IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


% 


// 


(./ 


S 


y. 


1.0 


11.25 


'WIIIIM    IIIII15 


'::  tt  III  2.2 

.„     116 


I.I     '  «-  IIIIIM 


11= 

\A.  11.6 


V] 


<^ 


/a 


^a 


<$i9 


/ 


m 
'''> 


'/ 


Photographic 

^Sciences 

Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


^ 


iV 


iV 


^\ 


% 


V 


o^ 


> 


'ii,^ 


9      m^.< 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHIVI/ICIVIH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiq 


ues 


C 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


Th 
to 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
whi'ih  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


□    Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 

□    Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommagee 

□    Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur^e  et/ou  pellicul6e 


D 
D 

n 
m 


Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  gdographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli6  avec  d'autres  documents 


r^    Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distention 


□ 


along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serr^e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 

distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intdrieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutdes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  tdxte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  dtait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  filmdes. 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  dt6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m^thode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 

□   Coloured  pages/  ' 

Pages  de  couleur 

□    Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagdes 

□    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaur^es  et/ou  pelliculdes 

r~7]    Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
I V  I    Pages  d6colordes,  tachetdes  ou  piqu6es 

□    Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d^tach^es 


/ 


Showthrough/ 
Transparence 


□    Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Quality  indgale  de  I'impression 

□    Includes  supplement{«ry  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 

I — I    Only  edition  available/ 


0 


Seule  Edition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  filmies  d  nouveau  de  faqon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


Th 
PC 
of 
fil 


Oi 

be 
th 
si( 
ut 
fil 
sii 

OI 


Tl 
si 

Tl 
w 

M 
di 
ei 
b( 
ri< 
re 
rr 


n 


Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppldmentaires.- 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film6  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu6  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


J 


12X 


16X 


aox 


26X 


30X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 


Douglas  Library 
Queen's  University 


L'exemplaire  iWrni  fut  reproduit  grfice  d  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

Douglas  Library 
Queen's  University 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filnridd 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sic^v  or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — ^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettet6  de  l'exemplaire  filmd.  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimis  sont  filmis  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
derniire  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  filmds  en  commengant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  chaque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbols  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE".  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN  ". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
film6s  A  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  film6  d  partir 
de  Tangle  sup6rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ndcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mithode. 


1 

2 

3 

32X 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

A 


M-      t 


ioTH  Congress,  >    HOUSE  OP  EEPRESEXTATIVES.     (  Ex  Doo 
_^a^ession.    J J    No.  89.' 


AWARD  OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


DOCUMENTS  AND  PROCEEDINGS 


oi"  I'lii'; 


HALIFAX  COMMISSION,  1877, 


I'XDKR  THK 


TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON  OF  MAY  8,   1871. 


IN  THREE    VOLUMES. 


VOLUME  L 


WASHINGTON: 

aoVEENUENT    PRINTING     OFPIOE. 

1878. 


v./ 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


VOLUME  I. 

Page. 

Treaty  of  1871,  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Uritaiu — articles  re- 
lating to  the  fisheries l-C) 

Mr.  Foster  to  Mr.  Evarts,  transmitting  record  of  the  Halifax  Commission, 

1877 (MO 

Record  and  proceedings  of  the  Commission 11-76 

APPENDICES. 

Ai'i'KNinx  A. — Case  of  Her  Majesty 77-117 

ArPKNDix  B. — Answer  on  behalf  of  the  United  States  of  America  to  the 

Case  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government 119-137 

Ai'PKNDix  C. — Brief  for  the  United  States  npon  the  question  of  the  extent 
and  linuts  of  the  inshore  fisheries  and  territorial  waters  on 
the  Atlantic  coast  of  British  North  America 1:59-167 

An'KNDix   D. — Keply  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government  to 

the  Answer  of  the  United  States  of  America lt')',t-187 

Appendix  E. — Documents  filed  with  the  secretary  of  the  Halifax  Commis- 
sion, and  read  at  the  sitting  held  on  the  IWth  day  of  July, 
1-'77,  in  support  of  the  Case  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's 
Government 189-241 

Appknuix  E.— Britis!i  ividence 'i4;j-1090 

VOLUME  n. 

Appkndix  G. — Artidavits  produced  in  8ui)port  of  the  Case  of  Her  Majesty's 

Government 1091-1455 

Appendix  H. — Oflicial  correspondence  from  the  years  1827  to  1872,  incdiisive, 
showing  the  encroachments  of  United  States  fishermen  in 
British  North  American  waters,  since  the  conclusion  of  the 
Convention  of  1818 1457-1506 

Appkndix  I, — 1.  Return  showing  the  quantities  and  values  of  ChIi  and  pro- 
ducts of  fish  imported  from  the  United  States  of  America, 
and  exported  to  the  United  States  and  all  other  countries, 
from  the  colony  of  Newfoundland,  during  each  year,  from 

1851  to  1876,  inclusive  l.")09-1518 

2.  Statement  showing  the  total  and  average  imi'orts  and  ex- 
ports of  fish  and  products  of  fish  for  the  four  years  pre- 
ceding the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  the  twelve  years  under  the 
treaty,  seven  years  after  its  abrogation,  and  three  years 
under  the  Washington  Treaty,  respectively 1519 

Appkndix   .J. — Speeches  of  counsel,  including  final  arguments 1.521-1885 

Api'endix  K. — Brief  on  behalf  of   Her  Majesty's  Government  in  reply  to 

Brief  on  behalf  of  the  United  States 1887-1906 

Appendix  L.— United  States  evidence 1907-2975 

SS106 


fS^ 


IV 


TABLE    OF    CONTENTS. 


VOLUME  III. 

Ai'i'KNinx  L. — United  States  evidence — Coiitinurd. 

Appendix  M. — AITidavits  produced  on  l)cliulf  of  (lie  United  States "JltTz-aiMS 

Appkndix  N.— Extract  from  minutes  of  executive  council  (Newfoundland), 

July7,1871   ;U4I) 

Appindix  O.— Statistics  produced  on  behalf  of  the  United  States IJliol-HUdO 

Appkndix  J'.— 1.  In  the  court  of  vice-admiralty:  Judgment  of  his  honor 

Judjre  Ha/.cn,  in  the  case  of  the  "White  Fawn" ;{:{t»l-;?a83 

2.  In  the  vice-admiralty  court  at  Halifax:  The  "  Warn  pa- 
tuck  " ;  Case  No.  'JM ;  Sir  William  Young,  judge;  tith 
December,  1H70 :5383-3;J88 

3.  In  the  vice-admiralty  court,  10th  February,  ld71:  The  "A. 
H.  Wanson,"  fishing  vessel ;  Sir  William  Young,  judge 
vice-admiralty 3388-33!)l 

4.  In  the  vice-admiralty  court,  10th  February,  1H71 :  The  "A. 
H.Franklin";  Sir  William  Young,  judge  vice-admiralty.  3391-3395 

5.  In  the  vice-admiralty  court:  The  "J.  H.  Nickerson  ";  Sir 
William  Young,  judge  vice-admiralty 3395-3398 

Appendix  (/. — Testimony  in  rebuttal  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's 

Government 3399-3448 

Appendix  R.— 1.  Gloucester  Mutual  Fishing  Insurance  Company 3449-3451 

2.  By-laws  of  the  Gloucester  Mutual  Fishing  Insurance 
Company  for  the  years  1870-1877,  adopted  November,  187(5, 
George  Steele,  president;  N.  D.  Cunningham,  vice-presi- 
dent ;  Cyrus  Story,  secretary  and  treasurer 3452-3456 

3.  Fishing  shipping  paper :  United  States  of  America,  dis- 
trict of  Gloucester 3456 


MESSAGE 


FROM   THE 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES, 


TRANSMITTING 


A  communication  from  the  Secretary  of  State  in  relation  to  the  delibera- 
tions of  the  Fishery  Commission. 


May  is,  1878. — Referred  to  the  Committee  on   Foreigu   Aft'airs  aud  ordered  to   be 

printed. 


To  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  : 

I  herewith  transiait  for  your  appropriate  action  a  communication  from 
the  Secretary  of  State  on  the  subject  of  the  result  of  the  deliberations 
of  the  Fishery  Commission,  appointed  under  certain  provisions  of  the 
Treaty  of  Washington,  with  the  accompanying  documents. 

Article  XXII  of  the  treaty  provides  that  any  sum  of  money  which 
the  Commissioners  may  award  shall  be  paid  by  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment in  a  gross  sum,  within  twelve  months  after  such  award  shall 
have  been  given. 

The  Commission  announced  the  result  of  its  deliberations  on  the  L*3d 
(lay  of  November,  last  year,  and  an  appropriation  at  the  present  session 
of  Congress  will  be  necessary  to  enable  the  government  to  make  the 
payment  provided  for  in  the  treaty. 

I  respectfully  submit  to  the  consideration  of  Congress  the  record  of 
the  transaction,  as  j)resented  upon  the  papers,  and  recommend  an  appro- 
priation of  the  necessary  sum  with  such  discretion  to  the  executive  gov- 
ernment in  regard  to  its  payment  as,  in  the  wisdom  of  Congress,  the 
public  interests  may  seem  to  require. 

n.  15.  HAYES. 

Executive  Mansion,  ^^ay  17,  1S78. 


s 
I] 

8 

r 
C 
a 

0 

n 

t( 

01 

111 
l»i 


oi 
ot 
w 

si< 

sic 

iia 

ab 

at 

Ui 

till 

ge 

ani 

of 

to 

his 

COl 

fld( 
the 
Un 
par 
joci 
I 
use 

sill) 

Sta 
cou 
Hal 
seic 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Department  of  State,  May  IG,  1878. 

1  bave  the  honor  to  lay  before  you  the  papers  which  relate  to  the 
subject  of  the  fisheries  as  submitted  to  the  deteriniiiatiou  of  a  Com- 
mission by  certain  provisions  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  and  as  con- 
sidered before  such  Commission  in  evidence  and  argument,  and  the 
result  of  the  deliberations  of  the  Commission,  Jis  announced  by  the 
Commissioners  at  the  conclusion  of  their  labors.  These  papers  embrace 
all  the  authentic  documents  of  the  transaction,  (iommencing  with  the 
negotiation  of  the  pertinent  articles  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  run- 
ning through  the  conduct  of  the  investigation  before  the  Commission 
to  the  result  reached  by  the  Commissioners,  and  closing  with  the  report 
of  the  Agent  of  the  United  States  of  such  proceedings  before  the  Com- 
mission and  their  result.  When  communicated  to  Congress  they  will 
present  to  its  attention  such  materials  for  legislative  action  in  the 
premises  as  are  in  the  possession  of  the  department. 

The  selection  of  the  three  Commissioners  in  the  manner  pointed  out 
by  the  treaty  had  been  completed  by  my  distinguished  predecessor  in 
office,  just  before  I  entered  upon  my  duties,  and  the  Agent  on  the  part 
of  this  Government  "  to  represent  it  generally  in  all  matters  connected 
with  the  Commission,"  as  provided  in  the  treaty,  had  receiv  d  his  ap- 
poinment  some  years  before.  Tlie  treaty  enjoined  upon  the  Commis- 
sioners that  they  should  proceed  with  the  organization  of  the  Commis- 
sion "at  the  earliest  convenient  period  after  they  have  been  respectively 
named,"  and  I  deemed  it  important  that  counsel  as  competent  and  suit- 
able as  I  could  command  from  the  profession  should  be  promi>tly  placed 
at  the  service  of  our  Agent,  to  aid  in  the  maintenance  of  the  case  of  the 
United  States  before  the  Commission.  I  thought  the  government  for- 
tunate in  being  able  to  secure  the  professional  aid  of  lawyers  of  such 
general  ability  and  special  qualifications  as  Mr.  Dana,  of  Massachusetts, 
and  Mr.  Trescot,  of  South  Carolina.  Upon  an  examination  of  the  record 
of  the  proofs  and  arguments  made  before  the  Commission,  I  am  happy 
to  concur  in  the  judgment  which  our  Agent,  Mr.  Foster,  expresses  in 
his  report  as  to  the  merit  and  value  of  the  labors  of  these  accomplished 
counsel  in  the  conduct  of  the  case,  and  1  am  quite  sure  the  ability, 
fidelity,  vigilance,  and  circumspection  shown  by  Mr.  Foster  himself  in 
the  preparation,  the  production,  and  the  enforcement  of  the  case  of  the 
United  States,  deserve  and  will  receive  the  fullest  approval  of  all  de- 
partments of  the  government  that  shall  have  occasion  to  give  the  sub- 
ject any  consideration. 

In  the  preparation  and  presentation  of  the  proofs,  1  was  able  to  make 
use  of  the  unrivalled  knowledge  and  complete  intelligence  of  the  whole 
subject  of  fish  and  fisheries  possessed  by  Professor  Baird,  the  United 
States  Commissioner  of  Fish  and  Fisheries,  who  gave  to  the  agent  and 
consul  of  the  United  States,  during  the  session  of  the  Commission  at 
Halifax,  the  benefit  of  his  attendance  and  scientific  instruction  in  the 
selection  and  production  of  evidence  on  our  part,  and  in  criticism  and 


VIII 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


•ilij 


correction  of  that  adduced  by  tiio  Uritish  agent  and  counsel.  It  gives 
me,  also,  pleasure  to  concur  in  Mr.  Foster's  praise  of  the  valuable  serv- 
ices, in  connection  with  the  case  of  the  United  States,  of  Mr.  Babsou, 
the  collector  of  custonis  at  (Jloiu'oster,  th<'  principal  fishing  port  of  the 
countrv,  and  of  Mr.  flackson,  our  exi)eri('n('ed  an«l  exeellent  consul  at 
Halifax. 

In  looking  back  upon  the  conduct  of  the  case  of  the  United  States 
before  the  (Joininission,  I  am  not  able  to  discover  any  failure  of  ability 
or  attention  on  our  part  in  any  matter  calculated  to  secure  a  just  anil 
satisfactory  determination  by  the  Commissioners  of  the  jnatter  submitted 
to  them.  If  that  determination,  as  announced  by  the  Commissioners, 
shall  fail  to  satisfy  our  sense  of  right,  as  a  disposition  of  the  matter  in 
contention  before  theCommission,the  disappointment  cannot  be  charged 
to  any  fault  or  omission  on  the  part  of  our  Agent  and  counsel  in  the 
presentation  of  our  case. 

In  proceeding  to  lay  before  you  the  actual  residt  of  the  i)roceedings 
before  the  Commission  for  communication  to  Congress,  with  such  recom- 
mendation in  respect  to  its  action  thereupon  as  may  seem  to  you  expe- 
dient, I  find  it  necessary  to  precede  sucli  observations  upon  the  result 
Itself,  as  seem  to  me  appropriate,  by  a  brief  statement  of  the  essential 
points  of  the  contention  between  the  two  countries  on  the  subject  of  the 
fisheries,  and  of  the  method  which,  it  was  hoped,  had  been  happily  pro- 
vided by  the  Treaty  of  Washington  for  solving  the  dispute. 

LTj)on  the  termination  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  the  dispute  about 
the  fisheries,  which  was  put  at  rest  while  that  treaty  was  in  operation, 
was  remitted  to  its  old  and  troublesome  elements.  When  the  subject 
was  taken  up  in  the  negotiations  which  produced  the  Treaty  of  Wash- 
ington, it  appears  from  the  protocol  of  the  conferences  on  this  subject 
which  will  be  found  among  the  i)apers  now  submitted,  that  the  High 
Commissioners  on  the  i)art  of  the  United  States  regarded  the  participa- 
tion in  the  inshore  fisheries  of  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence  (the  matter 
under  negotiation),  as  of  very  motlerate  pecuniary  value,  justifying  only 
an  offer  of  the  sum  of  $1,(100,000  for  the  right  in  pcrpctuiti/,  to  save  the 
irritations  and  strifes  inseparable  from  the  vague  and  uncertain  water- 
line  of  demarcation  of  privileges  provided  by  the  convention  of  ISIS, 
which  had  been  so  fruitful  of  controversy  between  the  two  countries. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  High  Commissioners  on  the  part  of  Great  Brit- 
ain evidently  looked  ujion  the  possession  of  our  markets  for  the  products 
of  the  fisheries  of  the  Dominion  and  adjacent  parts  free  of  duty,  as  the 
desirable  consideration  in  exchange  for  our  participation  in  their  fish- 
eries, with  such  makeweights  in  the  negotiation  in  the  way  of  further 
free  trade  as  they  might  he  able  to  i)ersuade  us  to  concede  therewith. 
They  persisted,  therefore,  in  rejecting  i>ecuiiiary  measures  of  the  value 
of  a  participation  in  the  inshore  iisheries  and  struggled  for  the  renewal 
of  free  importations  into  this  country,  which  had  been  enjoyed  under 
the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  to  as  large  an  extent  as  might  be.  The  result 
of  the  conferences  is  shown  in  Articles  XVIII  to  XXV  of  the  Treaty, 
and  disposed  of  the  matter  as  Ibllows : 

I.  A  participation  in  the  inshore  fisheries  of  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Law- 
rence is  conceded  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States  for  a  term  of 
years,  to  wit:  for  twelve  years  from  the  commencement  of  the  right. 
(Articles  XVIII  and  XXXIII.) 

II.  A  participation  in  the  inshore  fisheries  of  the  United  States  north 
of  thirty-ninth  parallel  of  north  latitude,  is  conceded  to  subjects  of  Great 
Britain  for  the  same  term  of  years.    (Article  XIX.) 

III.  Free  importation  into  the  United  States  of  fish  and  fish-oil  of  all 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


IX 


kinds  (except  of  inland  lakes,  and  rivers  falling  into  tbeni,  and  except 
fish  j)ieserved  in  oil),  being  the  i)rodn('c  of  the  flsheries  of  the  Dominion 
of  Canada  or  of  Prince  Edward  Island  was  conceded  for  the  same  term 
of  .vears.     (Article  XXI.) 

iV.  Upon  an  assertion  by  the  (lovernnient  of  Great  liritain  that  the 
privileges  accorded  to  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Article  Will 
are  of  (jrcnUr  value  than  those  accorded  by  Articles  XiX  and  XXI  to 
British  subjects,  which  was  not  admitted  by  the  (Jovernmeut  of  the 
United  States,  it  was  "  agreed  that  Commissioners  shall  be  appointed  to 
determine,  having  regard  to  the  privileges  accorded  by  the  Unitetl  States 
to  the  sul>jects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  as  staled  in  Articles  XIX  and 
XXI  of  tins  treaty,  the  amount  of  any  compensation  which,  in  their 
opinion,  ought  to  be  jiaid  by  the  (jovernment  of  tlu>  United  States  to 
the  Government  of  IJer  Britannic  Jlajesty,  in  return  for  the  privileges 
accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Article  XVIll  of 
this  treaty;  and  that  any  sum  of  money  whi(!h  the  said  Commissioners 
may  so  award  shall  be  i>aid  by  the  United  States  tiovernment,  in  a  gross 
sum,  within  twelve  months  after  such  award  shall  hav«'  been  given." 
(Article  XX IJ.) 

The  appointment  of  the  "Commissioners"  was  arranged  as  follows: 

One  ContniisKionor  sliall  lie  iiiinied  by  tlio  I'rcHideiit  of  tlio  rnittul  States,  one  by  Ilor 
Britimnic  Majesty  iiud  a  third  by  the  I'resident  of  tlie  United  StateHiiiul  Her  Hritannio 
Majesty  ecmjoiiitly  ;  and  in  case  the  third  coniniissioner  whall  not  hav(>  been  so  named 
within'a  period  of  three  months  IVom  the  date  when  this  articUi  Hhall  take  etfeet.theu 
the  third  commissioner  shall  be  named  1)y  the  representative  at  Loudon  of  Uis  Majesty 
the  Euiperor  of  Austiia  and  Kinj;  of  Hungary.     (Article  XXIII.) 

Tlie  order  of  procedure  l)efore  the  Commission  is  prescribed,  and  it  is 
provided  that  "  the  case  on  either  side  shall  be  closed  within  a  period  of 
■six  months  from  the  date  of  tiie  organization  of  the  Commission,  and 
the  Commissioners  shall  be  recpiested  to  give  their  award  as  soon  as  pos- 
sible thereafter."    (Article  XXIV.) 

The  Commission  as  organized  consisted  of  Mr.  Maurice  Delfos.see,  the 
Belgian  minister  at  Washington,  imnied  by  the  Austrian  ambassador 
at  London,  presiding  ;  the  honorable  Ensign  II.  Kellogg,  named  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States;  and  Sir  Alexander  T.  Gait,  named  by 
Her  Britannic  Majesty.  It  held  its  first  conference  on  the  15th  June, 
1877  ;  the  case  on  both  sides  was  concluded  at  the  .seventy-seventh  con- 
ference, held  on  the  21st  November,  1S77,  and  the  result  of  its  delibera- 
tions was  anntmnced  at  the  succeeding  conference,  held  on  the  2.">d  day 
of  the  .same  month.  This  result  is  stated  in  the  protocol  of  that  confer- 
ence, as  follows : 

The  undersigned,  Commissioners  appointed  under  Articles  XXII  and  XXIII  of  the 
treaty  of  Washington,  of  the  >th  ofVMay.  \STl,  to  determine  having  regard  to  the  priv- 
ileges accorded  by  the  United  States  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  as  stated 
in  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  of  said  treaty,  the  amount  of  any  comjicnsation  which  in  their 
(ijiinion  ouglit  to  be  paid  by  the  (iovernment  of  the  United  .States  to  the  tJovernment 
of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  in  return  for  the  privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the 
United  States  under  Article  XVIII  of  the  said  treaty, — having  carefully  ami  impartially 
examined  tlu^  matters  referred  to  them,  according  to  justice  and  equity,  in  conformity 
with  the  solemn  declaration  made  and  subscribed  l)y  tbeni  on  the  ti*^teenth  day  of 
June,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy-seven, — 

Award  the  sum  of  live  millions  five  hundred  thousand  dollars  in  gold,  to  be  paid  by 
the  (Jovernment  of  the  United  States  to  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  in 
accordance  with  the  jirovisious  of  the  said  treaty. 

Signed  at  Halifax,  this  twenty-third  day  of  November,  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  twenty-seven. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
A.  T.  GALT. 


■— 


X 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


Tlio  Uuitod  States  CoinniiHHioner  is  of  opinion  that  tbe  advantages  accruing  to  Great 
Britain  under  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  arc  greater  than  the  advantages  conferred  on 
the  United  States  by  said  treaty,  and  he  cannot  therefore  concur  in  the  (.onclusions 
announced  by  his  colleagues. 

And  the  Aitierican  Conitnissioner  deems  it  his  duty  to  state  further  that  it  is  ques- 
tionable whc  her  it  is  competent  for  the  board  to  make  an  award  under  the  treaty 
except  with  tlie  unanimous  consent  of  its  members. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG, 

Commi88ioner. 

Upon  the  aiinouncemeiit  of  this  result,  Mr.  Foster,  the  agent  of  the 
Uuited  States,  addressed  the  Commission,  saying- : 

I  have  no  instructions  from  the  Government  of  the  United  States  as  to  the  course  to 
be  pursued  in  the  contingency  of  such  a  result  as  has  just  been  announced.  But  if  I 
were  to  accept  in  silence  the  i)aper  signed  by  two  Conunissioners,  it  might  be  claimed 
hereafter  that,  as  agent  of  the  United  States,  I  had  acquiesced  in  treating  it  as  a  valid 
award.  Against  such  an  inference  it  seems  to  be  my  duty  to  guard.  I  therefore  make 
this  statement  which  I  desire  to  have  placed  upon  record. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER, 
.Igeiil  of  the  United  States. 

The  question  arising  upon  the  actual  result  of  the  deliberations  of  the 
Commission,  in  manner  and  form  as  announced  by  the  Commissioners, 
and  suggested  by  Mr.  Commissioner  Kellogg,  "  whether  it  is  competent 
for  the  board  to  make  an  award  under  the  treaty,  except  with  the  unan- 
imous consent  of  its  members,"  is  one  that  can  be  treated  and  deter- 
mined only  between  the  two  governments.  The  Commission  could  not 
adjudicate  upon  its  own  powers  under  the  treaty,  and  did  not  attempt 
to  do  so.  No  consideration  of  this  question  has,  as  yet,  arisen  between 
the  two  governments.  Quite  in  advance  even  of  the  organization  of  the 
Commission,  in  a  debate  in  the  Dominion  Parliament  in  March,  1875, 
upon  a  motion  "  for  an  address  i)raying  for  correspondence  in  reference 
to  tho  compensation  to  be  paid  by  the  United  States  to  Canada,  under 
Ihe  Treaty  of  Washington,  for  the  right  of  fishing  in  Canadian  waters," 
the  requirement  of  unanimity  of  the  Commission,  in  any  valid  award, 
was  distinctly  stated  by  Mr.  Blake,  minister  of  justice.  He  said  "  that 
the  amount  of  compensation  that  we  would  receive  from  our  fisheries 
must  be  an  amount  unanimously  agreed  upon  by  the  Commissioners, 
and  that,  therefore,  we  must  be  willing  to  accept  such  compensation  as 
the  American  Commissioner  would  be  willing  to  concede  to  us,  or  we 
should  receive  nothing."' 

While  the  Commission  was  in  session,  an  equally  distinct  declaration 
of  the  British  opinion  of  the  requirements  of  the  treaty,  on  this  point, 
appeared  in  the  columns  of  the  leading  newspaper  of  that  country.  The 
London  Times  announced  in  its  issue  of  July  0,  1877,  in  the  most  un- 
qnalitied  terms,  that  "on  every  point  that  comes  before  it"  [the  Fishery 
Commission]  "  for  decision,  the  unanimous  consent  of  all  its  members  is, 
by  the  terms  of  the  treaty,  necessary  before  an  authoritative  verdict  can 
be  given." 

In  this  country  no  [)ublic  discussion  on  this  point  seems  to  have  arisen 
until  since  the  conclusion  of  the  labors  of  the  Commission.  It  will  be 
quite  competent  for  Congress,  in  considering  an  appropriation  to  meet 
the  proper  obligations  of  the  government  under  the  treaty,  to  waive  or 
to  insist  upon  this  objection  to  the  validity  of  the  award  of  the  Commis- 
sion for  uon  conformity  to  the  requirements  of  the  treaty.  In  the 
absence  of  any  declaration  by  Congress  adverse  to  the  validity  of  the 
award,  it  will  not  be  the  duty  of  the  Executive  to  raise  any  discussion 
with  tue  British  Government  upon  this  point.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
Congress  should  accompany  the  appropriation  with  an  expression  of  its 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


XI 


opinion  tbat  the  attention  of  the  British  Government  should  be  drawn 
to  the  subject,  the  actual  payment  of  the  award  might,  so  far  as  this 
point  is  concerned,  well  be  made  to  depend  upon  the  view  which  that 
government  should  maintain  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  treaty  in  this 
regard.  I  think  it  may  be  assumed  that  neither  the  people  of  this  coun- 
try nor  any  branch  of  this  government  will  desire  to  seek  exemption 
from  it  money  payment  upon  any  judgment  of  its  own  upon  a  point  of 
this  nature  under  this  beneficent  treaty,  unless  it  be  so  well  founded  as 
to  secure  the  concurrence  of  the  other  High  Contracting  Party. 

I  pass  now  to  an  examination  of  serious  importance,  that  is  to  say,  a 
comparison  between  theaward  of  theCommission  in  its  substance,  with  the 
submission  thereto  under  which  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Commission  and 
the  limitation  of  its  power  over  the  matter  in  contention,  between  the 
two  countries,  are  defined.  That  an  award  should  comport  with,  and 
not  transcend,  the  submission  of  the  parties  is  a  vital  principle  of  all 
arbitrations,  whether  public  or  private,  and  its  firm  maintenance  is  es- 
sential to  the  preservation  of  this  beneficent  method  of  settling  con- 
troversies between  nations  and  individuals.  Too  ready  or  too  severe  an 
application  of  this  rule,  in  reference  to  international  arbitrations,  is 
easily  avoided  by  a  recognition  of  certain  manifest  propositions.  In 
the  first  place,  the  largeness  of  the  subjects  and  the  generality  of  the 
elements  of  controversies  between  nations  preclude  the  vitiation  of  an 
award  far  exceeding  the  submission,  unless  upon  a  measure  of  disparity 
which  cannot  reasonably  be  overlooked  and  which  cannot  fairly  be  dis- 
puted. In  the  second  place,  the  absence  of  any  possible  resort  to  a 
common  paramount  judgment  as  to  the  rectitude  of  the  objection  to  an 
international  award,  and  the  necessary  renewal,  therefore,  or  aggravation 
ot  the  orginal  controversy  as  the  consequence  of  impugning  the  award 
may  well  be  trusted  to  deter  a  government  from  attempting  such  criti- 
cism, except  upon  most  certain  and  adequate  grouiul«,  and  under  the 
most  urgent  motivCvS  of  avoiding  still  more  serious  mischiefs  to  the 
public  interests. 

The  mass  of  testimony  and  the  amplitude  of  argument  produced  be- 
fore the  commission,  and  submitted  herewith,  however  carefully  explored, 
will,  1  think,  leave  no  doubt  upon  the  nuiin  featufs  of  the  controversy 
upon  which  the  award  should  be  tested  in  respect  to  its  conformity  to 
the  submission.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that  the  protocols  of  the 
conferences  have  preserved  no  record  of  the  steps  in  the  investigation, 
or  of  the  methods  of  reasoning  by  which  the  widely  diverse  conclusions 
of  the  two  Commissioners  that  concurred  ami  the  Commissioner  that  dis- 
sented, respectively,  were  readied.  The  promidgation  of  the  judgments 
of  the  several  Commissioners  followed  imnuMlialely  upon  tiie  closing  of 
the  arguments,  aiul  was  accompanietl  by  no  exposition  whatever  of  the 
grounds  of  such  judgments.  In  the  absence  of  direct  instructions  from 
these  sources  it  is  necessary  to  unfold,  from  the  proofs,  the  practical 
nature  and  character  of  the  pecuniary  interests  wliich  constitute  the  sub- 
jects to  be  compared  in  money  value  by  the  CommissioiuM's,  under  Arti- 
cles XVIII,  XIX,  and  XXI,  of  the  Treaty,  to  reach  the  result  of  a  pe- 
cuniary award  under  Arti(!le  XXII. 

I.  It  will  appear,  indisputably,  upon  the  proofs  that  the  practical 
measure  of  the  concession  to  the  United  States  of  Article  XVIII,  was  the 
grant  of  a  participation  by  onr  citizens  in  the  inshore  fisheries  of  the  Gulf 
of  Saint  Lawrence;  that  is  to  say,  of  a  free  and  ecpml  right  to  take  part 
in  the  fisheries  within  the  three  miles  line  instead  of  being  excluded 
therefrom,  as  under  I  he  convention  of  1818.  It  also  appears  from  the 
proofs,  that  the  fishery  thus  opened  to  us  was  the  mackerel  fishery,  within 


XII 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


that  line.  This  concession,  then,  constituted  the  whole  subject  and 
measure  of  any  pecuniary  value  which  could  enter  into  any  award 
against  the  United  States.  What  the  pecuniary  value  of  this  participa- 
tion in  the  inshore  mackerel  fisliery  was  fairly  estimable  at,  constituted 
the  exterior  limit  of  any  possible  award  against  the  United  States. 

II.  But  when  this  first  term  of  the  pecuniary  calculations  had  been 
reached,  there  remained  for  the  Commissiou  a  similar  estimate  of  the 
pecuniary  value  of  the  concessions  made  by  the  United  States  under 
Articles  XIX  ami  XXI  of  the  treaty.  Whatever,  upon  a  fair  estimate, 
should  seem  to  be  the  pecuuiary  value  of  these  concessions,  was  to  be 
subtracted  from  the  pecuniary  value  of  the  concession  to  the  United 
States  under  Article  X  V^III,  and  the  balance,  as  thus  produced,  and  that 
only,  should  constitute  the  award  justiiiable  under  Article  XXII. 

As  the  result  of  this  pecuniary  problem,  submitted  by  the  treaty  to 
this  commissiou.  Commissioners  Delfosse  and  Gait  hav-e  given  the  sum 
of  $5,500,000  as  the  superior  value  of  the  enjoyment  for  twelve  years  by 
the  United  States  of  the  concession  under  ArticleX  VIII,  over  the  enjoy- 
ment for  the  same  period  by  British  interests  of  the  coiniessions  under 
Articles  XIX  and  XXI.  Commissioner  Kellogg,  on  the  other  hand, 
tiiuls  "  that  the  advantages  accruing  to  Great  Britain  under  the  treaty 
of  W^ashington,  are  greater  th-AU  the  advantages  conferretlon  the  United 
States  by  said  treaty,"  and  could  concur,  therefore,  in  no  pecuuiary 
award  against  the  United  States  under  Article  XXII. 

The  first  impression  on  comparing  this  "award  "  of  two  Commissioners 
with  the  treatment  of  the  subject  in  contention  between  the  governments 
by  the  Joint  High  Commissioners,  and  the  treaty  "submission"  of  a 
single  point  in  that  contention  not  finally  disposed  of  by  the  treaty 
itself,  is  of  almost  irresistible  force  that  the  pecuniary  measure,  an- 
nounced by  the  two  Commissioners,  is  wholly  inapplicable  to  the  very 
limited  subject  submitted  to  the  Commissio  i  for  admeasurement.  If 
the  High  Commissioners  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  considered 
81,000,000  as  a  liberal  sum  for  the  purchase  in  perpetait!/  of  the  whole 
privilege  of  the  inshore  fishery,  without  any  furtlier  advantageous  con 
cessions  in  exchange  therefor,  and  if  the  High  Commissioners  on  the 
part  of  Great  Britain  considered  the  exemption  of  the  products  of  the 
Canadian  fisheries  from  duties  on  importation  in  this  country  so  valua- 
ble that  such  concession,  on  our  p;irt,  could  not  be  dispensed  with  iis  an 
element  in  the  negotiation,  it  seems  dillicult  to  believe  that  these  emi- 
nent |)ersons  could  have  had  in  mind  in  the  "  submission"  of  Article 
XXII  of  the  treaty  the  same  subject  of  valuation  which,  in  the  minds 
of  the  two  Fishery  Commissioners,  formed  the  basis  of  the  valuation  in 
their  "award." 

The  allowance  of  .$5,500,000  for  twelre  i/ears'  enjoyment  of  what  one 
High  Ctmtracting  Tarty  valued  in  negotiation  at  less  than  >«  1,000,000  in 
perpetuity,  and  tliis  ov»'r  and  above  the  i)rivilege  of  free  importjition, 
which  the  other  High  Contracting  Party,  in  negotiation,  stipulated  lor 
as  indispi-nsable  to  its  interests,  is  not  easily  reconcilable  with  that  es- 
sential identity  between  the  matter  of  tiie  submission  and  the  mattei-  of 
the  award  on  which  the  whole  system  of  arbitration  rests.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  judgment  of  Commissioner  Kellogg  seems  (piite  coiiformable 
with  what  was  manifestly  both  the  object  of  the  treaty  negotiations  and 
their  ap|)arent  result.  This  object  and  this  apparent  result  was  to  ad- 
Just  equivalents  by  the  treaty  itself,  and  leave  but  the  narrowest  margin 
of  debate  as  to  the  accuracy  of  the  adjustmeut,  to  be  the  province  and 
area  of  the  Jurisdiction  of  the  Fishery  Commission. 

Giving  the  largest  range  for  divergent  and  conflicting  evidence,  where 
evidence  rests  on  opinion,  and  assuming  the  largest  measure  of  value  to 


AWARD    OP   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


XIII 


iibject  and 
any  award 
4  participa- 
;onstituted 
kates. 
4  had  been 
iiate  of  the 
ates  under 
ir  estimate, 
I,  was  to  be 
the  United 
)d,  and  that 

:x:ii. 

le  treaty  to 
en  the  sum 
ve  years  by 
r  the  enjoy- 
iions  under 
)tlier  hand, 
•  the  treaty 
1  the  United 
3  pecuniary 

nimissionera 
;overninents 
iasion"  of  a 
s'  the  treaty 
iieasure,  an- 
I  to  the  very 
Lirenient.    If 
consiilered 
the  whole 
ageous  con 
lers  on  the 
lucts  of  the 
ry  80  valua- 
witl»  as  an 
tliese  emi- 
of  Article 
tlie  minds 
.aluation  in 

what  one 
1,(M»0,0()0  iit 
mportation, 
piiiated  for 
til  that  es- 
>  matter  ol' 
On  the  con- 
conformable 
tiations  and 
t  was  to  ad- 
west  margin 
ovince  and 

lence,  where 
of  value  to 


the  concession  of  Article  XVIII,  and  the  smallest  measure  of  value  to 
onr  set-offs  of  Articles  XIX  and  XXI,  when  we  come  to  definite  criteria 
of  the  valne  of  each,  the  result  seems  incompatible  with  the  required 
identity  between  the  matter  of  the  submission  and  the  matter  ot  the 
award. 

It  happened  that  before  the  Commission  at  Halifax  had  (concluded  its 
labors,  live  ttshing  seasons  of  the  treaty  period  had  already  elapsed, 
and  the  actual  statistics  of  the  privileges  reciiirocally  conceded,  were  at 
hand,  to  replace  conjectural  estimates  by  actual  results  of  the  enjoy- 
ment, on  the  one  hand  and  the  other, of  the  reciprocal  concessions.  Upon 
these  statistics  it  was  disclosed  that  the  whole  mackerel  catch  of  the 
United  States,  for  these  five  seasons,  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence, 
both  within  and  without  the  three  mile  line,  was  Ki?,!*-!")  barrels.  The 
Canadian  estimates  claimed  that  three  quarters  of  this  cat<^h  was  within 
the  three-mile  line,  and  so  to  be  credited  to  the  jirivilege  conceded  by 
Article  XVIII.  The  United  States  estimate  placed  the  [noportion  at 
less  than  a  (puuter.  Allowing  even  the  Canadian  claim,  the  product 
of  these  five  years  of  inshore  fishery  would  be  125,0(51  barrels.  It  was 
established  ujion  Canadian  testimony  that  the  price  which  mackerel 
bore  in  the  jnovinces  was  $3.7o  per  barrel.  This  would  give  as  th 
valne,  cured  and  packed,  of  the  American  catch  under  the  privilege  of 
Article  XVIII  (upon  the  Canadian  claim  of  three-quarters  being  inshore) 
!i*-172,3u3.  But  in  this  value  are  included  the  bjirrel,  the  salt,  the  expense 
of  catching,  curing,  and  packing,  all  of  which  must  l»e  deducted  before 
thii  profit,  which  measures  the  value  of  the  fishery  i)rivilege,  is  reached. 
Ui)on  the  evidence  a  dollar  a  barrel  would  be  an  excessiv*^  estimate  of 
such  profit.  This  would  give  a  profit  to  the  United  States  from  the  en 
jovuient,  for  these  five  seasons  of  the  tisherv  privilege  conceded  under 
Article  XVIII,  of  but  *L>o,()0()  a  year. 

The  statistics  of  importation  of  the  i)roduct  of  the  Canadian  fish- 
eries, under  the  privilege  of  Article  XXI,  show  that  the  duty  exacted 
prior  to  this  coneess  on,  if  imposed  upon  the  Canadian  importations 
under  that  privilege,  would  have  produced  a  revenue  of  almut  $200,000 
per  annum  upon  mackerel  alone,  and  of  $300,000  upon  all  kinds  of  fish 
(mackerel  ii. eluded)  and  fish  oil. 

Upon  these  figures  it  is  quite  obvious  that  wm  <^  the  ])rofits  of  the 
fishery  privilege  enjoyed  by  our  i)eople  under  Article  XVIII  ten-fold 
what  the  statistics  show,  or  $250,000  per  annum,  and  were  the  cotices- 
sion  of  duty  treated  as  but  one  half  of  it,  or  $150,000  per  annum,  a 
gain  to  the  Canadian  fisheries  under  Article  XXI,  there  would  be  but 
the  sum  of  $100,000  per  annum  as  a  support  of  the  two  Commissioners' 
award  of  nearly  $500,000  j)er  annum  as  the  balance  of  benefit  to  the 
United  States.  Another  and  (juite  indei)endent  criterion  for  testing  the 
coiiqietency  of  the  two  Commissioners'  award,  is  furnished  by  the  his- 
tory of  this  fishery  privilege  during  some  years  intervening  between  the 
repeal  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  and  the  negotiation  of  the  Treaty  of 
Washington.  The  Provincial  GovernnuMit  in  these  years  adopted  a 
license  systeni  by  which  fishing  vessels  of  the  United  States  were  nd- 
niitted  to  the  inshore  fishery  upon  the  payment  of  fees  for  the  season  at 
the  rate  of  so  much  per  ton.  The  experience  of  this  system  showed 
that,  under  an  exaction  of  50  cetits  per  ton,  our  fishing  tleet  generally 
took  out  licenses;  that  when  the  fee  was  raised  to  $1  per  ton  the  num- 
ber of  licenses  fell  off  about  one  half ;  and  when  a  fee  of  $2  per  ton  was 
exacted  but  few  licenses  were  taken  out.  It  would  not  be  easy  to  sug- 
gest a  more  practical  or  trustworthy  nu^asure  of  the  pecuniary  value  to 
our  fishermen  of  a  participation  in  the  inshore  fisheries  of  the  Gulf  of 
Saint  Lawrence,  than  a  fair  experiment  of  the  license  system  would 


XIV 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


afford.  Assuming,  even,  that  the  tonnage  licensed  at  the  lowest  rate, 
to  wit,  50  cents  per  ton,  would  have  borne  the  largest  rate  attempted, 
to  wit,  |2  per  ton,  and  the  result  places  the  proprietary  value  of  the 
privilege  at  an  inconsiderable  sum.  This  tonnage  was  about  32,000 
tons,  which,  at  $2  per  ton,  would  have  produced  a  revenue  to  the  prov- 
inces of  but  $64,000  per  annum.  If  against  this  measure  of  the  value 
of  the  privileges  accorded  to  the  United  States  under  Article  XVIII, 
there  be  setoff  the  low  estimate  of  the  value  of  exemption  from  duty, 
as  hereinbefore  stated,  at  $150,000  per  annum,  the  concession  made  by 
the  United  States  under  Article  XXI,  the  balance  of  advantage  of  the 
reciprocal  concessions  appears  clearly  in  favor  of  the  Canadian  interests. 

In  the  review  of  the  transaction  of  the  Fishery  Commission,  as  re- 
corded in  the  papers  herewith  submitted,  which  it  was  necessary  for  this 
government  to  make,  in  order  to  determine  whether  the  limits  of  the 
subject  submitted  to  the  Commission  had  been  adhered  to  or  transcended 
by  the  two  Commissioners'  award,  I  have  assumed  the  construction  of 
the  evidence,  bearing  upon  the  values  involved,  most  favorable  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  award. 

The  result,  however,  of  ray  examination  of  the  case  satislies  me  that 
the  two  Commissioners  must  have  taken  into  account  some  very  indefi- 
nite and  quite  illusory  elements  of  calculation,  wholly  outside  of  the 
narrow  submission  of  rhe  treaty,  in  order  to  bring  out  the  weighty  bal- 
ance of  advantage  to  the  United  States  which  their  award  expresses- 
As  the  'Commissioners  have  given  no  information  as  to  the  steps  or 
methods  of  calculation,  respecting  either  of  tlie  privileges  which  were 
to  be  measured  aru  compared  by  them,  which  led  to  the  award  they  have 
made,  I  am  unable  to  correct  my  own  view  of  the  evidence  by  any  in- 
struction from  that  source. 

It  will  be  for  Congress  to  determine  in  making  an  appropriation  to 
meet  the  proper  obligations  of  the  government  under  the  treaty,  whether 
the  question  of  the non  conformity  of  the  awardto  tlie  submission,  should 
be  presented  to  tlie  attention  of  the  British  Government,  and  l)e  made 
the  subject  of  consideration  betweeu  the  two  governments.  The  ques- 
tion between  the  two  countries  is  of  much  more  serious  import  timn  the 
present  money  payment  involved.  Tlie  -subject  of  valuation  will  remain 
as  an  occasion  of  controversy,  after  the  brief  treaty  period  covered  by 
this  award  has  expired.  Seven  years  hence,  if  no  final  negotiation  shall, 
in  the  mean  time,  have  extinguished  this  opportunity  for  umbrage  and 
misunderstanding  between  the  two  countries,  the  subject  of  the  insliore 
fisheries  will  again  vex  the  patience  of  tlie  governments,  and  disturb 
their  relations.  The  mischief  of  an  extravagant  and  inexplicable  meas- 
ure of  value,  if  acquiesced  in  by  a  payment  of  this  award,  without  an 
absolute  and  firm  protest  against  its  measure  of  the  lishery  privilege 
involved,  will  then  present  it-self,  and  may  grow  into  an  unmanageable 
element  in  future  treatnient  of  the  subject  in  the  interest  of  justice  and 
peace. 

By  Article  XXM  of  the  treaty  the  award  is  made  payable  within  twelve 
months  after  it  shall  have  been  given  ;  that  is,  on  or  before  the  23d  day 
of  November,  in  the  present  year.  While  the  appropriation  by  Con- 
gress will  need  to  be  made  at  the  present  session,  there  will  be  abund- 
ant time,  before  the  expiration  of  the  year,  to  bring  to  the  attention  of 
the  British  Government  the  sentiments  of  this  government,  as  they  shall 
be  expressed  bj'  Congress,  on  the  subject  of  the  awani,  and  its  jiayment, 
and  the  measure  of  value  of  the  fishery,  privilege  involved  therein. 
Kespectfully  submitted, 

WM.  M.  EVAKTS. 

To  the  President. 


lowest  rate, 
!  attempted, 
;alue  of  the 
,bout  32,000 
to  the  prov- 
of  the  value 
tide  XVIII, 
1  from  duty, 
ion  made  by 
ntage  of  the 
ail  interests, 
ssioii,  as  re- 
isary  for  this 
imits  of  the 
transcended 
istruction  of 
irable  to  the 

(lies  me  that 
s  very  iiideli- 
itside  of  the 
weighty  bal- 
d  expresses- 
the  stei)S  or 
which  were 
rd  they  have 
e  by  any  iii- 

[opriatiou  to 

aty,  whether 

ssion,  should 

ind  l)e  made 

.     The  ques- 

ort  than  the 

I  will  remain 

1  covered  by 

iation  shall, 

inbrage  and 

the  inshore 

and  disturb 

cable  meas- 

without  an 

ry  privilege 

manageable 

Justice  and 

ithin  twelve 
the  23d  day 
ion  by  Con- 
be  abuud- 
attention  of 
is  they  shall 
ts  payment, 
herein. 

IVAKTS. 


TREATY  BETWEEN 


THE   UNITED   STATES  AND  GREAT 
BRITAIN. 


ARTICLES  RELATING  TO  THE  FISHERIES. 

Concluded  May  8, 1871;  ralificatiom  exchanged  June  17,  1871;  pro- 
darned  July  4,  1871. 

Article  XVIII. 

It  is  agreed  by  the  High  Contracting  Parties  that,  in  addition  to  the 
liberties  secured  to  the  United  States  fishermen  by  the  Convention  be- 
tween the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  signed  at  London  on  the 
20th  day  of  October,  1818,  of  taking,  curing,  and  drying  fish  on  certain 
coasts  of  the  British  North  American  Colonies  therein  defined,  the  in- 
habitants of  the  United  States  shall  have,  in  common  with  the  subjects 
of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  the  liberty,  for  the  term  of  years  mentioned 
in  Article  XXXIII  of  this  Treaty,  to  take  fish  of  every  kind,  except 
shellfish,  on  the  sea-coasts  and  shores,  and  in  the  bays,  harbours,  and 
creeks  of  the  Provinces  of  Quebec,  Nova  Scotia,  and  New  Brunswick, 
and  the  Colony  of  Prince  Edward's  Island,  and  of  the  several  islands 
thereto  adjacent,  without  being  restricted  to  any  distance  from  the  shore, 
with  permission  to  land  upon  the  said  coasts  and  shores  and  islands,  and 
also  upon  the  Magdalen  Islands,  for  the  purpose  of  drying  their  nets 
and  curing  their  fish  ;  provided,  that  in  so  doing  they  do  not  interfere 
with  the  rights  of  private  property,  or  with  British  fishermen,  in  the 
peaceable  use  of  any  part  of  the  said  coasts  in  their  occupancy  for  the 
same  purpose. 

It  is  understood  that  the  above-mentioned  liberty  applies  solely  to  the 
sea-fishery,  and  that  the  salmon  and  shad  fisheries,  and  all  other  fisheries 


in  rivers  and  the  mouths 
fishermen. 


of  rivers,  are  reserved  exclusively  for  British 
Article  XIX. 


It  is  agreed  by  the  High  Contacting  Parties  that  British  subjects 
shall  have,  in  common  with  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  the  liberty, 
for  the  term  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII  of  this  Treaty,  to 
take  fish  of  every  kind,  except  shellfish,  on  the  eastern  sea  coasts  and 
shores  of  the  United  States  north  of  the  thirty-ninth  parallel  of  north 
latitude,  and  on  the  shores  of  the  several  islands  thereunto  adjacent, 
and  in  the  bays,  harbours,  and  creeks  of  the  said  sea-coasts  and  shores 
of  the  United  States  and  of  the  said  islands,  without  being  restricted 
to  au3'  distance  from  the  shore,  with  permission  to  land  npon  the  said 
coasts  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  islands  aforesaid,  fa.  the  purpose 
of  drying  their  nets  and  curing  their  fish  j  provided  that,  in  so  doing, 
they  do  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  private  property,  or  with  the 
fishermen  of  the  United  States  in  the  peaceable  use  of  any  part  of  the 
said  coasts  in  their  occupancy  for  the  same  purpose. 

It  is  understood  that  the  above-mentioned  liberty  applies  solely  to  the 
sea-fishery,  and  that  salmon  and  shad  fisheries,  and  all  other  fisheries 
in  rivers  and  mouths  of  rivers,  are  hereby  reserved  exclusively  for  fish- 
ermen of  the  United  States. 
1  F 


2 


AWARD    OF  THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Article  XX. 

It  18  agreed  that  the  places  designated  by  the  Cominiasioners  ap- 
pointed under  the  tirst  article  of  the  treaty  between  the  United  States 
and  Great  Britain,  conchuled  at  Washington  on  the  5th  of  June,  1854, 
upon  the  coasts  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Dominions  and  the  United 
States,  as  places  reserved  from  the  common  right  of  fishing  under  that 
treaty,  shall  be  regarded  as  in  like  manner  reserved  from  the  common 
right  of  fishing  under  the  preceding  articles.  In  case  any  question 
should  arise  between  the  Governments  of  the  United  States  and  of  Her 
Britannic  Majesty  as  to  the  common  right  of  fishing  in  places  not  thus 
designated  as  reserved,  it  is  agreed  that  a  Commission  shall  be  appointed 
to  designate  such  places,  and  shall  be  constituted  in  the  same  manner, 
and  have  the  same  powers,  duties,  and  authority  as  the  Commission 
appointed  under  the  said  first  article  of  the  treaty  of  the  5th  of  June, 
1854. 

Article  XX  I. 

It  is  agreed  that,  for  the  terra  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII 
of  this  treaty,  fishoil  and  fish  of  all  kinds  (except  fish  of  the  inland 
lakes,  and  of  the  rivers  falling  into  them,  and  except  fish  preserved  in 
oil),  being  the  produce  of  the  fisheries  of  the  United  States,  or  of  the 
Dominion  of  Canada,  or  of  Prince  Edward's  Island,  shall  be  admitted 
into  each  country,  respectively,  free  of  duty. 

Article  XXII. 

Inasmuch  as  it  is  asserted  by  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Ma- 
iesty  that  the  privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States 
under  Article  XVIH  of  this  treaty  are  of  greater  value  than  those  ac- 
corded by  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  of  this  Treaty  to  the  subjects  of  Her 
Britannic  Majesty,  and  this  asserti  u  is  not  admitted  by  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  it  is  furtjer  agreed  that  Commissioners  shall 
be  appointed  to  determine,  having  regard  to  the  privileges  accorded  by 
the  United  States  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  as  stated 
in  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  of  this  Treaty,  the  amount  of  any  compensa- 
tion which,  in  their  opinion,  ought  to  be  paid  by  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  to  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  in  return 
for  the  privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under 
Article  XVIII  of  this  Treaty ;  and  that  any  sum  of  money  which  the 
said  Commissioners  may  so  award  shall  be  paid  by  the  United  States 
Government,  in  a  gross  sum,  within  twelve  months  after  suwh  award 
shall  have  been  given. 

Article  XXHI. 

The  Commissioners  referred  to  in  the  preceding  article  shall  be  ap- 
pointed in  the  following  manner,  that  is  to  say:  One  Commissioner  shall 
bo  named  by  the  President  of  the  United  States,  one  by  Her  Britannic 
Majesty,  and  a  third  by  the  President  of  the  United  States  and  Her 
Britannic  Majesty  conjointly;  and  in  case  the  third  Commissioner  shall 
not  have  been  so  named  within  a  period  of  three  months  from  the  date 
when  this  article  shall  take  effect,  then  the  third  Commissioner  shall  be 
named  by  the  representative  at  London  of  His  Majesty  the  Emperor  of 
Austria  and  King  of  Hungary.  In  case  of  the  death,  absence,  or  inca- 
pacity of  any  Commissioner,  or  in  the  event  of  any  Commisssioner  omit- 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


isioners  ap- 
lited  States 
June,  1854, 
tbe  Uuited 

under  that 
be  commou 
ny  question 

and  ofller 
;es  not  thus 
e  appointed 
me  manner, 
Uom  mission 
th  of  June, 


I 

f 
1 


ting  or  ceasing  to  act,  the  vacancy  shall  be  tilled  in  tbe  manner  herein- 
before provided  for  making  the  original  appointment,  the  period  of  three 
months  in  case  of  such  substitution  being  calculated  from  the  date  of 
the  happening  of  the  vacancy. 

The  Commissioners  so  named  shall  meet  in  the  city  of  Halifax,  in  the 
Province  of  Nova  Scotia,  at  the  earliest  convenient  period  after  they 
have  been  respectively  named,  and  shall,  before  proceeding  to  any  busi- 
ness, make  and  subscribe  a  solemn  declaration  that  they  will  impartially 
and  carefully  examine  and  decide  the  matters  referred  to  them  to  the 
best  of  their  judgment,  and  according  to  justice  and  equity;  and  such 
declaration  shall  be  entered  on  the  record  of  their  proceedings. 

Each  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  shall  also  name  one  person  to 
attend  the  Commission  as  its  agent,  to  represent  it  generally  in  all  mat- 
ters connected  with  the  Commission. 

Article  XXIV. 


cle  XXXIII 
F  the  inland 
[»reserved  in 
?s,  or  of  the 
be  admitted 


ritannic  Ma- 
in ited  States 
in  those  ac- 
cts  of  Her 
je  Govern- 
sioners  shall 
accorded  by 
ty,  as  stated 
compensa- 
ment  of  the 
y  in  return 
;ate8  under 
which  the 
ited  States 
sutth  award 


shall  be  ap- 
sioner  shall 
r  Britannic 
es  and  Her 
sioner  shall 
Dm  the  dat« 
ner  shall  be 
Emperor  of 
ice,  or  luca- 
sioner  omit- 


The  proceedings  shall  oe  conducted  in  such  order  as  the  Commis- 
sioners appointed  under  Articles  XXII  and  XXIII  of  this  treaty  shall 
determine.  They  shall  be  bound  to  receive  such  oral  or  written  testi- 
mony as  either  government  may  present.  If  either  party  shall  ofter 
oral  testimony,  the  other  partj'  shall  have  the  right  of  cross  examination, 
under  such  rules  as  the  Commissioners  shall  prescribe. 

If  in  the  case  submitted  to  the  Commissioners  either  party  shall  have 
specitted  or  alluded  to  any  report  or  document  in  its  own  exclusive  pos- 
session, without  annexing  a  copy,  such  party  shall  be  bound,  if  the  other 
party  thinks  proper  to  apply  for  it,  to  furnish  that  party  with  a  copy 
thereof,  and  either  party  may  call  upon  the  other,  through  the  Commis- 
sioners, to  produce  the  originals  or  certified  copies  of  any  papers  ad- 
duced as  evidence,  giving  in  each  instance  such  reasonable  notice  as 
the  Commissioners  may  require. 

The  case  on  either  side  shall  be  closed  within  a  period  of  six  months 
from  the  date  of  the  organization  of  the  Commission,  and  the  Commis- 
sioners shall  be  requested  to  give  their  award  as  soon  as  possible  there- 
after. The  aforesaid  period  of  six  months  may  be  extended  for  three 
months  in  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  among  the  Commissioners 
under  the  circumstances  contemplated  in  Article  XXIII  of  this  Treaty. 

Article  XXV. 

The  Commissioners  shall  keep  an  accurate  record  and  correct  minutes 
or  notes  of  all  their  proceedings,  with  the  dates  thereof,  and  may  ap- 
point and  employ  a  secretary  and  any  other  necesi^ary  ollicer  or  officers 
to  assist  them  in  the  transaction  of  tlie  business  which  may  come  before 
them. 

Each  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  shall  pay  its  own  Commissioner 
and  agent  or  counsel ;  all  other  expenses  shall  be  defrayed  by  the  two 
governments  in  equal  moieties. 

Article  XXVI. 

The  navigation  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence,  ascending  and  descending, 
from  the  forty-fifth  parallel  of  north  latitude,  where  it  ceases  to  form 
the  boundary  between  the  two  countries,  from,  to,  and  into  the  sea,  shall 
forever  remain  free  and  open  for  the  purposes  of  commerce  to  the  citi- 
zens of  the  United  States,  subject  to  any  laws  and  regulations  of  Great 


4  AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 

BritaiD  or  of  the  Doroinion  of  Canada,  not  inconsistent  with  such  priv- 
ilege of  free  navigation. 

The  navigation  of  the  rivers  Yul£on,  Porcupine,  and  Stikine,  ascend- 
ing and  descending,  from,  to,  and  into  the  sea,  shall  forever  remain  free 
and  open  for  the  purposes  of  commerce  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic 
Majesty  and  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  subject  to  any  laws 
and  regulations  of  eitlier  country  within  its  own  territory,  not  incon- 
sistent with  such  privilege  of  free  navigation. 

Article  XXVII. 

The  Governnieut  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  engages  to  urge  upon  the 
Government  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  to  secure  to  the  citizens  of  the 
United  States  the  use  of  the  Welland,  St.  Lawrence,  and  other  canals 
in  the  Dominion  on  terms  of  equality  with  the  inhabitants  of  the 
Dominion;  and  the  Government  of  the  United  States  engages  that  the 
subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  shall  enjoy  the  use  of  the  St.  Clair 
Flats  Canal  on  terms  of  equality  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  United 
States,  and  further  engages  to  urge  upon  the  State  governments  to 
secure  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  the  use  of  the  several 
State  canals  connected  with  the  navigation  of  the  lakes  or  rivers  trav- 
ersed by  or  contiguous  to  the  boundary-line  between  the  possessions  of 
the  high  contracting  parties,  on  terms  of  equality  with  the  inhabitants 
of  the  United  States. 

Article  XXVIII. 

The  naviga<^iou  of  Lake  Michigan  shall  also,  for  the  term  of  years 
mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII  of  this  treaty,  be  free  and  open  for  the 
purpose  of  commerce  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  subject 
to  any  laws  and  regulations  of  the  United  States  or  of  the  States  bor 
dering  thereon  not  inconsistent  with  such  privilege  of  free  navigation. 

Article  XXIX. 


It  is  agreed  that,  for  the  term  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII 
of  this  Treaty,  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise  arriving  at  the  ports  of 
New  York,  Boston,  and  Portland,  and  any  other  ports  in  the  United 
States  which  have  been  or  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  specially  desig- 
nated by  the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  destined  for  Her 
Britannic  Majesty's  Possessions  in  North  America,  may  be  entered  at 
the  proper  custom-house  and  conveyed  in  transit,  without  the  payment 
of  duties,  through  the  territory  of  the  United  States,  nnder  such  rules, 
regulations,  and  conditions  for  the  protection  of  the  revenue  as  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  may  from  time  to  time  prescribe  j 
and,  under  like  rules,  regulations,  and  conditions,  goods,  wares,  or  mer- 
chandise may  be  conveyed  in  transit,  without  the  payment  of  duties, 
from  such  Possessions  through  the  territory  of  the  United  States  for 
export  from  the  said  ports  of  the  United  States. 

It  is  further  agreed  that,  for  the  like  period,  goods,  wares,  or  mer- 
chandise arriving  at  any  of  the  ports  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Posses- 
sions in  North  America,  and  destined  for  the  United  States,  may  be 
entered  at  the  proper  custom-house  and  conveyed  in  transit,  without  the 
payment  of  duties,  through  the  said  Possessions,  under  such  rules  and 
regulations,  and  conditions  for  the  protection  of  the  revenue,  as  the 
Governments  of  the  said  Possessions  may  from  time  to  time  prescribe; 
and,  under  like  rules,  regulations,  and  conditions,  goods,  wares,  or  mer- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION.  5 

chandise  may  be  conveyed  in  transit,  without  payment  of  dutiea,  from 
the  United  ^State8  through  the  said  Possessions  to  other  places  in  the 
United  States,  or  for  export  from  ports  in  the  said  Possessions. 

Article  XXX. 

It  is  agreed  that,  for  the  term  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII 
of  this  Treaty,  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  may  carry  in  British 
vessels,  without  payment  of  duty,  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise  from 
one  port  or  place  within  the  territory  of  the  United  States  upon  the  St. 
Lawrence,  the  Great  Lakes,  and  the  rivers  connecting  the  same,  to 
another  port  or  place  within  the  territory  of  the  United  States  as  afore- 
said :  Provided,  That  a  portion  of  such  transportation  is  made  through 
the  Dominion  of  Canada  by  land  carriage  and  in  bond,  under  such  rules 
and  regulations  as  may  be  agreed  upon  between  the  Government  of  Her 
Britannic  Majesty  and  the  Government  of  the  United  States. 

Citizens  of  the  United  States  may,  for  the  like  period,  carry  in  United 
States  vessels,  without  payment  of  duty,  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise 
from  one  port  or  place  within  the  Possessions  of  Iler  Britannic  Majesty 
in  North  America  to  another  port  or  place  within  the  said  Possessions: 
Provided,  That  a  portion  of  such  transportation  is  made  through  the 
territory  of  the  United  States  by  land-carriage  and  in  bond,  under  such 
rules  and  regulations  as  may  be  agreed  upon  between  the  Government 
of  the  United  States  and  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty. 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  further  engages  not  to  impose 
any  export  duties  on  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise  carried  under  this 
article  through  the  territory  of  the  United  States;  and  Her  Majesty's 
Crovernment  engages  to  urge  the  Parliament  of  the  Dominion  of  Can- 
ada and  the  legislatures  of  the  other  colonies  not  to  impose  any  export 
duties  on  goods,  wares,  or  merchandise  carried  under  this  article;  and 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  may,  in  case  such  export  duties 
are  iiuj)osed  by  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  suspend,  during  the  period 
that  such  duties  are  imposed,  the  right  of  carrying  granted  under  this 
article  in  favor  of  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty. 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  may  suspend  the  right  of  carry- 
ing granted  in  favor  of  the  subjects  of  Her  IJritanuic  Majesty  under  this 
article,  in  case  the  Dominion  of  Canada  should  at  any  time  deprive  the 
citizens  of  the  United  States  of  the  use  of  the  canals  in  the  said  Domin- 
ion on  terms  of  equality  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  Dominion,  as  pro- 
vided iu  Article  XXVII. 


Article  XXXI. 

The  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  further  engages  to  urge 
upon  the  Parliament  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  and  the  Legislature  of 
New  Brunswick,  that  no  export  duty,  or  other  duty,  shall  be  levied  ou 
lumber  or  timber  of  any  kind  cut  on  that  portion  of  the  American  ter- 
ritory in  the  State  of  Maine  watered  by  the  river  St.  John  and  its  tribu- 
taries, and  floated  down  that  river  to  the  sea,  when  the  same  is  shipped 
to  the  United  States  from  the  Province  of  New  Brunswick.  And,  iu 
case  any  such  export  or  other  duty  coutiuues  to  be  levied  after  the 
expiration  of  one  year  from  the  date  of  the  exchange  of  the  ratitlcatious 
of  this  treaty,  it  is  agreed  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
may  suspend  the  right  of  carrying  hereinbefore  granted  under  Article 
XXX  of  this  treaty,  for  such  period  as  such  export  or  other  duty  may 
be  levied. 


6 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 

Article  XXXII. 


It  is  farther  agreed  that  the  provisions  and  stipulations  of  Articles 
XVIII  to  XXV  of  this  Treaty,  inclusive,  shall  extend  to  the  Colony  of 
Newfoundland,  so  far  as  they  are  applicable.  But  il  the  Imperial  Par- 
liament, the  Legislature  of  Newfoundland,  or  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  shall  not  embrace  the  Colony  of  Newfoundland  in  their  laws 
enacted  for  carrying  the  foregoing  articles  into  effect,  then  this  article 
shall  be  of  no  effect ;  but  the  omission  to  make  provision  by  law  to  give 
it  effect,  by  either  of  the  legislative  bodies  aforesaid,  shall  not  in  any 
way  impair  any  other  articles  of  this  Treaty. 

Article  XXXIII. 

The  foregoing  Articles  XVIII  to  XXV,  inclusive,  and  Article  XXX 
of  this  Treaty,  shall  take  effect  as  soon  as  the  laws  required  to  carry 
them  into  operation  shall  have  been  passed  by  the  Imperial  Parliament 
of  Great  Britain,  by  the  Parliament  of  Canada,  and  by  the  Legislature 
of  Prince  Edward's  Island  on  the  one  hand,  and  by  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States  on  the  other.  Such  assent  having  been  given,  the  said 
articles  shall  remain  in  force  for  the  period  of  ten  years  from  the  date 
at  which  they  may  come  into  operation;  and,  further,  until  tbe  expira- 
tion of  two  years  after  either  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  shall  have 
given  notice  to  the  other  of  its  wish  to  terminate  the  same ;  each  of  the 
High  Contracting  Parties  being  at  liberty  to  give  such  notice  to  the 
other  at  tbe  end  of  the  said  period  of  ten  years  or  at  any  time  afterward. 


Mr.  Foster  to  Mr.  Evarts. 

Washington,  December  13, 1877. 

Sir  :  I  have  the  honor  to  transmit  to  you  the  complete  record  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  Halifax  Commission,  under  Articles  XVIII  to  XXIII 
of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  signed  May  8, 1871,  together  with  the  result 
arrived  at  by  the  Commissioners. 

On  the  15th  of  June,  A.  D.  1877,  the  Commission  met  and  organized. 
On  that  day  the  rules  of  procedure  were  adopted,  and  the  case  of  Her 
Majesty's  Government  was  filed.  The  Commission  adjourned  from  June 
16  to  July  28,  during  which  interval  I  prepared  and  tiled  the  answer  on 
behalf  of  the  United  States,  and  a  reply  to  the  answer  was  filed  by  the 
British  Agent. 

The  regular  sessions  of  the  Commission  began  on  the  28th  of  July,  and 
the  time  was  occupied  until  the  18th  of  September,  principally  in  the 
examination  of  witnesses  and  reading  of  affidavits  in  support  of  the 
case  ot  Her  Majesty's  Government.  During  that  time,  two  interlocutory 
discussions  took  place  of  considerable  importance. 

On  the  28th  of  August,  the  counsel  of  the  United  States  made  a 
strenuous  effort  to  obtain  some  arrangement  by  which  the  arguments 
should  be  so  alternated  as  to  give  them  fair  notice  of  the  grounds  to  be 
taken  and  positions  to  be  maintained  in  the  final  reply  on  behalf  of 
Great  Britain,  especially  as  regards  the  bearing  of  their  testimony  and 
statistics,  as  to  which  their  case  filed  would  be  of  little  use.  This  was 
particularly  important,  because  no  oral  opening  whatever  had  been 
made  by  the  Agent  or  counsel  of  Her  Majesty.    Although  the  rules  of 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


procedure  seemed  clearly  to  contemplate  an  opening  upon  the  evidence, 
tbey  did  not  in  terras  require  one.  This  application  was  refused  by  a 
majority  of  the  Commissioners,  Mr.  Kellogg  dissenting.  And  the  ttnal 
result  WIS,  that  the  three  arguments  on  behalf  of  the  United  States 
were  compelled  to  be  made  tirst,  and  were  followed  by  three  arguments 
on  behalf  of  Great  Britain. 

It  was,  and  is,  the  opinion  of  the  counsel  and  Agent  of  the  United 
States  that  it  would  have  beeu  fairer  and  mote  consonant  with  usage 
to  have  arranged  some  order  of  arguments,  by  which  the  counsel  tor  the 
United  States  might  hear  something  from  the  British  counsel  as  to  the 
bearing  and  use  to  be  made  of  the  evidence  before  their  own  arguments 
were  completed,  reserving  to  the  British  Government  the  advantage  of 
the  final  reply. 

During  the  progress  of  the  evidence  oflFered  for  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
it  became  obvious  that  a  very  large,  if  not  the  greater,  part  of  the 
British  claim  was  based  upon  alleged  advantages  of  a  commercial 
character,  which,  whether  valuable  or  not,  were  certainly  not  secured 
to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  by  the  articles  of  the  treaty  of  1871. 

I  therefore,  on  the  1st  of  September,  made  the  following  motion,  for 
the  purpose  of  excluding  these  pretended  advantages  from  considera- 
tion, and  thus  relieving  us  from  the  necessity  of  swelling  an  already 
enormous  volume  of  testimony  by  evidence  on  points  clearly  irrelevant 
to  the  true  issue : 

The  counsel  and  Agent  of  the  United  States  ask  the  honorable  Commissioners  to  rnl« 
and  declare  that  it  is  not  competent  for  this  Commission  to  award  any  compensation 
for  commercial  interaourse  between  the  two  countries,  and  that  the  advantages  result- 
ing from  the  x)ractice  of  i>urcUtising  bait,  ice,  supplies,  &c.,  and  from  being  allowed  to 
transship  cargoes  in  British  waters,  do  not  constitute  a  foundation  for  award  of  com- 
pensation, and  shall  be  wholly  excluded  from  the  consideration  of  this  tribunal. 

On  the  5th  and  Cth  September  this  motion  was  fully  argued  on  both 
sides,  and  at  the  close  of  the  argument  the  Commission  unanimously 
rendered  the  following  decision  : 

The  Commission,  having  considered  the  motion  submitted  by  the  Agent  of  the 
United  States  at  the  conference  held  on  the  1st  instant,  deoide  : 

That  it  is  not  within  the  competence  of  this  tribunal  to  award  compensation  for 
commercial  intercourse  between  the  two  countries,  nor  for  purchasing  bait,  ice,  sup- 
plies, &e.,  nor  for  permission  to  transship  cargoes  in  British  waters. 

The  British  case  had  (page  29)  made  the  following  emphatic  statement: 

Freedom  to  transfer  cargoes,  to  ontQt  vessels,  buy  supplies,  obtain  bait,  and  trafflo 
generally  in  British  ports  and  harbors,  or  to  transact  other  business  ashore,  not  neces- 
sarily connecte<l  with  Ashing  pursuits,  are  secondary  privileges,  which  materially  en- 
hance the  principal  concessions  to  United  States  cikizous.  Thent  advauiage^  are  indis- 
jiensablc  to  the  aiiovess  of  foreign  fishing  oh  Canadian  eoants ;  without  such  facilities,  fishing 
operations,  both  inside  and  outside  of  the  in-shoies,  cannot  be  conducted  on  an  extensive  and 
remuneralive  scale. 

Naturally,  therefore,  the  Agent  and  counsel  of  the  United  States  felt 
that  this  decision  of  the  Commission  eliminated  from  the  British  claim 
its  largest  element  of  value,  and  that  they  were  not  only  at  liberty  but 
bound  to  confine  themselves  to  the  consideration  of  what  was  left, 
namely,  the  value  of  the  specific  fisheries  which  had  been  opened  to  the 
citizens  of  the  United  States  by  the  XVII  I.  Article  of  the  treaty  of 
1871;  and  in  this  opinion  they  were  confirmed  by  the  language  of  Sir 
Alexander  Gait,  one  of  the  Commissioners,  in  expressing  his  concur- 
rence in  the  decision : 

I  listened  with  very  great  jdeasuro  to  the  extremely  able  argnnionts  mide  on  both 
sides,  and  I  find  that  the  eiiect  of  this  motion  and  of  the  argument  which  has  been 
given  upon  it  is  to  limit  the  power  of  this  tribunal  to  certain  specified  points.    This 


8 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


m 


definition  ia  undoubtedly  important  in  its  ronf^nquencen.  It  eliniinateH  from  Mia  con- 
sideration of  the  CommisHion  uu  important  purtot  tlie  cuho  Hul>niitto<i  on  boliulf  of  Her 
M%jeHty'H  Oovornmeut,  and  tliiu  is  undoubtedly  the  case,  so  fur  as  this  part  forms  a 
direct  claim  for  compensation. 

The  evideoce  on  behalf  of  the  United  Statoa  commenced  on  the  10th 
day  of  September  and  closed  on  the  24th  of  October.  During  that  time 
seventy-eight  witnesses  were  examined  orally,  nearly  all  of  whom  came 
from  the  flshiug-towns  of  Maine  and  Massachusetts,  and  had  been  prac- 
tical fishermen  and  commanders  of  fishing-schooners.  Among  them, 
however,  were  a  number  of  the  largest  fish-dealers  and  owners  of  fish' 
ing-vessels  in  the  United  States. 

I  also  introduced  two  hundred  and  eiglity  affidavits  and  a  great  masR 
of  statistics  gathered  from  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Statistics,  the 
custom-house  of  Boston  and  Gloucester,  and  the  returns  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts inspector-genera^  of  fish. 

Much  use  was  made  of  Canadian  public  documents  and  of  the  diplo- 
matic and  legislative  discussions  of  questions  connected  with  the  British 
North  American  fisheries,  the  rights  of  the  citizens  of  tlie  United  Htates 
to  use  them  under  the  convention  of  1818,  and  the  limitations  of  those 
rights  by  the  terms  of  that  convention,  and  upon  the  degree  of  impor- 
tance of  the  extension  of  fishing-rights  conferred  on  the  United  States 
by  the  Iteciprocity  Treaty  and  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

The  evidence  as  to  the  value  to  the  Canadians  of  the  remission  of 
duties  upon  fish  and  fish-oil  and  of  free  access  to  the  niarliets  of  the 
United  States  during  the  period  of  the  Eeciprocity  Treaty ;  of  the  dis- 
astrous effect  of  the  abrogation  of  that  treaty  upon  the  fishing  interests 
of  the  Dominion ;  of  the  revival  of  those  interests  directly  after  the 
Treaty  of  Washington  went  into  operation ;  of  their  present  flourishing 
and  prosperous  condition ;  and  of  their  favorable  prospects  for  the 
future,  seemed  to  me  very  full  and  conclusive. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  appeared,  without  contradiction,  that  ever  since 
that  treaty  took  effect,  July  1, 1873,  United  States  fish  ng  in  British 
waters  had  steadily  declined ;  that  it  had  become  unprofitable,  and  was 
being  gradually  well-nigh  abandoned.  In  addition  to  such  direct  testi- 
mony, no  uncertain  evidence  of  the  practical  participation  of  United 
States  fishermen  in  the  fisheries  within  the  territorial  waters  of  Canada 
and  of  the  real  value  of  such  fishing  was  furnished  by  the  history  of 
the  system  of  licenses  adopted  by  the  Dominion  Government  during 
the  years  intervening  between  the  termination  of  the  Beciprocity  Treaty 
of  1854  and  the  execution  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington.  During  these 
years,  from  186G  to  1870,  the  Dominion  issued  licenses  permitting  United 
States  fishermen  to  fish  within  the  three-mile  limit  upon  payment  of  a 
fixed  tonnage-fee,  which,  at  first,  was  50  cents  per  ton,  and  was  after- 
ward raised  to  $1  and  then  to  $2  per  ton. 

It  appeared  in  evidence  that,  at  50  cents  per  ton,  licenses  were  almost 
universally  taken,  and  when  the  fee  was  increased  to  $1,  the  taking  of 
licenses  was  reduced  about  one-half,  and  that  when  it  reached  $2,  hardly 
any  were  procured,  that  amount  being  a  tax  too  onerous  for  reasonable 
profit ;  and  when  the  licenses  were  taken,  the  fee  was  pair',  not  as  rep- 
resenting the  mercantile  value  of  the  right,  but  largely  to  escape  annoy- 
ance, litigation,  and  the  uncertantics  arising  out  of  the  claim  of  the 
Canadians  to  draw  lines  of  exclusion  between  headlands.  The  largest 
number  of  United  States  vessels  taking  out  licenses  during  any  of  these 
years  was  454,  which,  at  the  high  average  of  70  tons  a  vessel,  would  be 
31,780  tons.  Putting  these  licenses  at  the  highest  point,  $2  per  ton, 
that  would  make  an  amount  of  $03,560  annually.    This  indicates  what 


AWARD   OF   THR   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


9 


H  from  tlifl  con- 
II  bohttit  of  I{«^r 
ia  purt  forinii  a 

1  on  the  10th    \ 
iug  that  time    ; 
['  wboin  oaine    j 
id  been  prac- 
imong  them, 
ruers  of  flsh- 

a  great  masn 
itatinticfl,  the 
>f  the  Massa- 

of  the  (liplo- 
th  the  British 
Juited  fltates 
:ionH  of  those 
ree  of  impor- 
Jnited  States 

I  remission  of 
arkets  of  the 
y ;  of  the  dis- 
hing interests 
ictly  after  the 
nt  flourishing 
pects  for  the 

lat  ever  since 
ng  in  British 
able,  and  was 
h  direct  testi- 
ion  of  Uuited 
)r8  of  Canada 
;he  history  of 

raent  during 
)rocity  Treaty 

During  these 

ttiug  Uuited 
payment  of  a 

nd  was  after- 

8  were  almost 
the  taking  of 
ed  $2,  hardly 
or  reasonable 
(\  not  as  rep- 
tscape  annoy- 
claim  of  the 
The  largest 
',  any  of  these 
sel,  would  be 
;,  $2  per  ton, 
idicates  what 


the  Dominion  Oovernment  was  willing  to  accept  as  the  price  of  that 
privilege,  and  the  conviction  of  the  United  States  flshurmen  that  they 
could  not  afl'ord  to  pay  such  an  amount,  and  preferred  exclusion  from 
the  limits  to  its  payment. 

The  mackerel-fishery  is  the  only  one  pursued  by  United  States  fisher- 
men, to  any  considerable  extent,  within  Canadian  territorial  waters. 
And  as  to  this  the  evidence  seemed  to  me  to  show  conclusively  that 
only  a  very  small  fraction  of  the  mackerel  taken  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint 
Lawrence  or  elsewhere  adjacent  to  the  British  North  American  posses- 
sions has  ever  been  caught  within  the  three-mile  zone.  Upon  a  care- 
ful review  of  all  the  evidence,  it  is  my  deliberate  opinion  that  annual 
interest  at  .">  per  cent,  upon  the  sum  which  two  of  the  Commissioners 
have  attempted  to  award  far  exceeds  the  commercial  v/'uc  of  all  the 
fish  drawn  from  Canadian  waters  by  American  fishermen  tvfter  they  are 
caught  and  landed  upon  shore.  If  it  were  a  simple  question  how  much 
should  be  paid  for  the  privilege  of  fishing  within  these  limits,  the  result 
arrived  at  by  the  two  Commissioners  would  be  an  erroneously  exagger- 
ated valuation. 

But  by  the  terms  of  the  treaty  the  Commissioners  were  enjoined,  by 
way  of  offset,  to  have  regard  to  the  value  of  the  concession  of  a  vested 
right  to  import  fish  and  fish-oil  duty  free  into  the  United  States.  The 
direct  pecuniary  gains,  accruing  to  the  Canadians  from  this  concession, 
were  shown  to  amount  to  between  three  hundred  thousand  and  four 
hundred  thousand  dollars  annually  iind  to  be  constantly  increasing. 

I  am  constrained  to  believe  that  the  majority  of  the  Commissioners 
must  have  wholly  disreganled  this  element  in  tlieir  conclusion,  though 
upou  what  grounds  they  ilid  so  T  aa  quite  unable  to  conjecture. 

Upon  the  conclusion  of  the  evidei.ce  I  thought — a.id  in  this  opinion 
the  eminent  counsel  associated  with  me  in  the  conduct  of  the  case  fully 
agreed — that  it  had  been  proved  conclusively  that  the  mackerel-fishery 
of  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence  was  so  variable  that  it  offered  no  cer- 
tainty of  profit;  that  the  fldiing  by  United  States  vessels  in  Cana- 
dian territorial  waters  was  only  occasional,  and  in  amount  bore  but  a 
small  proportion  to  their  fishing  in  the  body  of  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Law- 
rence which  is  a  part  of  the  open  sea  and  free  to  all  mankind,  and  in 
tiie  inshore  fisheries,  which  were  free  to  them  under  the  convention  of 
1818;  thatthe  developmentof  the  United  St.ites  coast  fishery  has  offered, 
and  would  continue  to  offer,  a  more  profitable  field  for  the  industry  and 
capital  of  United  States  fishermen ;  that  the  supply  of  fish  from  the 
lakes  and  the  transport  of  fresh  fish  far  into  the  interior,  were  super- 
seding the  use  of  salted  mackerel  as  an  article  of  food ;  that  the  mar- 
kets of  the  United  States  hail  always  been,  and  from  the  nature  of 
things  must  continue  to  be,  indispensable  to  the  prosecution  of  their 
own  fisheries  by  the  Canadians,  and  that  the  gain  to  them  by  the  remis- 
sion of  duties  bad  been  between  three  and  four  hundred  thousand  dol- 
lars annually  and  was  steadily  increasing. 

The  decision  of  September  6  having,  in  the  language  of  Sir  Alexander 
Gait,  "  eliminated  an  important  part  of  Her  Majesty's  case,  so  far  as 
that  part  found  a  direct  claim  for  compensation,"  we  felt  that  if  the  Com- 
missioners were  to  be  governed  by  the  law  and  the  evidence,  they  ought 
not  to  make  any  award  against  the  United  States,  and  we  are  of  the 
same  opinion  still. 

I  feel  it  my  duty  to  say  that  the  result  arrived  at  by  a  majority  of  the 
Commissioners,  whether  it  does  or  does  not  constitute  a  valid  award  under 
the  treaty,  should  never  be  accepted  as  a  valuation  of  the  inshore  fish- 
eries, entitled  to  weight,  after  the  expiration  of  the  period  embraced  in 


10 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


the  treaty.  This  is  also  the  opinion  of  my  associates,  and  I  believe  it 
to  be  the  universal  opinion  of  the  United  States  fishermen,  fish-dealers, 
and  owners  of  fishing- vessels.  The  importance  to  the  Canadians  of  access 
to  the  United  States  markets  is  so  indispensable,  that  the  control  over 
fish  importations  will  constitute  the  means  of  eventually  sec^^iing  to 
this  country  an  indemnity  against  any  Injustice  which  we  may  have 
received  in  this  measure  of  the  value  of  the  inshore  fisheries,  and  of  pre- 
venting any  further  exposure  to  such  injustice. 

If  the  United  States  flshei  nen  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence  had  been 
promptly  and  fully  protected  from  illegal  molr stations  while  exercising 
the  rights  enjoyed  under  the  convention  of  1818,  very  little  would  ever 
have  been  heard  about  the  importance  to  them  of  fishing  in  British  ter- 
ritorial waters. 

Yon  will  observe  that  two  of  the  Commissioners  agreed  in  their  esti- 
mate of  the  sum  of  $5,500,000  as  due  by  the  United  States,  while  the 
third  expressed  the  opinion  that  nothing  was  due  by  the  United  States, 
and  that  the  advantages  exchanged  were  completely  equalized  by  the 
terms  of  the  treaty  itself. 

Having  no  specific  instructions  for  such  a  contingency,  it  appeared  to 
rae  to  be  my  duty  to  receive  this  communication  simply  for  transmission, 
and  to  preserve  for  the  government  of  her  Britannic  Mnjesty  and  the 
United  States  the  right  to  determine  for  themselves  whether  a  decision 
not  unanimous  on  its  face  was  a  proper  and  valid  award  under  the 
provisions  of  the  treaty. 

I  venture  to  hope  that  my  language  as  recorded  in  the  final  protocol 
will  be  found  apt  and  sufficient  for  the  purpose. 

I  desire  to  bear  testimony  to  the  great  industry  and  fidelity  with 
which  the  counsel  of  the  United  States,  Hon.  Richard  H.  Dana,  jr.,  and 
Hon.  William  Henry  Trescot,  performed  their  share  of  the  labor  of  the 
trial,  and  to  the  thoroughness  and  ability  of  their  fiual  arguments.  It 
was  an  unspeakable  relief  to  have  the  responsibilities  devolved  upon 
me  shared  by  such  able  coadjutors. 

I  also  received  important  assistance  in  the  preparation  of  the  evidence 
from  F.  J.  Babson,  esq.,  collector  of  the  port  of  Gloucester. 

The  presence  at  Halifax  of  Prof.  S.  F.  Baird,  United  States  Fish 
Commissioner,  and  his  staff  of  assistants  was  of  great  value. 

From  the  time  when  I  was  first  employed  by  the  government  in  1873 
down  to  the  end  of  the  sessions  of  the  Commission,  I  received  constant 
assistance  from  Judge  M.  M.  Jackson,  United  States  consul  at  Halifax, 
who  in  familiar  and  thorough  knowledge  of  all  questions  relating  to  the 
fisheries  is  surpassed  by  no  one,  and  who  in  this  matter,  as  in  all  his 
other  official  duties,  has  represented  the  interests  of  his  country  most 
faithfully,  ably,  and  honorably. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  sir,  your  obedient  servant, 

I3WIGHT  FOSTKR, 
Agent  of  the  United  States  be/ore  the  Halifax  (Jominimon, 

Hon.  William  M.  Evarts, 

Secretary  of  State. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


11 


RECORD   OF   THE  PROCEEDINGS  OF   THE    HALIFAX  COM- 
MISSION, 1877. 


tiiial  protocol 

fidelity  with 
l).ina,  jr.,  and 
I  labor  of  the 
j»nments.    It 

volved  upon 


STER, 

ommission. 


LIST  OF  APrENDICES. 

A. — Case  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government. 

B. — Answer  on  behalf  of  the  United  States  of  America  to  the  Case 
of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government. 

C. — Brief  of  the  United  States  ui)on  the  question  of  the  extent  and 
limits  of  the  inshore  fisheries  and  territorial  waters  on  the  Atlantic 
Coast  of  British  North  America. 

D. — Reply  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government  to  the 
answer  of  the  United  States  of  America. 

E. — Documents  filed  in  support  of  the  Case  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's 
Government. 

F. — British  evidence. 

G. — British  affidavits. 

U. — Official  correspondence  showing  the  encroachments  of  United 
States  fishermen  in  British  North  American  waters. 

I. — Newfoundland  statistics. 

J. — Arguments  of  counsel  before  the  Halifax  Commission,  including 
the  final  arguments. 

K. — Brief  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government  in  reply 
to  the  brief  for  the  United  States. 

L. — United  States  evidence. 

M. — United  States  affidavits 

N. — Document  filed  by  the  counsel  for  Newfoundland. 

O. — United  States  statistics. 

P. — Judgments  in  vice-admiralty  court. 

Q. — Testimony  in  rebuttal  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Gov- 
ernment. 

R. — Documents  filed  by  United  States  counsel  respecting  insurance 
and  shipping  papers. 

PROTOCOLS  OF  EACH  DAY'S  CONFERENCE. 

Protocol  I. 

Record  of  the  procecdinfffi  of  the  Commission  appointed  under  Articles  22 
and  23  of  the  Treatif  of  Washington,  of  the  Sth  of  May,  1871,  at  the  first 
conference  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  ^eoiia,  on  the  ioth  daij  of  June,  1877. 

The  conference  was  convened  at  the  Legislative  Council  Chamber,  at 
Halif..x,  in  accordance  with  an  arrangement  previously  made  between 
the  three  Commissioners. 

The  (3onimissioners  who  were  i>resent  and  produced  their  respective 
powers,  which  were  examined  and  found  to  be  in  good  and  due  form, 
were : 

His  Excellency  Monsieur  Maurice  Delfosse,  Envoy  lOxtraordinary  and 
Minister  Plenipotentiary  of  His  Majesty  the  King  of  the  Belgians,  at 
Washington,  named  by  the  Ambassador  at  Landou,  of  His  Imp3rial 
Majesty  the  Emperor  of  Austria-Hungary ; 

The  Hon.  Ensign  H.  Kellogg,  named  by  the  President  of  the  United 
States;  and 


12 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Sir  Alexander  T.  Gait,  K.  C.  M.  G.,  named  by  Her  Britannic  Majesty. 

Tlie  Hon.  Dwight  Foster  attended  the  conference  as  Agent  of  the 
United  States,  and  Francis  Glare  Ford,  esq.,  attended  as  Agent  of  Her 
Britannic  Majesty. 

The  Hon.  Ensign  H.  Kellogg  then  proposed  that  M.  Delfosse  should 
preside  over  the  labors  of  the  mission ;  and 

M.  Delfosse  having  expressed  his  acknowledgments,  assumed  the 
Presidency. 

Sir  A.  T.  Gait  then  requested  M.  Delfosse  to  name  some  suitable  per- 
son to  act  as  Secretary  of  the  Commission.  M.  Delfosse  named  J.  H. 
G.  Bergne,  esq.,  of  the  Foreign  Office,  London,  who  accepted  the  position. 

The  Commissioners  thereupon  proceeded  to  make  and  subscribe  the 
following  solemn  declaration,  which  was  read  by  the  Secretary,  and 
signed  in  duplicate  by  each  of  the  Commissioners : 

"  We,  the  undersigned,  namely,  His  Excellency  Monsieur  Maurice 
Delfosse,  Envoy  Extraordinary  and  Minister  Plenipotentiary  of  His 
Majesty  the  King  of  the  Belgians,  at  Washington,  etc.,  etc.,  etc.,  ap- 
pointed by  the  Ambassador  in  London  of  His  Imperial  Majesty  the  Em- 
peror of  Austria-Hungary ; 

"  The  Honorable  Ensign  H.  Kellogg,  etc.,  etc.,  etc.,  appointed  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States ;  and 

"  Sir  Alexander  Tillock  Gait,  K.  C.  M.  G.,  etc.,  etc.,  etc.,  appointed 
by  Her  Britannic  Majesty; 

"Having  met  at  Halifax  as  Commissioners  under  Article  22  of  the 
Treaty  of  Washington  of  the  eighth  of  May,  1871,  to  determine,  having 
regard  to  the  privileges  accorded  by  the  tfuited  States  to  the  subjects 
of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  as  stated  in  Articles  19  and  21  of  the  said 
Treaty;  the  amount  of  any  compensation  which,  in  our  opinion,  ought 
to  be  paid  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  the  Government 
of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  in  return  for  the  privileges  accorded  to  the 
citizens  of  the  United  States,  under  Article  18  of  the  said  Treaty,  do 
hereby  solemnly  declare  that  we  will  impartially  and  carefully  examine 
and  decide  the  matters  referred  to  us,  to  the  best  of  our  judgment,  and 
according  to  justice  and  equity ; 

In  witness  whereof  we  have  hereunto  subscribed  our  names,  this 
fifteenth  day  of  June,  one  thousiind  eight  hundred  and  seventy-seven." 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 


Mr.  Ford  then  produced  his  commission  as  Agent  of  Her  Britannic 
Majesty,  which  was  found  to  be  in  due  form.  Mr.  Foster  also  produced 
his  commission  as  Agent  of  the  United  States,  which  was  likewise  found 
to  be  in  due  form. 

Mr.  Foster  then  produced  a  draft  of  rules  proposed  for  the  procedure 
of  the  Commission,  which  had  been  submitted  to  him  by  Mr.  Ford.  To 
these,  he  said,  that  in  the  main  he  agreed,  but  took  exception  to  certain 
of  them  which  contemplated  the  appearance  of  counsel  on  either  side, 
as  well  as  the  accredited  Agents.  He  submitted  to  the  Commissioners 
that  no  person  other  than  the  Agent,  on  either  side,  should  be  permitted 
to  address  the  court. 

Mr.  Ford  objected  to  this  view,  and  contended  that  counsel  should  be 
permitted  to  address  the  court. 

Mr.  Foster,  in  reply,  gave  his  reasons  for  maintaining  his  contention. 

The  Commissioners  thereupon  retired  to  deliberate,  and  on  their  return 
M.  Delfosse  announced  the  following  decision  : 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


13 


itc,  appointed 


"  The  ComtoissioDers  having  considered  the  statements  made  by  the 
Agents  of  the  respective  governments ;  decide,  That  each  Agent  may 
be  heard  personally  or  by  counsel,  but  in  the  case  of  the  British  Agent 
he  shall  be  limited  to^ve,  as  representing  the  Maritime  Provinces  on 
the  Atlantic  (^oast  of  British  North  America ;  and  in  the  case  of  the 
Agent  of  the  United  States  he  shall  be  allowed  a  similar  number." 

Mr.  Ford  then  stated  that  he  desired  to  raise  an  important  point,  viz. : 
whether  ex  parte  affidavits  should  be  admitted  as  written  testimony, 
under  the  terras  of  Article  24  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington.  He  con- 
tended that  such  ex  parte  affidavits  should  not  be  admissible  before  the 
Commission. 

Mr.  Foster,  on  the  other  hand,  contended  that  such  ex  parte  affidavits 
should  be  admitted  as  written  testimony,  the  Commissioners  being  left 
to  attach  to  them  such  value  as  they  might  think  fit. 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson,  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain,  maintained  the  views 
expressed  by  Mr.  Ford  on  this  point. 

The  Commissioners  then  retired  to  deliberate,  and  on  their  return, 
M.  Delfosse  announced  that  the  Commissioners  had  decided  that  affi- 
davits should  be  admitted. 

The  Commissioners  then  again  retired  for  deliberation,  and  on  their 
return,  M.  DeUosse  stated  that  the  following  rules  had  been  adopted  for 
the  procedure  of  the  court ;  and  directed  them  to  be  read  by  the  Sec- 
retary : — 


RULES  FOR  THE  PROCEDURE  OF  THE  HALIFAX  COMMISSION. 


nsel  should  be 


I.  When  the  Commissioners  shall  have  completed  all  necessary  pre- 
liminary arrangements,  the  British  Agent  shall  present  a  copy  of  the 
"  Case  "  of  Her  Ma,jesty'8  Government  to  each  of  the  Commissioners, 
and  dui)licate  copies  to  the  United  States  Agent. 

II.  The  court  shall  thereupon  adjourn  for  a  period  of  six  weeks,  on 
the  expiration  of  one-half  of  which  period,  the  United  States  Agent  shall 
deliver  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Commission  at  least  twelve  copies  of  the 
Counter-case  of  the  United  States  Government.  The  British  Agent 
shall,  three  days  before  the  meeting  of  the  court,  after  such  adjourn- 
ment, deliver  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Commission  at  least  twelve  copies 
of  the  "  Reply  "  of  Her  Majesty's  Government. 

III.  The  evidence  brought  forward  in  support  of  the  British  Case 
must  be  closed  within  a  period  of  six  weeks  after  the  case  shall  have 
been  opened  by  the  British  counsel,  unless  a  further  time  be  allowed 
by  the  Commissioners  on  application.  The  evidence  brought  forward 
in  support  of  the  United  States  Counter-case  must  be  closed  within  a 
similar  period,  after  the  opening  of  the  United  States  Case  in  answer, 
unless  a  further  time  be  allowed  by  the  Commissioners  on  application. 
A  period  of  fourteen  days  shall  then  be  allowed  for  the  evidence  in  re- 
ply on  the  British  side,  unless  a  further  time  be  allowed  by  the  Com- 
missioners on  application.  But  as  soon  as  the  evidence  in  support  of 
the  British  Case  is  closed  that  in  support  of  the  United  States  shall  be 
commenced,  and  as  soon  as  that  is  closed  the  evidence  in  reply  shall  be 
commenced.  After  which,  arguments  shall  be  delivered  on  the  part  of 
the  United  States,  in  writing,  within  a  period  of  ten  days,  unless  a 
further  time  be  allowed  by  the  Commissioners  on  application,  and  argu- 
ments in  closing  on  the  British  side  shall  be  deUvered  in  writing  within 
a  further  period  of  ten  days,  unless  a  further  time  be  allowed  by  the 
Commissioners  on  application.  Then  the  case  on  either  side  shall  be 
considered  as  finally  closed,  unless  the  Commissioners  shall  direct  further 
arguments  upon  the  especial  points,  the  British  Government  having  in 


14 


AWARD    OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ii!M 


sach  case  the  right  of  general  reply ;  and  the  Commissioners  shall  at 
once  proceed  to  consider  their  award.  The  periods  thus  allowed  for 
hearing  the  evidence  shall  be  without  counting  any  days  of  adjournment 
that  may  be  ordered  by  the  Commissioners. 

lY.  The  Commissioners  shall  meet  from  day  to  day  at  the  place  ap- 
pointed, unless  otherwise  adjourned. 

V.  The  Secretary  shall  keep  a  record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Com- 
mission upon  each  day  of  its  session,  which  shall  be  read  at  the  next 
meeting,  and  signed,  after  approval,  by  the  Commissioners,  the  Secre- 
tary, and  the  Agents. 

VI.  The  Secretary  shall  keep  a  Notice  Book,  in  which  entries  may  be 
made  by  the  Agent  or  Counsel  for  either  Government,  and  all  entries 
in  such  book  shall  be  due  notice  to  the  opposing  Agent  or  Counsel. 

VII.  The  minutes  of  proceedings  and  evidence  shall  be  kept  in  dupli- 
cate, one  of  which  will  be  delivered  to  the  Agent  of  each  Government 
at  the  close  of  the  proceedings. 

VIII.  One  Counsel  only  shall  be  allowed  to  examine  a  witness,  and 
one  Counsel  only  to  cross-examine  the  same  witness,  unless  otherwise 
allowed  by  the  Commissioners. 

IX.  Tlie  oral  evidence  shall  be  certified  by  the  reporters  caking  the 
same. 

X.  The  Secretary  will  have  charge  of  all  the  books  and  papers  of  the 
Commission,  and  no  papers  shall  be  withdrawn  from  the  tiles  or  taken 
from  the  office  without  an  order  of  the  Commission.  The  Agent  or 
Counsel  on  either  side  shall,  however,  be  allowed  access  to  such  books 
and  papers  for  purposes  of  reference,  and  at  the  close  of  the  proceed- 
ings books  and  papers  filed  shall  be  returned  to  the  respective  parties 
who  may  have  produced  them. 

XI.  Ail  witnesses  shall  be  examined  on  oath  or  solemn  affirmation, 
and  eic^rtrfe  affidavits  are  to  be  admitted. 

XII.  The  Award  shall  be  made  out  in  duplicate,  and  copy  be  pre- 
sented to  respective  Agents  of  the  two  Governments. 

XIII.  The  Commissioners  shall  have  power  to  alter,  amend,  add  to, 
suspend,  or  annul,  any  of  the  foregoing  rules  as  may  seem  to  them  ex- 
pedient iluring  the  course  of  the  proceedings. 

Mr.  Ford  then  proceeded  to  name  the  British  Counsel,  as  follows : 
Joseph  Doutre,  esq.,  Q.  C,  of  Montreal. 
S.  E.  Tiiomson,  esq.,  Q.  C,  of  St.  John,  New  Brunswick. 
Hon.  W.  V.  Whiteway,  of  St.  John's,  Newfoundland. 
Hon.  Louis  H.  Davies,  of  Charlottetown,  Prince  Edward  Island,  and 
K.  L.  Wetherbe,  esq.,  Q.  C,  of  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia. 
Mr.  Foster  stated  that  he  would  request  permission  to  name  the  coun- 
sel on  the  part  of  the  United  States,  after  such  adjournment,  as  might 
be  decided  on  after  the  presentation  of  the  "  Case  "  of  Her  Majesty's 
Government,  which  request  was  acceded  to  by  the  Commissioners. 

Mr.  Ford  then  presented  to  each  of  the  Commissioners  a  copy  of  the 
"  Case"  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,  and  duplicate  copies  to  the  United 
States  Agent,  accompanied  by  a  list  of  the  Documents  to  be  filed  with 
the  Secretary  in  support  of  the  "  Case."    (See  Appendix  A.) 

The  Commission  thereupon  adjourned  until  the  next  day,  the  six- 
teenth June,  at  noon.. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 

Protocol  II. 


15 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  second  confer- 
ence, held  at  Halifax,  Sova  Scotia,  on  the  i6th  day  of  June,  1877. 

The  conference  was  held  pnrsuant  to  adjournment. 
The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  B.^tain,  respectively,  were  present. 

The  President  having  directed  the  Secretary  to  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  these  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  commission  was  tliereupon  adjourned  until  Saturday,  the  28th 
day  of  July,  at  11  a.  m. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGXE. 


Protocol  III. 

Record  of  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  third  conference, 
held  at  Halifax,  Xora  Scotia,  on  the  2Sth  day  of  July,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

The  three  Commissioners  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

The  Secretary  reported  that  during  the  adjournment  the  United 
States  Agent  had,  in  compliance  with  the  second  rule  adopted  for  the 
proceduie  of  the  Commission,  delivered  to  him  twelve  cojnes  of  the 
"Answer  on  behalf  of  the  United  States  of  America  to  the  Case  of  Her 
Britannic  Majesty's  Government."    (Appendix  B.) 

This  "Answer  "  was  accompanied  by  a  "  Brief  for  the  United  States 
upon  the  question  of  the  extent  and  limits  of  the  inshore  fisheries  and 
territorial  waters  on  the  Atlantic  coast  of  British  Korth  America." 
(Appendix  0.) 

Copies  of  both  documents  were  forwarded  by  the  Secretary  on  Mon- 
day, the  9th  July,  to  each  of  the  Commissioners. 

In  conformity  with  the  same  rule,  the  British  Agent  had  delivered  to 
the  Secretary  twelve  copies  of  the  "  Reply  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic 
Majesty's  Government  to  the  Answer  of  the  United  States  of  America." 
(Appendix  D.) 

A  copy  of  this  document  was  forwarded  by  the  Secretary  to  each  of 
the  Commissioners,  on  the  20th  day  of  July. 

The  Secretary,  by  direction  of  the  President,  then  read  the  records  of 
the  last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commis- 
sioners, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Foster  then  proceeded  to  name  the  counsel  retained  on  behalf  of 
the  United  States,  as  follows:  Mr.  William  H.  Trescot,  of  Washington, 
and  Mr.  Richard  H.  Dana,  jr.,  of  Boston. 

Mr.  Foster  added  that  he  might  possibly,  although  not  probably,  name 
others  at  a  later  day. 

The  Secretary  then  informed  the  President  that,  subject  to  the  f»p- 
i»roval  of  the  Commissioners,  the  services  of  Mr.  George  B.  Bradley, 


16 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1S». 


SSI 


i^.v  ••' 


.    a. 


and  of  Mr.  Joha  A.  Lnmsden,  had  been  secured  as  stenographic  re* 
porters  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Commission.  The  Commissioners  were 
pleased  to  express  their  approval. 

The  President  next  requested  tbe  Secretary  to  record  the  fact  that  the 

proceedings  of  the  Commission  would  be  of  a  strictly  private  character. 

Mr.  Ford  then  proposed  that  the  sittings  of  the  Commission  should, 

unless  otherwise  ordered,  be  held  daily,  from  noon  to  4  p.  m.,  Saturday, 

and  Sundays  excepted. 

Mr.  Foster  concurred  in  the  proposed  arrangement,  which  was  agreed 
to  by  tbe  Commissioners,  on  the  understanding  that  if  time  were  found 
to  press  the  hours  of  the  daily  sittings  should  be  lengthened. 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  until  Mondav,  the  30th  July,  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  IV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fourth  confer- 
encCf  held  at  Halifax,  Kova  Scotia,  on  the  30<A  day  of  July,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  tbe  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Foster  then  requested  permission  to  introduce  Mr.  J.  S.  D.  Thom- 
son, of  Halifax,  and  Mr.  Alfred  Foster,  of  Boston,  who  would  attend 
the  Commission  to  perform  such  duties  on  behalf  of  the  United  States 
as  might  be  assigned  to  them.  He  added  that  Mr.  Henry  A.  Blood,  of 
Washington,  would  also  attend  to  render  clerical  assistance. 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson,  rising  to  open  the  case  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's 
Government,  stated  that  he  proposed  to  commeace  by  reading  tbe 
printed  '^Case''  submitted  to  the  Commissioners  on  behalf  of  Her  Britan- 
nic Majesty's  Government. 

This  be  proceeded  to  do,  and  the  documents  therein  referred  to  were 
read  in  due  order  by  the  Secretary.  These  will  be  found  in  a  collective 
form  in  Appendix  E. 

Mr.  Foster  then  proceeded  to  read  the  "Answer  on  behalf  of  the 
United  States  of  America  to  the  Case  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment," printed  copies  of  which  had  already  been  submitted  to  the  Com- 
missioners. He  stated,  however,  tbat  such  reading  formed  no  part  of 
his  opening,  in  course  of  which  he  proposed  to  quote  extracts  from  the 
"Answer." 

The  reading  of  the  "Answer  "  was  unfiaished  at  4  p.  m.,  when  the 
Commission  adjourned  till  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


rnited  States  and 


AWARD   OP   TEE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 

Protocol  V. 


17 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fislieriea  Commission  at  the  fifth  confer- 
ence,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  3lst  day  of  July,  1877. 

The  conference  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  tlie  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  Secretary  next  read  an  entry  which  had  been  made  in  the  notice- 
book  by  the  United  States  Agent,  requesting  the  production  of  certain 
documents. 

Mr.  Foster  then  continued  the  reading  of  the  ''Answer  on  behalf  of 
the  United  States  of  America  to  the  Case  of  Her  Britannic  M.ijesty's 
Government,"  on  the  conclusion  of  which,  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  read  "  The 
Reply  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government  to  the  Answer 
of  the  United  States  of  America." 

The  Secretary  read  in  due  order  "  The  Instructions  to  Her  Majesty's 
High  Commissioners,  and  Protocols  of  Conferences  held  at  Washington 
between  February  27  and  May  G,  1871,  so  far  as  this  paper  relates  to  the 
fisheries."    (No.  15,  Appendix  B.) 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson,  on  concluding  the  reading  of  the  "  Reply,"  said 
that  the  "  Case  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,"  the  "Answer  of  the 
United  States,"  and  the  "  Reply  of  Her  Majesty's  Government "  having 
now  been  read,  he  would  leave  the  case,  as  brought  out  in  evidence,  in 
the  hands  of  the  Commissioners,  who,  he  was  confident,  would  carefully 
and  impartially  decide  upon  it.  By  arriving  at  a  fair  and  equitable  de- 
cision they  would  remove  a  source  of  irritation  between  Great  Britain 
and  the  United  States,  and  earn  a  lasting  title  to  the  gratitude  of  two 
great  and  friendly  nations. 

The  Commission  then  proceeded  to  take  evidence  in  support  of  the 
"Case  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government." 

Simon  Chivirie,  a  fisherman,  residing  at  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  1,  Appendix  F.) 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  following  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGUT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


p.  m.,  when  the 


Protocol  VI. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  sixth  confer- 
ence, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  1st  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 
2f 


18 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


The  examination  of  Simon  Chivirie,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island, 
was  resumed  by  Mr.  Davies. 
Mr.  Foster  cross-examined  the  witness. 

Mr.  James  E.  Maclean,  of  Souris,  merchant,  a  member  of  the  legis- 
lative assembly  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence 
on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  2,  Appendix  F.) 
The  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Dana. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FEANCIS  CLARE  FOED. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BEEGNE. 


Protocol  VII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  seventh  con- 
ference^ held  at  Halifax,  Nova  iScotia,  on  the  2d  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  cross-examination  of  Mr.  James  R.  Maclean  was  resumed  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr,  John  F.  Campion,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  trader 
principally  in  fish,  and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evi- 
dence on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  3,  Appendix 
F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  Joseph  Campbell,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  fisherman 
by  trade,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  4,  Appendix  F.) 
The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies. 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  following  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLaEE  FOED. 
DWIGHT  FOSTEE. 
J.  H.  G.  BEEGNE. 


Protocol  VIII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  eighth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  3rd  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


19 


By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  Joseph  Campbell  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Davies. 

The  witness  was  cross  examined  by  Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  William  S.  McNeil,  of  Rustico,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  justice 
of  the  peace,  and  formerly  a  member  of  the  local  legislature,  engaged 
in  the  fishing  business,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters 
connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No,  5,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  Stanislaus  F.  Perry  (or  Poirier),  of  Tignish,  Prince  Edward  Island, 
a  member  of  the  Dominion  House  of  Commons,  a  farmer,  mill-owner, 
and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  G,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  Joseph  Campbell  was  recalled  and  reexamined  by  Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Davies  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 

by- 
Mr.  Alexander  W.  MacNeil,  of  Cavendish,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a 
justice  of  the  peace,  farmer,  and  fisherman  (No.  1,  Appendix  G),  and  by 
Mr.  Hugh  John  Montgomery,  of  New  London,  Prince  Edwiird  Island, 
merchant  (No.  2,  Appendix  G). 

The  Commission  adjourned  till  Monday,  the  6th  day  of  August,  at 
noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Peotocol  IX. 


States  and  of 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  ninth  con- 
ference^ held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  6th  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon  pursuant  to  adjournment. 
The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  Secretary  then  reported  that  the  services  of  Mr.  Benjamin  Russell 
had  been  secured  as  an  additional  shorthand  reporter,  and  the  President 
I  expressed  his  approval. 

The  Secretary  next  requested  permission  to  withdraw  from  the  archives 
the  affidavits  filed  with  him,  for  the  purpose  of  printing  them  at  conven- 
j  lent  periods.    This  permission  was  granted. 

M.  George  William  Howlan,  of  Cascumpec,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a 
[senator  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  formerly  a  member  of  the  executive 
council  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  consular  agenc  of  the  United 
■  States  at  Cascumpec,  engaged  in  the  fishing  business,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (Appen- 
dix F,  No.  7.) 


20 


AWARD   OF   THE   FI8UERY   COMMISSION. 


The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Trescot. 

Mr.  R.  S.  Thomson  then  proceeded  to  read  affidavits  made  by  the  fol- 
lowing persons  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry : 
Mr.  John  D.  White,  of  Alberton.    (No.  3,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Sylvaiu  F.  Arsineaux,  of  Tignisb.    (No.  4,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Alexander  Francis  Larkin,  of  Nail  Pond.  (No.  5,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  Conroy,  of  Kildare.    (No.  6,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  F.  White,  of  Alberton.    (No.  7,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Meddie  Gallant,  of  Big  Mimnigast.    (No.  8,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  Skerry,  of  Cascumpec.    (No.  9,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  Champion,  of  Cascumpec.    (No.  10,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Sebastian  Davidson,  of  Tignish.    (No.  11,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  William  Champion,  of  Cascumpec.    (No.  12,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  McDonald,  of  East  Point.    (No.  13,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  H.  Davidson,  of  Tignish.    (No.  14,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Joseph  Campbell,  of  Souris.    (No.  15,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Alexander  Chivirie,  of  Souris.    (No.  16,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  F.  Morrisay,  of  Tignish.    (No.  17,  Appendix  G.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  next  day  at  noon. 

M  AUK  ICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  X. 


^■i'.- 


ill 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  tenth  confer- 
ence, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  7th  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  re8i)ectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Weatherbe  proceeded  to  read  a  collection  of  "  Official  corre- 
spondence from  the  years  1827  to  1872,  inclusive,  showing  the  encroach- 
ments of  United  States  iishermen  in  British  North  American  waters 
since  the  conclusion  of  the  convention  of  1818."    (Appendix  H.) 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  then  read  affidavits  made  by  the  following  per- 
sons, on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry : 
Mr.  E.  Hackett,  of  Tignish.    (No.  18,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  M.  O'Connor,  of  Kildare  Cape.    (No.  19,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Alexander  Larkin,  of  Alberton.    (No.  20,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Gilbert  Perry,  of  Frog  Pond.    (No.  21,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  A.  J.  Gaudet,  of  Nail  Pond.    (No.  22,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  William  S.  Larkin,  of  Nail  Pond.    (No.  23,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Michael  Foley,  of  Alberton.    (No.  24,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Marshal  Pacquet,  of  Souris.    (No.  25,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Peter  Deagle,  of  RoUo  Bay.    (No.  26,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Samuel  Prowse,  of  Murray  Harbor.    (No.  27,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Daniel  McPhee,  of  Big  Pond.    (No.  28,  Appendix  G.) 


AWABD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


21 


Mr.  Malcolm  McFaydeu,  of  Murray  Harbor.    (No.  29,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Charles  W.  Duiiu,  of  Murray  Harbor.    (No.  30,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  Hewlett,  of  Georgetown.    (No.  31,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  Graham,  of  Cavendish.    (No.  32,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  11.  McDonahl,  of  St.  Margaret's.    (No.  33,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Colin  McKenzie,  of  French  Kiver,  New  London.    (No.  34,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  Alphonse  Gilman,  of  Malpeqne.    (No.  3.5,  Appendix  G.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


ed  States  and 


Protocol  XL 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  eleventh  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  N'ova  Scotia,  on  the  Sth  day  of  A^tgust,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  George  Harbour,  of  Sandy  Beach,  Gaspe,  a  farmer  and  fisherman, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  8,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Doutre  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  William  Sinnett,  of  Griffin's  Cove,  Gasp(^  County,  a  fisherman, 
was  next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  9,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Doutre  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  Gregoire  Grigny,  of  Newport,  Gasp<§  County,  a  fisherman,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  10,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Doutre  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  William  McLeod,  of  Port  Daniel,  in  the  county  of  Gaspe,  a  farmer 
and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.     (No.  11,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson. 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Peotocol  XII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  ticelfth  confer- 
ence,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  9th  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Gominission  met  according  to  appointment. 

The  three  CommiasiouerH,  and  the  Agents  of  Great  Britain  and  of 
the  United  States,  resjjectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Couimissiouers, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  William  McLeod  was  resumed  Ly  Mr.  S.  R. 
Thomson. 

The  witness  was  crosaexamined  by  Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Philip  Vibert,  of  Perc6,  in  the  county  of  Gasp6,  a  general  insur- 
ance and  commission  agent,  Lloyd's  agent,  and  formerly  high  sheriti' 
for  the  county  of  Gasp6,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  mat- 
ters connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  12,  Appendix  h\) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Doutre  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Weatherbe  then  proceeded  to  read  affidavits  made  on  matters 
connected  with  the  inquiry  by  the  following  persons : 

Mr.  E.  Marshal],  of  the  Island  of  Anticosti.    (No.  30,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  James  A.  Nickerson,  of  Margaret's  Bay.    (No.  37,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  J.  L.  lugraham,  of  North  Sydney.    (No.  38,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Foster  then  read  the  following  statement : 

"  Referring  to  page  20  of  the '  Answer  on  behalf  of  the  United  States,' 
and  to  Chapter  VI  of  the  'Reply  on  behalf  of  Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment,' thereto,  the  Agent  of  th<.  United  States  desires  to  state  that  upon 
an  examination  of  the  full  text  of  the  correspondence  and  instructions 
referred  to  therein,  which  have  been  kindly  furnished  to  him  by  the 
Agent  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,  it  appears  to  be  true,  as  asserted 
in  the  '  Reply,'  that  the  offer  cited  in  the  '  Answer '  was  a  part  of  a  gen- 
eral proposition  as  to  commercial  relations.  The  '  Answer' was  pre- 
pared without  access  to  the  original  documents  since  furnished,  and 
referred  only  to  the  letter  of  Sir  Henry  Bulwer,  and  the  extract  therein 
inclosed,  which  conveyed  to  the  mind  of  the  Agent  of  the  United 
States  the  suggestion  of  an  .alternative  negotiation,  the  one  contem- 
plating a  general  reciprocity,  the  other  an  arrangement  confined  to  the 
fisheries,  and  proposing  a  narrower  equivalent. 

"An  obvious  error  of  citation  also  arose  in  copying  or  printing,  whicb 
escaped  attention  in  reading  the  proof." 

The  Commission  then  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XIII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  thirteenth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  10th  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


23 


i  b .'  Mr.  S.  R. 


lexamiued  by 
de  ou  matters 


Tlie  Secretary,  by  direction  of  the  President,  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  CommisHioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Ajjents. 

Mr.  John  James  Fox,  of  Amherst,  Magdalen  Islands,  collector  of 
customs,  registrar  of  shipping,  and  overseer  of  fisheries,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  ou  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  13, 
Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  K.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  Mr.  Doutre  then  proceeded  to  read  attidavits 
made  on  matters  coniiected  with  the  inquiry  by  the  following  persons: 
M.  John  J.  McPhee,  of  Big  Pond,  P.  E.  I.     (No.  39,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  McDonald,  of  Chepstow.     (No.  40,  Appendix  G.) 
M.  James  Nowlaii,  of  Souris,  P.  B.  I.     (No.  41,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  G.  McNeil,  of  North  Rustico,  P.  B.  I.     (No.  42,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  George  McKenzie,  of  French  J{iver,  P.  B.  I.    (No.  43,  Appendix  G.) 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  till  Monday,  the  13th  day  of  August, 
at  11  a.  m. 

MAURICE  DELFOS8E. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DVVIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.   H.  G.  BERGNE. 


)rinting,  which 


Protocol  XIV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fourteenth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  13th  day  of  Avgust,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  11  a.  m.,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  George  McKenzie,  of  New  London,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a 
fisherman,  was  calle<l,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.     (No.  14,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  Thomas  Roberts  Bennett,  judge  of  the  district  court  at  Harbor 
Grace,  Newfoundland,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters 
connected  with  the  inquiry.     (No.  15,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 


The  Commission  adjourned  at  2  p. 


m.  until  the  following  day  at  noon. 
MAURICE  DBLFOSSE. 
t:.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


;ed  States  and 


24 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


■'■',  ii 


Peotocol  XV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fifteenth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  lUh  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  confereuce,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commission- 
ers, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  T.  R.  Bennett  was  resumed  by  Mr.  White- 
way. 
The  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr,  Dana. 

Mr.  William  Killigrew,  of  Saint  John's,  Newfoundland,  merchant,  was 
next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  16,  Appendix  F.) 
The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Whitew^ay. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FllANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocoi,  XVL 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  tlie  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  sixteenth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  lUthday  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commission- 
ers, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  W.  Killigrew  was  resumed  by  Mr.  White- 
way. 
The  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Foster. 
Mr.  James   Oliphant  Eraser,  of  the  board  of  works  department, 
Saint  John's,  Newfoundland,  was  next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on 
oath,  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  17,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Whiteway,  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Dana. 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  till  the  following  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLA.RE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


25 


I  states  anti 


Mr.  White- 


Protocol  XVII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  seventeenth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Kova  Scotia,  on  the  16th  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  rend  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  W3re  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Angus  Grant,  of  Port  Hawkesbury,  in  the  Strait  of  Canso,  a  mer- 
chant, and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath 
on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry,    (^o.  18,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  James  McKay,  deputy  inspector  of  fish,  at  Port  Mulgrave,  in  the 
Strait  of  Canso,  a  fisherman,  was  next  called  and  gave  evidence  on  oath 
on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  19,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  E.  Thompson.  No  cross-exami- 
nation was  desired. 

Mr.  James  Purcell,  of  Port  r.iiiigrave.  Strait  of  Canso,  a  revenue  ofli- 
cer  and  collector  of  light  dues,  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  20, 
Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dtina. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
D WIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


(d  States  and 


Protocol  XVIIL 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  eighteenth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Kova  Scotia,  on  the  llth  day  of  August, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  .ind 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  (yommissiouers, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Captain  E.  Hardinge,  C.  B.,  R.  N.,  aid-de  camp  to  Iler  Majesty  the 
Queen,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  21,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  John  Nicholson,  of  Louisbnrg,  Cape  Breton,  a  fisherman,  was  next 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  22,  Appendix  F.) 


26 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


it 


m 


The  witness  was  exaraiued  by  Mr.  Doutre  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  John  Maguire,  of  Steep  Creek,  Strait  of  Canso,  a  trader,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  in- 
quiry.    (No.  23,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Weatherbe  then  proceeded  to  read  an  affidavit  made  relative  to 
the  present  inquiry  by  Mr.  Peter  Paint,  sr.,  of  Port  Hawkesbury. 
(No.  44,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  William  Brown,  of  Port  Medway,  Nova  Scotia,  a  fisherman,  was 
next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  24,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies.  No  cross-examination  was 
desired. 

Mr.  Weatherbe  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  in- 
quiry by  the  following  persons  : 

Mr.  George  C.  Lawrence,  of  Port  Hastings,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  45, 
Appemlix  G.) 

Mr.  James  B.  Hadley,  of  Port  Mulgrave,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  46,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Michael  Crispo,  of  Harbor  au-Bouche,  in  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  47, 
Appendix  G.) 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  Monday,  the  20th  day  of 
August,  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FKANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XIX. 


B/ecord  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  nineteenth 
conference,  held  at  Ralifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  20th  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  James  W.  Bigelow,  of  Wolfville,  Nova  Scotia,  a  merchant,  and 
formerly  United  States  consular  agent  at  Cai)e  Canso,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  25, 
Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross  examined  by 
Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  John  Stapleton,  of  Port  Hawkesbury,  hotel-keei)er,  and  formerly 
a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  26,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  Michael  Wrayton,  of  Barrington,  Nova  Scotia,  ice-merchant,  was 


AWAED   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


27 


eel  States  and 


examined  by 


next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  27,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Daniel  C.  Stuart,  of  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  liotel-keeper,  and  for- 
merly captain  of  a  merchant-ship,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath 
on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  28,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe.  No  cross-examination 
was  desired. 

Mr.  Whiteway  then  proceeded  to  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the 
present  inquiry  by  the  following  persons: 

Mr.  Robert  S.  Munn,  of  Harbor  Grace,  Newfoundland.  (No.  48,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  James  S.  Hayward,  of  St.  John's,  Newfoundland.  (No.  49,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

(For  table,  see  Appendix  I.) 

Mr.  James  S.  Hayward,  of  St.  John's,  Newfoundland.  (No.  50,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  J.  J.  Rogerson,  of  St.  John's,  Newfoundland.    (No.  51,  Appendix 

G.) 

Mr.  Joseph  P.  Deneff,  of  St.  John's,  Newfoundland.  (No.  52,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  William  H.  Mulloy,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  53,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  George  Rose,  of  Little  Bay,  Newfoundland.  (No.  54,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  John  Evans,  of  English  Harbor,  Newfoundland.  No.  55,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  John  Rose,  of  Belloram,  Newfoundland.    (No.  50,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Philip  Hubert,  of  Harbor  Breton,  Newfoundland.  (No.  57,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  George  J.  R.  Suellgrove,  of  Saint  Jacques,  Newfoundland.  (No. 
58,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Henry  Giovanninni,  of  Rencontre,  Newfoundland.  (No.  59,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  James  P.  Snook,  of  Fortune,  Newfoundland.     (No.  GO,  Appendix 

G.) 

Mr.  William  G.  Bennett,  of  Fortune,  Newfoundland.  (No.  Gl,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Samuel  G.  Hickman,  of  Grand  Bank,  Newfoundland.  (No.  G2, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Henry  Benuing,  of  Lamalin,  Newfoundland.  (No.  63,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  James  Reeves,  of  Saint  Lawrence,  Newfoundland.  (No.  04,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Hugh  Vavasor,  of  Saint  Lawrence,  Newfoundland.  (No.  05,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 
Mr.  Thomas  Winter,  of  Burin,  Newfoundland.  (No.  00,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Philip  Pine,  of  Burin  Bay,  Newfoundland.  (No.  07,  Ai)pendix  G.) 
Mr.  William  Collins,  of  Burin,  Newfoundland.  (No.  08,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Owen  Pine,  of  Burin  Bay,  Newfoundland.  (No.  09,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Richard  Paul,  of  Burin  Bay,  Newfouudland.  (No.  70,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  Francis  Berteaux,  of  Burin,  Newfoundland.  (No.  71,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  Richard  McGrath,  of  Oderin,  Newfouudland.  (No.  72,  Appendix 
G.) 


28 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Mr.  Henry  Pennell,  of  Trepany,  Newfoundland.    (No.  73,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Patrick  Leary,  of  Renews,  Newfoundland.    (No.  74,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Garrett  Jackraan,  of  Renews,  Newfoundland.    (No.  75,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  John  White,  of  Ferrylaud,  Newfoundland.    (No.  7G,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Robert  Morry,  of  Caplin  Bay,  Newfoundland.    (No.  77,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  Peter  Winser,  of  Aquaforte,  Newfoundland.    (No.  78,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  Richard  Cashen,  of  Cape  Broyle,  Newfoundland.    (No.  79,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  following  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  II.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


*l%* 


Protocol  XX. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  twentieth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  2lst  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Weatherbe  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry  by 
the  following  persons : 

Mr.  Thomas  C.  Roberts,  of  Cape  Oanso,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  80,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  James  S.  Richard,  of  Getson's  Cove,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  81,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Jacob  Groser,  of  Lower  La  Have,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  82,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Nathaniel  Gost,  of  Lunenburg  Town,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  83,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Charles  Smith,  of  Lunenburg  Town,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  84, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Benjamin  Wentzler,  of  Lower  Harbor,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  85, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  George  Conrad,  of  South  Village,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  80,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Geoffrey  Cook,  of  Rose  Bay,  Nova  Scotia.     (No.  87,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Daniel  Getsou,  of  Getson's  Cove,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  88,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  D.  Riser,  of  Rose  Bay,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  89,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  James  W.  Spearwater,  of  New  Dublin,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  90, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  William  A.  Zwicker,  of  Lunenburg  Town,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  91, 
Appendix  G.) 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


29 


Mr.  Isaac  Lohues,  of  Middle  La  Have,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  92,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  James  McLean,  of  Letite,  connty  of  Charlotte,  in  New  Bruns- 
wick, merchant,  was  then  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters 
connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  29,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  cross  examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  James  Lord,  of  Deer  Island,  Charlotte  County,  New  Brunswick, 
a  fisherman,  was  next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.     (No.  30,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  li.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Dana. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSB. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNB. 


Peotocol  XXI. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fislieries  Commission  at  the  twenty  first  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax^  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  22d  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commission- 
ers, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Walter  B.  McLaughlin,  of  Grand  Mauan,  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy, 
light-keeper,  fishery  overseer,  and  county  counsellor  for  Charlotte 
County,  was  called  and  gave  evidence  on  oath,  on  matters  connected 
with  the  enquiry.     (No.  31,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  cross  examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Whiteway  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  en- 
quiry, by  the  following  persons : 

Mr.  Lawrence  Fortune,  of  Toad's  Cove,  Newfoundland.  (No.  93,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Thomas  Carew,  of  Shore's  Cove,  Cape  Broyle,  Newfoundland. 
(No.  94,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Charles  J.  Barnes,  of  St.  John's,  Newfoundland.  [(No.  95,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

]\Ir.  Philip  Grouchy,  of  Pouch  Cove,  Newfoundland.  (No.  96,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  William  Tulk,  of  Portugal  Cove,  Newfoundland.  (No.  97,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  James  Picot,  of  Portugal  Cove,  Newfoundland.  (No.  98,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Daniel  Tucker,  of  Broad  Cove,  Newfoundland.  (No.  99,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Philip  Lewis,  of  Bolyrood,  Newfoundland.  (No.  100,  Appendix 
G.) 


30 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


3^'i^!'t 


Mr.  Edward  O'Brien,  of  Cat's  Cove,  Newfoundland.  (No.  101,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Edward  "Wade,  of  Cat's  Cove,  Newfoundland.  (No.  102,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  George  Butler,  of  Northern  Gut,  Newfoundland.  (No.  103,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Stephen  Parsons,  of  Bay  Eoberts,  Newfoundland.  (No.  104,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  John  Barrett,  of  Spaniard's  Bay,  Newfoundland.  (No.  105,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Alfred  He  pkins,  of  Heart's  Content,  Newfoundland.  (No.  106, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Tliomas  Newhook,  of  New  Harbor,  Newfoundland.  (No.  107,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mi.  Edward  Morse,  of  Dildo,  Newfoundland,    (No.  108,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Alexander  McKay,  of  North  Sydney,  Nova  Scota.  (No.  109,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  James  McLeod,  of  Gabaras,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  110,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr,  ^  V'uai  Nearing,  of  Main-a-Dieu,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  Ill,  Ap- 

Ji'.  \:^.:<r  "  Lahey,  of  Main-a-Dieu,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  112,  Appen- 
dix G  ) 

Mr.  Daniel  Goodwin,  of  Cape  Canso,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  113,  Appen- 
dix (    ) 
Tht^  C  <::•  lissi       .:l|ourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


i 

m 

M 


M 


Peotocol  XXIL 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  twenty-second 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Kova  Scotia,  on  the  23d  day  of  August, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the  last 
conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  bue  Commissioners,  the 
Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Thomas  Savage,  of  Cape  Cove,  Gas|>^,  merchant  and  shipowner, 
a  member  of  the  local  legislature  for  the  Gulf  Division,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  32, 
Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  James  Baker,  of  Cape  Cove,  Gasp6,  a  trader  and  fisherman,  was 
next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  33,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


31 


Mr.  James  Jeasop,  of  Newport,  Gaspe,  a  builder  and  farmer,  and 
formerly  a  fisherman,  was  then  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on 
matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  34,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 

Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  William  Flynn,  of  Perc6,  county  of  Ga8p6,  customs  officer  and 
secretary  and  treasurer  of  the  county,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on 
oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.     (No.  35,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Josef  Couteur,  of  Cape  Despair,  Gasp^,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  36, 
Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  in  French  by  Mr.  Doutre,  who  translated 
the  replies. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAUEICE  DELFOSSB. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XXIII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  ticenty-third 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  2Mi  day  of  August, 

1877. 

The  Commision  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commis- 
sioners, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  T.  J.  LaMontaigne,  of  St.  Anne  des  Monts,  in  the  county  of 
Gasp^,  a  merchant,  engaged  in  the  fishing  business,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  37, 
Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  E.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Trescot. 

Mr.  John  Short,  of  the  village  of  Gaspe,  representative  of  the  county 
iu  the  Dominion  Parliament,  and  formerly  sheriff  of  the  county,  en- 
gaged in  the  fishing  business,  was  next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on 
oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  38,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Josef.  O.  Sirois,  of  Grande  Eivierd,  in  the  county  of  Gaspe,  a 
merchant,  engaged  in  the  fishing  business,  was  called,  and  gave  evi- 
dence on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  39,  Ap- 
pendix F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  in  French  by  Mr.  Doutre,  who  translated 
the  replies. 

Mr.  A.  Lebrun,  of  Perc6,  in  the  county  of  Gasp^,  a  fish  merchant,  was 


32 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


i«i 


i\  I. 


called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  40,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Louis  Roy,  of  Cape  Ohatte,  in  the  county  of  Gaspe,  a  fish  mer- 
chant, and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath 
on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  41,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Boutre.  No  cross  examination  was 
desired. 

Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present 
inquiry  by  the  following  persons : 

Mr.  William  Kelly,  of  Liugan,  Cape  Breton.    (No.  114,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Isaac  Archibald,  of  Cow  Bay,  Cape  Breton.  (No.  115,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  Joseph  Dobson,  of  South  Sidney,  Cape  Breton.  (No.  116,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  John  Peach,  of  Cow  Bay,  Cape  Breton.    (No.  117,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  James  Fraser,  of  South  Bar,  Cape  Breton.  (No.  118,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  John  Ferguson,  of  Cow  Bay,  Cape  Breton.  (No.  119,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  John  Murphy,  of  Lingan,  Cape  Breton.    (No.  120,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Angus  Matheson,  of  South  Sydney,  Cape  Breton.  (No.  121,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  William  H.  Sweet,  of  Fall  River,  Mass.,  U.  S.  A.  (No.  122,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  James  Archibald,  of  Boston,  Mass.,  U.  S.  A.  (No.  123,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Richard  Thomas,  of  Booth  Bay,  Maine,  U.  S.  A.  (No.  124,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  John  R.  Hamilton,  of  New  Carlisle,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No. 
125,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Baptiste  Coutoure,  of  Grande  River,  county  of  Gasp6.  (No.  12G, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Edward  G.  Hall,  of  New  Carlisle,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  127, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  William  E.  Gardiner,  of  Louisburg,  Cape  Breton.  (No.  128,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  Monday,  the  27th  day  of 
August,  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XXIV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  ticenty  fourth 
conference^  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  21th  day  of  August, 
1877. 

The  (]!ommissiou  met  at  noon,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 
The  tliree  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


88 


By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  John  F.  Taylor,  of  Isaac's  Harbor,  county  of  Gnysborongh, 
Nova  Scotia,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on 
matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  42,  Appendix  P.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Foster  then  requested  permission  to  examine  as  witnesses  on  be- 
half of  the  United  States  two  or  three  captains  of  United  States  fish- 
ing-vessels at  present  in  Halifax  Harbor.  This  he  desired  to  do  during 
the  course  of  tbe  day's  proceedings,  in  case  the  witnesses  might  be 
obliged  to  leave  the  port. 

Tbis  permission  was  granted. 

Mr.  James  Eisenhauer,  of  Lunenburg  Town,  a  fish  merchant,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  43,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatberbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  James  Bradley,  of  Newburyport,  Mass.,  U.  S.  A.,  a  fisherman, 
was  called  on  behalf  of  the  United  States,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath 
on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  1,  Appendix  L.) 

Tbe  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
S.  R.  Thomson. 

Mr.  Edward  Stapletou,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
2,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe  and  by  Mr.  Whiteway,  by  joint  cousent,  with  regard  to 
Newfoundland. 

Mr.  George  Romeril,  of  Perce,  agent  of  Messrs.  Charles  Robins  & 
Co.,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  44,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  5.30  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XXV. 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  twenty -fifth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  2Sth  day  of  August, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  Scates  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 
3f 


84 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Mr.  William  Macdonnell,  of  Argyle,  Yarmoath  County,  Nova  Scotia, 
a  trader,  and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on 
oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  45,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  John  Holliday,  of  the  city  of  Quebec,  a  partner  in  the  firm  of  A. 
Eraser  &  Go.,  fish-merchants,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  ou 
matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  46,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Davies  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 
by  the  following  persons : 
Mr.  Philip  L.  Montais,  of  Arichat.    (No.  129,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Christopher  Smyth,  of  Port  Hood.    (No.  130,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  Ingham  Brand,  of  Pubnico.    (No.  131,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Edward  Hirtle,  of  Lunenburg  Town.    (No.  132,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Bufus  Biscr,  of  Kose  Bay,  county  of  Lunenburg.    (No.  133,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 
Mr.  John  Morien,  of  Port  Medway.    (No.  134,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  Smeltzer,  of  Lunenburg  Town.    (No.  135.  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Elias  Richards,  of  Getsou's  Cove,  county  of  Lunenburg.    (No. 

136,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  James  Getson,  of  Getsou's  Cove,  county  of  Lunenburg.    (No. 

137,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  James  Publicover,  of  New  Dublin,  county  of  Lunenburg.    (No. 

138,  Appendix  G.) 

PirMr.  Donald  McDonald,  of  Main-aDieu,  Cape  Breton.    (No.  139,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 
Mr.  John  Bagnall,  of  Gabarus,  Cape  Breton.    (No.  140,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Peter  Bosdet,  of  West  Arichat,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  141 ,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  James  Marmean,  of  Arichat,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  142,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  David  Grouchy,  of  Descousse,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  143,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  Isidore  Leblanc,  of  Arichat,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  144,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Bryan  Murphy,  of  Port  Hood.    (No.  145,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Simon  Ferris,  of  West  Arichat,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  146,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  William  Creighton,  of  West  Arichat,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  147, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Isaac  Levesconte,  of  Arichat,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  148,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  William  Wentzell,  of  Moose  Harbor.    (No.  149,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Pardon  Gardner,  of  Port  Mouton.    (No.  150,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  George  McLeod,  of  Brooklyn,  Queens  County.    (No.  151,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  John  Lloyd,  of  Port  Mouton.    (No.  162,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  J.  McDonald,  of  Port  JoUie,  Queens  County.    (No.  153,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  William  Frehel,  of  Arichat.    (No.  154,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Philip  Diggdon,  of  Port  Medway.    (No.  155,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Michael  McDonald,  of  Whitehaven,  county  of  Guysboro.    (No. 
156,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  George  Murphy,  of  Port  Hood.    (No.  157,  Appendix  G.) 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHESY   COMMISSION. 


35 


Mr.  James  Pbelan,  of  Aricbat,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  158,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Trescot  tbeo  stated  tbat  be  desired  to  make  a  motion  for  tbe  con- 
sideration of  tbe  Commissioners,  wbicb  be  read  in  the  following  terms : 

Mr.  PuEsinKNT  and  Gentlemkn  of  thk  Commission  :  As  the  time  is  now  approach- 
ing wbeu  the  evidence  in  support  of  the  British  ciise  will  be  closed,  and  we  will  be 
required  to  open  the  testimony  in  behalf  of  the  United  States,  we  would  ask  leave  to 
make  a  slight  change  in  the  order  of  our  proceeding,  as  it  has  been  at  present 
arranged. 

According  to  the  present  arrangement  it  will  be  our  duty  to  open  our  case  in  advance 
of  tbe  testimony,  by  laying  before  you  the  general  scheme  of  our  argument,  and  indi- 
cating the  points  upon  which  evidence  will  be  submitted  in  its  supi)ort. 

The  character  of  the  testimony  which  has  been  now  submitted  in  support  of  the 
British  case,  and  the  tenor  of  that  which  we  will  offer  (as  may  be  inferred  from  the 
evidence  of  the  two  witnesses  whom  we  were  allowed  to  examine  out  of  order),  have 
impressed  us  with  the  conviction  that  a  practical  discussion  of  the  real  issues  will  be 
more  certainly  secured,  and  the  time  and  patience  of  the  Commission  will  be  more 
wisely  economized,  if  we  are  allowed  to  submit  such  views  as  it  may  be  our  duty  to 
maintain,  at  tbe  close  instead  of  in  advance  of  the  examination  of  witnesses. 

As  we  understand  the  wish  of  both  governments  to  be  that  the  whole  discussion 
fibsill  be  as  frank  and  full  as  possible,  it  uaa  occurred  to  us  that  you  might  be  disposed 
to  allow  us  to  adopt  such  an  arrangement  as  would  in  our  judgment  best  enable  us  to 
lay  before  you  a  complete  presentment  of  the  opinions  of  the  government  we  repre- 
sent. And  we  feel  more  assured  in  that  opinion  as  this  privilege  deprives  counsel  on 
tbe  other  side  of  no  advantage  which  they  now  possess.  For  besides  tbe  right  to  reply 
to  the  printed  argument,  which  they  now  have,  we  would  of  course  expect  that  they 
would  also  be  allowed  the  right  of  oral  reply  if  they  desired  to  exercise  it. 

An  opening  speech  is  not  necessary,  as  the  counsel  for  the  other  side  have  shown,  but 
it  would  be  obviously  improper  to  submit  this  case  without  a  careful  review  of  the 
testimony  which  will  have  been  offered  on  both  sides.  And  this  can  be  done  with  more 
convenience  and  thoroughness  by  an  oral  speech  than  by  a  written  argument.  To  say 
all  tbat  it  may  be  our  duty  to  say  in  a  printed  argument  would  be  ini2>ossible  without 
Nwelliug  it  into  a  volume  of  unreadable  proportions. 

It  is  our  purpose  to  make  the  printed  argument  a  complete  but  concise  summary  of 
the  contention,  a  clear  statement  of  the  principles  involved,  and  the  authorities  re- 
t't>rrod  to,  accompanied  by  an  analysis  of  the  leading  facts  of  the  testimony.  This  we 
can  do,  so  as  to  make  it  an  efficient  help  to  you  in  your  own  examination  of  tbe  case, 
it  we  are  not  compelled  to  overload  it  with  all  tbe  discussion  which  the  evidence  and 
the  case  itself  suggest,  but  which  we  would  sufficiently  dispose  of  in  oral  argument. 

We  would  therefore  request  permission  so  to  distribute  the  argument  on  our  side  as 
to  have  the  opportunity  of  submitting  our  views  orally,  upon  full  comparison  of  all 
the  testimony  taken.  It  is  no  small  inducement  to  make  this  request  tbat  we  believe 
that  upon  the  close  of  the  testimony  we  will  be  able  to  dispense  with  much  argument 
which  we  can  scarcely  avoid  in  the  present  imperfect  condition  of  the  testimony. 
Respectfully, 

RICH.  H.  DANA,  .Jr., 
WM.  HENRY  TRESCOT, 

Coumtlfor  United  States. 

Mr.  Foster  supported  the  application. 

Mr.  Doutre  stated  tbat  tbe  matter  should  receive  consideration,  and 
requested  permissiou  to  defer  giving  a  definite  answer  until  tbe  next 
meeting. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned  till  the  following  day  at  noon. 

MAUEICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

fiiANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
D WIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


ae 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 
Peotocol  XXVI. 


BHi- 


Record  of  the  proceedings  o/*  the  FWieries  Commission,  at  the  twenty-sixth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  2dth  day  of  August, 
1877. 

The  GoramiHsioii  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  tbree  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  James  A.  Tory,  of  Ouysborongh,  Nova  Scotia,  customs  (  ,  and 
formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  ou  mutters 
connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  47,  Ap|)endix  F.) 

TLe  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  then  rose  to  reply  to  the  motion  made  at  the  laHt 
conference  by  Mr.  Trescot.  He  stated  that  the  British  Agent  was  will- 
ing to  consent  to  the  following  arrangement  with  regard  to  the  point  in 
question,  namely,  that  if  the  United  States  counsel  desired  to  make  oral 
arguments  in  closing,  these  must  be  submitted  simultaneously  with  the 
written  arguments  on  the  United  States  side  required  by  the  rules 
adopted  for  the  procedure  of  the  Commission  ;  after  which  it  should  be 
competent  for  the  British  side  to  reply  both  orally  and  in  writing,  if 
both  methods  of  reply  were  desired  by  them. 

Mr.  Trescot,  in  reply,  said  that  the  proposal  of  Mr.  Thomson  did  not 
meet  the  approval  of  the  counsel  of  the  United  States,  inasmuch  as  the 
object  of  their  motion  was  to  have  the  oral  reply  of  the  Britif  "ouiisel 
to  their  oral  arguments,  then  to  file  the  United  States  printecf  rmeut, 
leaving  to  the  British  counsel  their  right  of  final  printed  '  o  the 

printed  argument  of  the  United  States.  What  they  desired  was  a  full 
statement  of  the  case  as  regarded  by  the  British  counsel,  and  Mr.  Thom- 
son's proposal  did  not  accom|dish  that ;  which  they  deemed  a  fair  request. 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  replied,  and  Mr.  Dana,  Mr.  Foster,  and  Mr.  Doutre 
subsequently  addressed  the  Commissioners.    (See  Appendix  J.) 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  debate,  Mr.  Trescot  handed  in  the  following 
amendment  which  he  proposed  shoald  be  made  in  Rule  III: 

"  Ordered  by  the  Commissioners,  That  the  third  paragraph  of  the  third 
rule  shall  be  amended  by  inserting  after  the  words  '  the  evidence  in  re- 
ply shall  be  commenced'  the  following:  'when  the  whole  evidence  is 
concluded,  either  side  may,  if  desirous  of  doing  so,  address  the  Com- 
missioners orally,  the  British  government  having  the  right  of  reply.'" 

The  President  then  announced  that  the  Commissioners  would  take  the 
matter  into  consideration  and  give  an  early  decision  upon  it. 

Mr.  Robert  MacDougall,  of  Port  Hood,  high  sheriff  of  the  county  of 
Inverness,  in  Cape  Breton,  was  next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oatli 
on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  48,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  M.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Weatherbe  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  in- 
quiry by  the  following  persons : 

Mr.  J.  E.  Robinson,  of  Griffin's  Cove,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  159, 
Appendix  G ) 

Mr.  Daniel  West,  of  Grand  Greve,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  160, 
Appendix  G.) 


AWARD   OF   THE   FI8RERT   COMMISSION. 


9f 


Mr.  Micbael  Molnnes,  of  Port  Daniel,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  161, 
Aopendix  O.) 
Tbe  CoioiuissioD  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  next  dav  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XXVIL 


388-exarained 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  twenty-seventh 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  30th  day  of  August, 

1877. 

Tbe  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

Tbe  tbree  Commissioners,  and  tbe  Agents  of  tbe  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  tbe  Secretary  read  tbe  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Dr.  Pierre  Fortin,  M.  D.,  of  the  city  of  Quebec,  a  member  of  the  legis- 
lative assembly  of  the  Province  of  Quebec,  and  formerly  commander  of 
a  Canadian  cruiser  employed  in  the  protection  of  tbe  fisheries,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  tbe  inquiry.  (No. 
49,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Doutre  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  James  Ilickson,  of  Batburst,  fishery  overseer  for  the  county  of 
Gloucester,  New  Brunswick,  was  called,  ami  gave  evidence  on  oath  on 
matters  connected  with  tbe  inquiry.    (No.  50,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Enos  Gardner,  of  Tusket,  in  tbe  county  of  Yarmouth,  Nova  Sco- 
tia, fishery  overseer,  and  clerk  of  the  peace  for  tbe  county,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  tbe  inquirj'.  (No. 
5i,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Whiteway  then  read  affidavits  made  by  the  following  persons  rela- 
tive to  tbe  present  inquiry  : 

Mr.  J.  J.  Rogerson,  of  St.  John's,  Newfoundland.  (No.  162,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Isaac  Mercer,  of  Bay  Roberts,  Newfoundland.  (No.  163,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Samuel  Fiander,  of  Coomb's  Cove,  Newfoundland.  (No.  164,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  George  Bishop,  of  Burin,  Newfoundland.    (No.  165,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  G.  A.  Hickman,  of  Grand  Bank,  Newfoundland.  (No.  166,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  John  Lake,  sr.,  of  Fortune,  Newfoundland.  (No.  167,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  George  Simms,  of  Grand  Bank,  Newfoundland.  (No.  168,  Appen- 
dix G.) 


88 


■HI 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


Mr.  Henry  T.  Holman,  Harboar  Breton,  Newfoundland.    (No.  169, 
Appendix  G.) 
The  Gommisdiou  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


le  > 


Ui!i 


Peotocol  XXVIII. 

Record  of  the  proceedinga  of  the  Fisherien  Commiasion  at  the  twenty-eighth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  IScotia,  on  the  HUt  day  of  August,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Doutre  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry  by  the 
following  persons : 

Mr.  John  LeGresley,  of  Point  St.  Peter.    (No.  170,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  John  B.  Fauvel,  of  Point  St.  Peter.    (No.  171,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  John  LeGros,  of  Point  St.  Peter.    (No.  172,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  AdolphuB  E.  Collas,  of  Point  St.  Peter.    (No.  173,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Daniel  Orange,  of  Paspebiac,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  174, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Joshua  Mourant,  of  Paspebiac,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  175, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Frank  Leblanc,  of  Port  Daniel,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  176, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Thomas  C.  Remon,  of  Little  Pabos,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No. 
177,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  William  O'Connor,  of  Little  Pabos,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  178, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  John  W.  Luce,  of  Grande  Greve,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  179, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Henry  Price,  of  Grande  Greve,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  18), 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  William  Hymon,  mayor  of  the  township  of  Cape  de  Rosier, 
Grande  Greve.    (No.  181,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Abraham  Gavey,  of  Grande  Greve,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No. 
182,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Peter  Ferguson,  of  L'Ance  au  Beauflls,  Province  of  Quebec. 
(No.  183,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Christopher  Baker,  of  Cape  Cove.    (No.  184,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  David  Phillips,  of  Peninsula,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  185, 
Ap,)endix  G.) 

Mr.  Richard  Miller,  of  Peninsula,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  180, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  James  Rooney,  of  Perce,  Province  of  Quebec.  (No.  187,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Francis  Le  BruP)  of  Jersey,  at  present  residing  at  Perce.  (No. 
188,  Appendix  C.) 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


39 


3d  states  and 


Mr.  William  Johnstone,  of  House  Harbor,  Magdalen  Islands.    (No. 

189,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Charles  Fournier,  of  Magdalen  River,  Province  of  Qaebec.    (No. 

190,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Alexis  Noil,  of  Fox  lliver.  Province  of  Qaebec.    (No.  191,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr,  John  Packwood,  of  (Jape  Rosier,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  192, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Mesiah  Tapp,  of  Fox  River,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  193,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  James  Samuel,  of  Fox  River,  Province  of  Qaebec.    (No.  194,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Edward  Trachey,  of  Perce,  Province  of  Qaebec.    (No.  195,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Edward  Burn,  of  Fox  River,  Province  of  Qaebec.    (No.  196,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Joseph  D.  Payson,  of  Westport,  Digby  County.    (No.  197,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Thomas  C.  Cook,  of  Cape  Canso,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  198,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  W.  Wise,  of  Chatham,  New  Brunswick.    (No.  199,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  S.  F.  Cheney,  of  Nantucket  Island,  Grand  Manan,  a  fisherman, 
was  called  on  behalf  of  the  United  States,  aLd  gave  evidence  on  oath  on 
matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  3,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster,  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
S.  B.  Thomson. 

Mr.  Davies  then  read  afiSdavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry, 
by  the  following  persons : 
Mr.  James  Flynn,  of  Perce.    (No.  200,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Edmund  Flynn,  of  Perce.    (No.  201,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  Vardon,  of  Malbay.    (No.  202,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  G.  Dumaresq,  of  Fox  River.    (No.  203,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Alexander  Campion,  of  Magdalen  River.    (No.  204,  Appendix  G. ) 
Mr.  Alexis  Malonin,  of  Griffin's  Cove.    (No.  205,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Charles  Gaul,  of  Douglas  Town.    (No.  206,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Robert  Tapp,  of  Fox  River.    (No.  207,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Luke  McCauley,  of  Douglas  Town.    (No.  208,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Thomas  McRay,  of  Gaspe.    (No.  209,  Appendix  G.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  ni.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XXIX. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisherieft  Commission  at  the  Uoeiity -ninth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  1st  day  of  September, 

1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 
The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  aud 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 


40 


▲WABD  OF  THX  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


m 


By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Goramission- 
ers,  the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  President  then  read  the  following  decision  : 

''  The  Commissioners  having  considered  the  motion  submitted  by 
Messrs.  Dana  and  Trescot,  decided  that — 

*<  Having  due  regard  to  the  right  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  to 
the  general  and  final  reply,  the  Commissioners  cannot  modify  the  rules 
in  such  a  manner  as  might  impair  or  diminish  such  right.  Each  party 
will,  however,  within  the  period  fixed  by  the  rules,  be  allowed  to  offer 
its  concluding  argument,  either  orally  or  in  writing;  and  if  orally,  it 
may  be  accompanied  by  a  written  resum6  or  summary  thereof,  for  the 
convenience  of  the  Commissioners,  such  resume  or  summary  being  fur- 
nished within  the  said  period. 

"  Mr.  Kellogg  dissenting." 

Mr.  Foster  then  read  the  following  notice  of  motion  : 

**  The  Counsel  and  Agent  of  the  (Juited  States  muve  the  honorable 
Commissioners  to  rule  and  declare  that — 

<<  It  is  not  competent  for  this  Commission  to  award  any  compensation 
for  commercial  intercourse  between  the  two  countries,  and  that  the 
advantages  resulting  from  the  practice  of  purchasing  bait,  ice,  supplies, 
&c.,  and  from  being  allowed  to  transship  cargoes  in  British  waters,  do 
not  constitute  good  foundation  'or  an  award  of  compensation,  and  shall 
be  wholly  excluded  from  the  consideration  of  this  tribunal." 

The  Commission  adjourned  until  Monday,  the  3d  of  September,  at 
noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Peotocol  XXX. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  thirtieth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  3d  day  of  September,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 
The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Ford  then  presented  to  the  Commissioners,  and  to  the  Agent  of 
the  United  States,  copies  of  the  "  Brief  on  behalf  of  Her  Majesty's  Gov- 
ernment" in  reply  to  the  "Brief  for  the  United  States  upon  the  question 
of  the  extent  and  limits  of  the  inshore  fisheries  and  territorial  waters  ou 
the  Atlantic  Coast  of  British  North  America."    (Appendix  K.) 

Mr.  Doutre  next  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 
by  the  following  persons : 
Mr.  Francis  Noil,  of  Fox  River.    (No.  210,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  Jessop,  of  Newport.    (No.  211,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  S.  B.  Hammond,  of  Lockeport.    (No.  212,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  William  Lloyd,  of  Lockeport.    (No.  213,  Appendix  G.) 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


41 


lie  honorable 


Ire  ford. 


id  States  and 


Mr.  James  Alexander,  of  Point  St.  Peters.    (No.  214,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  George  Prevel,  of  St.  George  of  Malbay.    (No.  215,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Daniel  Devot,  of  the  Basin,  Amherst  Island,  Magdalen  Islands. 
(No.  216,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Josei^  Sinette,  of  Griffin's  Gove.    (No.  217,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  Phelan,  of  Port  Daniel.    (No.  218,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Sixte  Lafrance,  of  Amherst  Harbor,  Magdalen  Islands.    (No. 

219,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr,  Gabriel  Cormier,  of  Amherst  Harbor,  Magdalen  Islands.    (No. 

220,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  A.  Conway,  of  Gasp^.    (No.  321,  Appendix  G ) 
Mr.  Pbilias  Sirois,  of  L'Islet,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  222,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  John  Renouf,  of  Carlisle,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  223,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  William  F.  Bower,  of  Point  St.  Peter.    (No.  224,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Hippolyte  Bondiman,  of  Esquimaux  Point.    (No. 225,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Francois  Cormier,  of  Esquimaux  Point.    (No.  226,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Placide  Doyle,  of  Esquimaux  Point.    (No.  227,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Gabriel  Cormier,  of  Esquimaux  Point.    (No.  228,  Ap])oudix  G.) 
Mr.  Nathaniel  Bondman,  of  Esquimaux  Point.    (No.  229,  Appendix 
G.) 
Mr.  Julias  Boudreau,  of  Esquimaux  Point.    (No.  230,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Philip  Touzel,  of  Sheldrake,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  231,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Samuel  Bouchard,  of  Amherst  Harbour,  Magdalen  Islands.    (No. 
232,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Gabriel  Seaboyer,  of  Lower  LaHave,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  233,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Patrick  Mullins,  of  South  Bar,  Sydney,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  234, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Michael  Rooney,  of  Douglas  Town,  Piovince  of  Quebec.    (No.  235, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Peter  Briord,  of  Douglas  Town,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  230, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Andrew  Kennedy,  of  Douglas  Town,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No. 
237,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Pierre  Brochu,  of  Seven  Islands,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  23S, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Isaac  Chouinard,  of  Cape  Chat,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  239, 
Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Austin  Locke,  of  Lockeport.    (No.  240,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Daniel  McAdams,  of  Lockeport.    (No.  241,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Messie  Fouruier,  of  Grand  Vallee,  Province  of  Quebec.    (No.  242, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  William  Haddon,  of  Grande  Isle,  Magdalen  Islands.    (No.  243, 
A|)pendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  Cartor,  of  PortMouton.    (No.  244,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  William  McLeod,  of  Port  Daniel.    (No.  245,  Appendix  G  ) 
Mr.  Allen  Matthews,  of  East  Ragged  Islands.    (No.  240,  Appendix 
G.) 
Mr.  Daniel  Murray,  jr.,  of  Port  Mulgrave.    (No.  247,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Thomas  Condon,  of  Guysborough.    (No.  248,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Alexander  McKenzie,  of  Crow  Harbor,  county  of  Guysborough. 
(No.  249,  Appendix  G.) 


42 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Mr.  Michael  Bobertson,  of  Fort  JoUie,  Qaeen's  County.    (No.  250, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  (Geoffrey  H.  Pablicover,  of  Oetton^s  Cove,  Lunenburg.   (No.  251, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  James  8.  Seaboyer,  of  Rose  Bay,  Lunenburg.    (No.  252,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  Thomas  Bitcey,  sr.,  of  Lower  LaHave.    (No.  253,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  William  D.  Smith,  of  Fort  Hood.    (No.  254,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Archibald  B.  Skinner,  of  Fort  Hastings.    (No.  255,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  William  B.  Mnnroe,  of  Whitehaven.    (No.  256,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Matthew  Munroe,  of  Whitehaven.    (No.  257,  Appendix  G.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  until  the  next  dav  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNB. 


Feotoool  XXXI. 

Record  of  the  prooeedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  thirty-first  con- 
ference^  held  at  Halifax^  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  Uh  day  of  September^  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  Fresident,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  was  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Doutre  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 
by  the  following  persons : 

Mr.  Isaac  W.  Rennels,  of  Fort  Hood.    (No.  258,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  John  McAdams,of  Fort  Jollie.    (No.  259,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Donald  Campbell,  of  Fort  Mouton.    (No.  260,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  John  D.  Richard,  of  LaHave  Island,  and  now  of  Getson's  Cove. 
(No.  261,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Colin  McLeod,  of  Brooklyn,  Qaeen's  County.  (No.  262,  Appea- 
dix  G.) 

Mr.  James  Bnscher,  of  Fort  Mouton.    (No.  263,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  William  Ross,  collector  of  customs  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  was 
then  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  tUe 
inquiry.    (No.  52,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Charles  Creed,  of  Halifax,  a  general  broker,  and  secretary  to  the 
Halifax  Chamber  of  Commerce,  was  next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on 
oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  53,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  John  Dillon,  of  Steep  Creek,  Strait  of  Canso,  a  fish  merchant  and 
formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters 
connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  54,  Appendix  F.) 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


43 


Tbe  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe.    No  cross-examination 
was  desired. 

Mr.  Doutre  then  read  aflSdavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 
by  the  following  persons : 
Mr.  John  P.  Gardiner,  of  Gape  Sable  Island.    (No.  264,  Appendix  6.) 
Mr.  Alexander  Gillies,  of  Port  Hood.    (No.  265,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Henry  Hemlow,  sr.,  of  Liscomb,  Nova  Sootia.    (No.  266,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  William  Watts,  of  Port  Hood.    (No.  267,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Joshua  Smith,  of  Port  Hood  Island.    (No.  268,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Livingston  Goggins,  of  Westport,  Digby  Gounty.    (No.  269,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 
Mr.  Martin  Wentzell,  of  Lower  LaHave.    (No.  270,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  William  B.  Ghristian,  of  Prospect,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  271,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 
Mr.  Alexander  McDonald,  of  Port  Hood  Island.    (No.  273,  Appendix 

G.) 
Mr.  Angus  Gillies,  of  Port  Hood.    (No.  273,  Appendix  G.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  dav  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


,ed  States  and 


Protocol  XXXIL 


•resent  inquiry 


).  262,  Appea- 


)S-examined  b,y 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  thirty  second 
conference^  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia^  on  the  oth  day  of  Septembery 

1877. 

Tbe  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Foster  read  the  notice  of  motion  which  had  been  filed  bv  him  at 
tbe  conference  of  the  Ist  of  September  (see  Protocol  No.  XXIX),  and 
supported  the  application  made  therein  on  behalf  of  the  Uuited  States. 
Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson,  Mr.  Doutre,  Mr.  Weatherbe,  and  Mr.  Whiteway 
answered  on  behalf  of  Her  Majesty's  Government.  Mr.  Trescot  and 
Mr.  Dar«a  replied.  (No.  3,  Appendix  J.) 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  till  4  p.  m.  the  next  dav  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


44 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISSERT  COMMISSION. 


PBOTOOOL    XXXIII. 

Bxord  of  the  proeeedings  of  the  fisheries  Commisaion  at  the  thirty-third 
conference,  held  at  HalifaXj  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  6th  day  of  September, 
1877. 

The  Com  mission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference ;  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Foster  read  certain  documents  relative  to  the  liability  to  confis- 
cation of  United  States  vessels  for  obtaining  supplies,  transshipping 
cargoes,  &c.    (No.  3,  Appendix  J.) 

The  matter  was  discussed  by  Mr.  Foster,  Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson,  and 
Mr.  Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Dana  then  resumed  his  speech,  left  unfinished  at  the  close  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  previous  day. 

The  Commission  then  retired  to  deliberate,  and  on  their  return  the 
President  read  the  following  decision  : 

'<  The  Commission  having  considered  the  motion  submitted  by  the 
Agent  of  the  United  States  at  the  conference  held  on  the  1st  instant, 
decide — 

<^That  it  is  not  within  the  competence  of  this  tribunal  to  award  com- 
pensation for  commercial  intercourse  between  the  two  countries,  nor  for 
the  purchasing  of  bait,  ice,  supplies,  &c.,  nor  for  the  permission  to 
transship  cargoes  in  British  waters." 

Sir  Alexander  Gait  stated  the  reasons  which  had  induced  him  to  ac- 
quiesce in  this  decision,  which  was  unanimous."  (See  No.  3,  Appen- 
dix J.) 

Mr.  Marshal  Paquet,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  farmer  and 
fisherman,  was  next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  55,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  Barnaby  Mclsaac,  of  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  farmer 
and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  56,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  exatnined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Uana. 

Mr.  Joseph  Tierney,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  master  mar- 
iner and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters 
connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  57,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  James  McPhee,  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  farmer  and 
fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  58,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies.  No  cross-examination 
was  desired. 

Mr.  Whiteway  read  an  affidavit  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 
by  Mr.  J.  O.  Eraser.    (No.  274,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Whiteway  also  handed  in  a  certified  copy  of  a  dispatch  from  the 
Earl  of  Eimberley  to  Governor  Hill,  dated  the  7th  July,  1871,  relative 


▲WARD   OF  THE   FI8HEBT   COMMISSION. 


45 


to  tbe  admission  of  United  States  ftsbermen  to  the  Newfoundland  waters. 
(Appendix  N.) 

Mr.  John  Macdonald,  of  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  farmer 
and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on 
matters  couiiected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  59,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies.    No  cross-examination  was 
desired. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  5  p.  n.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
D WIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XXXIV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fi»herie»  Commismon  at  tike  thirty-fourth 
conference^  held  at  Halifax,  Ifova  Scotia,  on  the  7th  day  of  September, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

Tbe  tbree  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference ;  which  were  approved  and  signed  by  the  Commission- 
ers, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Thomas  R.  Pattillo,  of  Liverpool,  Nova  Scotia,  a  fish-merchant, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  tbe 
inqniry.    (No.  60,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Tbomson  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  John  R.  Maodonald,.of  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  fish- 
erman, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
tbe  inquiry.    (No.  61,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  John  D.  Macdonald,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  farmer 
and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    ( No.  62,  Appendix  F.) 

Tbe  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  Peter  S.  Richardson,  of  Chester,  Lunenburg  County,  a  fisherman, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  63,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Charles  E.  Nass,  of  Chester,  Lunenburg  County,  a  fisherman,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  tbe  inquiry. 
(No.  64,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Robert  Young,  of  Caraquette,  New  Brunswick,  a  fish-merchant, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  65,  Appendix  F.) 


46 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COHlflSSION. 


m'ii 


The  witness  was  examinecl  by  Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Bonald  Macdonald,  of  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a 
farmer  and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  mat- 
ters connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  66,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Foster. 

Mr.  Holland  C.  Payson,  of  Westport,  Digby  County,  fishery  overseer, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  ou  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  67,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Clement  McTsaac,  of  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  farmer 
and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  68,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies.  No  cross-examination  was 
desired. 

Mr.  Laughlin  Macdonald,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  fisher- 
man, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  oa  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  69,  Appendi.  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  M'\  Davie^:  No  cross-examination  was 
desired. 

Mr.  Joseph  Beaton,  of  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  farmer 
and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  70,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies.  No  cross-examination  was 
desired. 

Mr.  James  Mclnnis,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  fisherman, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  71,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  Alexander  Macdonald,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  captain 
of  a  coasting-schooner,  and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave 
evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  72,  Ap- 
pendix F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies.  No  cross-examination  was 
desired. 

Mr.  John  McLellan,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  fisherman, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  73,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  Benjamin  Champion,  of  Alberton,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  fish- 
erman, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  74,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

The  Commission  adjourned  till  Mondav,  the  17th  September  at  noon. 

'MAUBICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FBANCIS  CLABE  FOBD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTEB. 
J.  H.  G.  BEBGNE. 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 

Protocol  XXXV. 


47 


Record  of  the  prooeedingn  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  thirty-fifth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  8ootia,  on  the  llth  day  of  September, 

3877. 

The  Comniissiou  met  at  noon,  parsuant  to  ailjourninent. 

The  three  Commissioners,  aud  the  Agents  of  the  Uuitud  Statics  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
tbe  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  John  C.  Cunningham,  of  Gape  Sable  Island,  Nova  Scotia,  a  mas- 
ter mariner,  engaged  in  the  fishing  business,  was  called,  and  gave  evi- 
dence on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquirv.  (No.  75,  Appen- 
dix F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Benjamin  H.  Buggies,  of  Westport,  Digby  County,  Nova  Scotia, 
customs  officer,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  76,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Josiah  Hopkins,  of  Barrington,  Nova  Scotia,  fish-merchant,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  77,  Appendix  F.) 

Tbe  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

Mr.  Weatherbe  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present 
inquiry  by  the  following  persons : 

Mr.  John  Bethell,  of  West  Bancrow,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  275,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Edward  D.  Treraain,  of  Port  Hood.    (No.  276,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Bobert  Ourrie,  of  Louis  Harbor,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  277,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Parker  Matthews,  of  Black  Point,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  278,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Bobert  Deagle,  of  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island.  (No.  279, 
Appendix  G). 

Mr.  James  Carey,  of  Port  Mulgrave,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  280,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Thomas  Pinkham,  of  Booth  Bay,  State  of  Maine.  (No.  281,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Beuben  Harlow,  of  Shelburne,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  282,  Appendix 
6.) 

Mr.  Jndah  C.  Smith,  of  Barrington,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  283,  Appendix 
G) 

Mr.  Amos  H.  Outhouse,  of  Tiverton,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  284,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  John  Merchant,  of  Hardwicke,  Northumberland  County.  (No. 
285,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Wallace  Trask,  of  Little  River,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  286,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  George  E.  Mosley,  of  Tiverton,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  287,  Appendix 
G.) 


i% 


AWABD   or  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Mr.  Gharles  H.  Payson,  of  Westport,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  288,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Bleazer  Growell,  of  Clark«'«  Harbor,  Nova  Sootia.    (No.  289, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Dauiel  V.  Keony,  of  Gape  Sable  Island,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  290, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Gilbert  Merritt,  of  Sandy  Gove,  Nova  Sootia.    (No.  291,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Gharles  W.  Denton,  of  Little  Biver,  Nova  Sootia.    (No.  292, 
Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  Joseph  £.  Denton,  of  Little  Biver,  Nova  Sootia.    (No.  293,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  John  McKay,  of  Tiverton,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  294,  Appendix  G  ) 

Mr.  Whitefleld  Oathonse,  of  Tiverton,  Nova  Sootia.    (No.  295,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  John  W.  Snow,  of  Di^by,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  296,  Appendix  G.) 

Mr.  James  Patterson,  of  Port  Williams,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  297,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Byron  P.  Ladd,  of  Yarmonth,  Nova  Sootia.    (No.  298,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Abram  Thurston,  of  Sanford,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  299,  Appen- 
dix G.) 

Mr.  Saranel  M.  Byerson,  of  Yarmouth,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  300,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  Bobert  G.  Eakins,  jr.,  of  Yarmouth,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  301, 
Appendix  G.) 

The  Gommission  then  adjourned  till  next  day  at  noon. 

MAUBIGE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FBANGIS  GLABE  FOBD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTEB. 
J.  H.  G.  BEBGNE. 


Protocol  XXXVl. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheriea  Commission  at  the  thirty -sixth 
conference,  held  at  Halifaw,  Nova  Sootia.  on  the  ISth  day  of  September, 
1877. 

The  Gommission  met  at  noon  as  appointed. 

The  three  Gommissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  tbeGommissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  William  H.  Harrington,  of  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  a  commission 
and  fish  agent,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  78,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  John  Pumey,  of  Sandy  Point,  Sfaelburne,  Nova  Scotia,  a  flsh-mer- 
chant,  was  next  cfdled,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiiy.    (No.  79,  Appendix  F.) 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


49 


The  witness  was  examiued  by  Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Dana. 

Mr.  Robert  G.  Noble,  of  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  a  commission  and  fish 
agent,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  80,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examiued  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Dana. 

Mr.  James  Barry,  of  the  customs  department  at  Ottawa,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  ou  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No. 
81,  Appendix  F.) 
The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies. 

Mr.  Davies  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 
by  the  following  persons : 
Mr.  Daniel  lloss,  of  North  Rustico,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  302,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  A.  McLeod,  of  Kensington,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  303,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  James  McDonald,  of  Chepstow,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  304,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Donald  McCormack,  of  Black  Bush,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  305,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  Angus  B.  McDonald,  of  Sonris,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  306,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Peter  McDonald,  of  Souris,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  307,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  John  Mclntyre,  of  Fairfield,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  308,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Michael  McDonald,  of  French  River,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  309,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  Thomas  Welsh,  of  Souris,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  310,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Dominick  Doviant,  of  North  Rustico,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  311,  Appen- 
dix G.) 
Mr.  Robert  Carson,  of  North  Rustico,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  312,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Charles  McEachan,  of  Township  No.  46.    (No.  313,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Daniel  C.  McLean,  of  Black  Bush,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  314,  Appendix 

G.) 
Mr.  Daniel  Mclntyre,  of  Black  Bush,  P.  E.  I.    (No.  315,  Appendix  G.) 
Mr.  Thomas  Milner,  of  Parker's  Cove,  Nova  Scotia.    (No.  316,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  James  W.  Cousins,  of  Digby  Town,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  317,  Ap- 
pendix G.) 

Mr.  David  Swain,  of  Port  Clyde,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  318,  Appendix 
G.) 

Mr.  Robert  Henry  Bolman,  of  Sand  Point,  Nova  Scotia.  (No.  319, 
Appendix  G.) 

This  closed  the  case  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  a  few  witnesses,  expected  at  a  later  date,  permission  to  examine 
whom,  during  the  course  of  the  United  States  evidence,  was  asked  and 
obtained. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  3.30  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 
4p 


m 


m 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Protocol  XXXVII. 


Record  of  the  proceeding*  o/  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  thirty  seventh 
oon/erencCy  held  at  Ualijax.  Nova  Scotia^  on  the  19th  day  of  September, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissiun- 
ers,  the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Foster,  in  commencing  the  case  of  the  United  States,  stated  that 
he  did  not  propose  to  make  any  formal  opening,  but  that  before  pro- 
ceeding to  examining  wituesses,  he  would  hand  in  certain  statistical 
documents  relating  to  the  fisheries  and  the  trade  in  fish  between  the 
United  States  and  British  North  America. 

These  statistics  were  accompanied  by  an  affidavit  as  to  their  correct- 
ness by  the  compiler,  Mr.  Hamilton  Andrews  Hill,  of  Boston.  (Ap- 
I>endix  O.) 

Mr.  David  Ingersoll,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  then 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  4,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  S. 
B.  Thomson. 

Mr.  Nathaniel  E.  Attwood,  of  Provincetown,  Mass.,  a  manufocturer 
and  dealer  in  cod-liver  oil,  and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  5, 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster. 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  ra.  until  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  OELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XXXVIII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  thirty-eighth  | 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  20th  day  of  September, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  L  .States  and 

Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  uk'  recoiiis  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Com  lissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  Att^^ood  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Foster.  Mr. 
S.  R.  Thomson  and  Mr.  Whiteway,  by  consent,  cross-examined. 

Mr.  Barziliai  Kemp,  of  Wellfleet,  Mass.,  a  master  manner  and  fisher- 


AWARD   OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


M 


states  and  of 


xamined  by  S. 


man.  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  6,  Appendix  L.) 
Tbe  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster. 
The  (Jommission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DBLFOS8E. 

E.  U.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XXXIX. 

Record  of  the  proceedingn  of  the  Fisheries  Commisfiion  at  fie  thirty  ninth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  Int  day  of  September j 

1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  ap|)oiuced. 

Tbe  three  Commissioners  and  tbe  Agents  of  tbe  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
tbe  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Tbe  examination  of  Mr.  Barzillai  Kemp  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Foster. 
Tbe  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Nathaniel  Attwood  was  recalled,  and  handed  in  a  statement  of 
bauk-flsbing  vessels  belonging  to  Provincetowu,  Mass. 

Mr.  Francis  M.  Freeman,  of  Provincetowu,  Mass.,  a  6sh  merchant  and 
outtitter,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  7,  Appendix  L.) 

Tbe  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
S.  B.  Thomson.  Mr.  Whiteway  further  cross-examined  the  witness  by 
consent. 

Mr.  Henry  Cook,  of  Provincetowu,  Mass.,  an  owner  of  fishing- vessels 
and  outfitter,  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on 
oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  8,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Whiteway. 
Tbe  Commission  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Proctocol  XL. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fortieth  eon- 
ferene^.  held  at  Salifax,  Nova  Scotia^  on  the  22d  day  ofSeptemberj  1877. 

Tbe  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

Tbe  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 


62 


AWARD   OF  THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ifi 


By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  confeience,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Joshna  Paine,  of  Provincetown,  Mass.,  a  merchant  and  president 
of  an  insurance  company,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on 
matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  9,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Nathan  D.  Freecian,  of  Provincetown,  Mass.,  a  merchant,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  iu- 
quiry.    (No.  10,  Ap|)endix  L.) 

The  witness  ^as  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Bangs  A.  Lewis,  of  Provincetown,  Mass.,  a  merchant  and  out- 
f  .ter  of  vessels,  was  next  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters 
connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  11,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

The  Gommission  then  adjourned  until  Monday,  the  24tb  day  of  Sep- 
tember, at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSB. 

K.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGET  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocoi,  XLI. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  Hie  Fisheries  Commission  at  (he  forty  fini 
conference^  held  at  Halifax^  Nova  Scotia^  on  the  2Wi  day  of  September. 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commission- 
ers, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  James  W.  Graham,  of  Wellfleet,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and ; 
fisherman,  was  callecL  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  12,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Davies. 

Mr.  Foster  then  handed  in  a  statement  showing  the  number  and  ton- 
nage of  vessels  of  the  United  States  employed  in  the  cod  and  mackerel  | 
fisheries,  from  1866  to  1876  inclusive.    (No.  2,  Appendix  O.) 

Mr.  Davies  requested  that  similar  returns  might  be  produced  show- 
ing the  statistics  for  the  years  1856  to  1866. 

Mr.  Daniel  0.  Newcomb,  of  Wellfleet,  Mass.,  a  mast«r  mariner  and  I 
fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  | 
with  the  inquiry.    (So.  13,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examine;!  by  Mr.j 
Weatherbe. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


58 


iniaed  by  Mr. 


Mr.  Moses  Fettingell,  of  Newbaryport,  Mass.,  inspector  of  customs, 
and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on 
matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  14,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Isaiah  0.  Young,  of  Wellfleet,  Mass.,  an  outfitter  of  vessels,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  in< 
quiry.    (No.  15,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Timothy  A.  Daniels,  of  Wellfleet,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  16,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

Mr.  D.  W.  Oliver,  of  Wellfleet,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  rjatters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
17,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Davies. 
The  Commission  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  ciiARE  FORD. 
D WIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


ted  States  and 


Protocol  XLII. 

[  Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  forty-second 
conference^  held  at  Halifax,  If  ova  Scotia,  on  the  25th  day  of  September, 

1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
[of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
|la8t  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
jtlio  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  George  Friend,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman  and  sailmaker, 
Ewas  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  couuecteu  with  the 
[inquiry.    (No.  18,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
[Weatherbe,  and,  by  consent,  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 

Mr.  Charles  Henry  Orne,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and 
fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
fith  the  inquiry.    (No.  19,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  ^by 
Mr.  Davies,  and,  by  consent,  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 

Mr.  Benjamin  Maddocks,of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fish-dealer,  was  called, 
RQil  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
20,  Appendix  L.) 


54 


AWABD   OF   THE   BISHERY  COMMISSION. 


The  witness  was  examiDed  by  Mr.  Dana  and  oross-examined  by  Mr. 
Doutre,  and,  by  consent,  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAUBIOE  DELFOSSB. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Peotoool  XLIIL 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  forty  third 
conference,  held  at  Halifax^  Nova  Scotia^  on  the  2iith  day  of  September, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Sfocretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  wore  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  cross-examination  of  Mr.  Maddocks  was  resumed  by  Mr.  White- 
way. 

Mr.  Andrew  Leighton,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  tiaherman,  and  mem- 
ber of  a  fishing  firm,  was  then  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  ou 
matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  21,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Dana  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry  by 
the  following  persons : 
Mr.  Cristopber  C.  Poole,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  234,  Appendix  M.) 
Mr.  Russell  D.  Terry,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  235,  Appendix  M.) 
Mr.  William  Herrick,  of  Swan's  Island,  Me.    (No.  236,  Appendix  M.) 
Mr.  Thomas  H.  White,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  237,  Appendix  M.) 
Mr.  Charles  Lee,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  238,  Appendix  M.) 
[N.  B. — Two  hundred  and  thirty-three  United  States  affidavits  had 
been  already  printed  in  Boston,  but  not  as  yet  submitted  to  the  Com- 
mission.] 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XLIV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Oommission  at  the  forty  fourth 
oot^ferenoe,  lield  at  Halifax,  Nova  iScotia,  on  the  27th  day  of  September, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and] 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


56^ 


By  directioa  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Atupon  Biggs,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and  fisher- 
man, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  22,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  John  J.  Bowe,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
23,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  John  H.  Gale,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  packer  and  depnty  inspector 
of  mackerel  for  the  city  of  Gloucester,  was  call'^d,  and  gave  evidence  on 
oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  24,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4.10  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAUBICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FEANCIS  CLABE  FOBD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTEB. 
J.  H.  G.  BEBGNE. 


Protocol  XLV. 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  forty-fifth 
conference^  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  2Sth  day  of  September^ 

1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  John  S.  Evitt,  of  Bay  of  Islands,  Newfoundland,  a  master  mar- 
iner and  dealer  in  fish,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  mat- 
ters connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  25,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies,  and  by  consent  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 

Mr.  Davies  requested  permission  to  examine  a  witness  on  behalf  of 
Her  Majesty's  Government.    The  request  was  granted ;  and 

Mr.  William  B.  Smith,  of  Cape  Sable  Island,  Barrington,  Nova  Scotia, 
la  master  mariner  and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath 
|oa  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  82,  Appendix  F.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Davies  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
iDaua. 

Mr.  William  B.  Smith  was  recalled  and  cross-examined  on  certain 
I  points. 

Mr.  Benjamin  F.  Cook,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  inspector  of  castoms, 
[was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
jiDquiry.    (No.  26,  Appendix  L.) 


56 


AWABD  OF  THE  FI8HERT  COMMISSION. 


The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Edwin  Smith,  of  Oloacester,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and  fish- 
erman, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  27,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  Monday,  the  1st  day  of 
October,  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XL VI. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  forty-sixth 
conference^  held  at  Halifax^  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  Ist  day  of  October, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Foster  handed  in  a  copy  of  the  judgment  of  His  Honor  Judge 
Hazen  in  the  case  of  the  White  Faicn.    (No.  1,  Appendix  P.) 

Mr.  John  Mclnnis,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and  fish- 
erman, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No  28,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Joseph  O.  Procter,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  engaged  in  the  fishing 
business,  was  then  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  cou- 
nected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  29,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescott  and  cross-examined  by 
M.  Davies  and  reexamined  by  Mr.  Foster. 
The  Commission  then  a(.juurned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XLVII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission,  at  the  forty  second  | 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  2d  day  of  October, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  andj 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


67 


By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Sydney  Gardner,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  inspector  of  cnstoms,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  in- 
quiry.   (No.  30,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Stephen  J.  Martin,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and 
fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  31,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Michael  Macauley,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and  fish- 
erman, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  32,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies  and,  by  consent,  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 

Mr.  S.  J.  Martin  was  recalled  and  re  examined  by  Mr.  Dana.  Mr. 
Weatherbe  cross-examined. 

Mr.  Ezra  Turner,  of  Isle  of  Haut,  State  of  Maine,  a  fisherman,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  33,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MADRICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRA:J0IS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  XLVIII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  forty-eighth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  lid  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  cross-examination  of  Mr.  Ezra  Turner  was  resumed  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Samuel  T.  Rowe,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
34,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Moses  Tarr,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman  and  fish-merchant, 
was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
inquiry.    (No.  35,  Appendix  L.) 


58 


AWARD   OF  THB  FISOERY  C0HMIS8I0N. 


The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Benjamin  Ashby,  jr.,  of  Noank,  Conn.,  a  fisherman,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
36,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Peotoool  XLIX. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  forty-ninth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  en  the  ^th  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretai^,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Davies  handed  in  reports,  extracted  from  Canadian  newspapers, 
of  judgments  delivered  by  Sir  William  Young,  in  the  vice-admiralty 
court  of  Halifax,  on  the  following  cases: 

The  Wampatuck,  6th  December,  1870.    (Ko.  2,  Appendix  P.) 

The  A.  H.  Wanson,  10th  February,  1871.    (No.  3,  Appendix  P.) 

The  A.  J.  Franklin,  10th  February,  1871.    (No.  4,  Appendix  P.) 

The  J.  H.  Nickerson,  November,  1871.    (No.  5,  Appendix  P.) 

Mr.  Joseph  F.  Brown,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and 
fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  ou  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  37,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Peter  H.  Mills,  of  Deer  Isle,  Me.,  a  farmer  and  fisherman,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  38,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  William  H.  McDonald,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  in- 
quiry.   (No.  39,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Whiteway. 

Mr.  William  A.  Dickey,  of  Belfast,  Me.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  40 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
DoQtre. 

Mr.  Alvarado  Gray,  of  Brooksville,  State  of  Maine,  a  fisherman,  was 


AWASD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


59 


called,  and  gave  eTidenceon  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inqairy. 
(No.  41,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe  and  by  Whiteway. 
The  Commission  adjoarned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOS8E. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  L. 

Recordof  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  atihe  fiftieth  conference^ 
held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  5th  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Robert  H.  Hulbert,  of  Gloncester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  and  pilot 
of  the  United  States  steamer  Speedwell,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence 
on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inqairy.    (No  42,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  partially  examined  by  Mr.  Foster,  who  requested 
permission  to  reserve  the  remainder  of  the  examination  until  some  fish- 
ermen at  present  in  the  port  of  Halifax  had  given  their  testimony. 

Mr.  Castanus  M.  Smalley,  of  Belfast,  Me.,  a  fisherman,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No. 

43,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Edward  A.  Googins,  of  Portland,  Me.,  a  fisherman,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No. 

44,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Isaac  Burgess,  of  Belfast,  Me.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave 
evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  45,  Ap- 
pendix L ) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Charles  H.  Brier,  of  Belfast,  Me.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  46, 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Doutre. 

Mr.  Dexter  F.  Walsh,  of  Belfast,  Me.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  47, 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 


60 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


Mr.  La\?reDce  Londrigan,  of  St.  Mary's  Bay,  Newfoandland,  a  fish- 
erman, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  48,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Bichard  Hopkins,  of  Belfast,  Me.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  49, 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  James  O.  Clark,  of  Belfast,  Me.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  50, 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 
The  Commission  adjourned  till  Monday,  the  Sth  of  October,  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  LI. 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fifty-first 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  eighth  day  of  October, 
1877. 

The  (.Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Foster  presented  to  the  Commissioners  and  to  the  Agents  of  Great 
Britain  copies  of  233  affidavits  on  behalf  of  the  United  States,  which 
had  been  printed  in  Boston.    (Appendix  M,  1  to  233.) 

The  President  inquired  whether  these  affidavits  were  put  in  without 
being  read  by  consent  of  the  British  side. 

Permission  was  requested  by  Mr.  Weatherbe  to  state  next  day  what 
course  the  British  side  desired  to  pursue  in  this  respect.  «^ 

The  examination  of  Mr.  Robert  H.  Hulbert  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Fos- 
ter.   The  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Davies. 

Mr.  James  Currie,  of  Pictou,  Nova  Scotia,  a  master  mariner  and  fisher- 
man, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  51,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Thomson. 

Mr.  William  Perry,  of  Sheet  Harbor,  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  a  seaman 
and  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  ou  oath  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  inquiry.    (No.  52,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Doutre. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


61 


Mr.  Thomas  Warren,  deputy  collector  of  customs,  of  Deer  Isle,  State 
of  Maine,  and  formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on 
oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  53,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Weatherbe. 

Mr.  Wilford  J.  Fisher,  of  Eastport,  Me,  express  and  commission 
agent,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.    (No.  54,  Appendix  L.) 
The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DVVIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  LII. 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fifty  second 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  9</t  day  of  October^ 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

Th«  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  stated  that  Her  Majesty's  Agent  had  no  objection 
to  the  affidavits  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  being  filed  without 
being  read. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  Wilford  J.  Fisher  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Tres- 
cot.   The  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson. 

Mr.  Joseph  Lakeman,  of  Grand  Manan,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  55, 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
S  R.  Thomson. 

Mr.  Sylvanus  Smith,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  an  owner  of  vessels  and 
outfitter,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  56,  Appendix  L.) 
The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster. 
The  Commission  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


62 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Pbotoool  LIII. 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fuherie*  Commission  at  ih«  fifty-third  con- 
ference, heid  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  10th  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Gommission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 
The  examination  of  Mr.  Sylvanus  Smith  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Foster. 
The  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Davies. 
Mr.  Oilman  S.  Williams,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  police  ofBcer,  and 
formerly  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters 
connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No  57,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
S.  B.  Thomson. 
The  Commission  adjoarned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

M AURIC  K  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KEI LOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Peotocol  LIV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fifty  fourth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  11th  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  an  1  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  cross-examination  of  Mr.  Williams  was  resumed  by  Mr.  S.  li. 
Thomson. 

Mr.  David  W.  Low,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  postmaster,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  58, 
Appendix  L.) 
The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana- 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 
Pbotocol  LV. 


63 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fitheriea  Commi»gion  at  the  fifty-fifth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  12th  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  Uuite<l  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 
The  examination  of  Mr.  David  W.  Low  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Dana. 
The  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Davies. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  nntil  Monday,  the  15th  day  of 
October,  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGBT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNB. 


Protocol  LVI. 

Record  of  the  proceedinga  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fifty  siath 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  15th  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 
The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  cross-examination  of  Mr.  David  W.  Low  was  resumed  by  Mr. 
Davies  and  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 

The  witness  was  re-examined  by  Mr.  Dana,  and  again  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Davies  and  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 

Mr.  Dana  and  Mr.  Foster  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the 
present  inquiry  by  the  following  persons : 
Mr.  Joseph  McPhee,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  239,  Appendix  M.) 
Mr.  William  Parsons,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  240,  Appendix  M.) 
Mr.  Solomon  Pool,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  241,  Appendix  M.) 
Mr.  Benjamin  Swim,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  242,  Appendix  M.) 
Mr.  Charles  F.  Carter,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  243,  Appendix  M.) 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  until  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


64 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Protocol  LVII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fifty -seventh 
conference,  held  at  Haltfax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  lOth  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  road  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Eliphalet  W.  French,  of  Eastport,  Me.,  a  fish  merchant,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  in- 
quiry.   (No.  59,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson. 

Mr.  Foster  then  read  affidavits  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 
by  the  following  persons : 

Mr.  Winthrop  Thurston,  of  Bockport,  Mass.    (No.  244,  Appendix  M.) 

Mr.  James  A.  Colson,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  245,  Appendix  M.) 

Mr.  Henry  G.  Coas,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  246,  Appendix  M.) 

Mr.  Joseph  J.  Tupper,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.    (No.  247,  Appendix  M.) 

Mr.  William  Davis,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  master  mariner  and  fish- 
erman, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  60,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  William  O.  Cook,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
61,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Edward  Hill,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  62, 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
S.  B.  Thomson. 

Mr.  John  Conley,  of  Bookport,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
63,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  John  C.  Knowlton,  of  Bockport,  Mass.,  a  fisherman,  was  called, 
and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  conuected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  64,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr.  | 
S.  B.  Thomson. 

The  Commission  then  a(\journed  till  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAUBICE  DELF0S8E. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FBANOIS  CLABE  FOBD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTEB. 
J.  H.  G.  BEBGNE. 


award  of  the  fishery  commission. 
Protocol  LVIII. 


66 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fifty-eighth  con- 
ference^ held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia^  on  the  nth  day  of  October^  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

Tlie  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  James  H.  Myrick,  of  Boston,  engaged  in  the  fishing  business,  was 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry. 
(No.  65,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Foster  then  read  an  affidavit  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry 

by  Mr.  Hanson  B.  Joyce,  of  Swan's  Island,  Me.    ^No.  248,  Appendix  M.) 

Mr.  Chresten  Nelson,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  fisherman  and  sail-maker, 

was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 

iuqairy.    (No.  66,  Appendix  L,) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  ISIr.  Dana  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
S.  K.Thomson. 

Mr.  James  W.  Pattillo,  of  North  Stoughton,  Mass.,  a  retired  fisher- 
man, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry.     (No.  67,  Appendix  L.) 
The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot. 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4.15  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  LIX. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  fiflyninth  con- 
ference, held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  ISth  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  t'  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  James  W.  Pattillo  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Tres- 
cot.   This  witness  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson. 

Prof.  Spencer  F.  Baird,  assistant  secretary  of  the  Smithsonian  Insti- 
tate,  at  Washington,  and  United  States  Commissioner  of  Fish  and  Fish- 
eries, was  then  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected 
with  the  inquiry.    (No.  68,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana. 

The  examination  of  Professor  Baird  was  interrupted  in  order  to  call 
a  witness  at  present  in  Halifax  Harbor. 

5f 


66 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Mr.  William  J.  Nass,  a  master  mariner  and  fisherman,  of  Chester, 
Kova  Scotia,  a  naturalized  citizen  of  the  United  States,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (Ko.  60, 
Ap  )endix  D.) 

'I be  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr, 
Davies. 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
D WIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Peotocol  LX. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  sixtieth  eon- 
ference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  I9th  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  CommieiE'.ion  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissiotiers-,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
liist  conference,  which  were  approved  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  examination  of  Professor  Baird  was  resum'^d  by  Dana.    The  wit- 

nesf*  was  cross-examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  by  Mr.  Whiteway. 

Mr.  Howard  M.  Churchill,  of  Rustico,  Prince  Edward  Island,  a  United 

States  citizen,  fish-merchant,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  od 

matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  70,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
Davies. 

Mr.  Isaac  C.  Hall,  of  Winthrop,  Mass.,  and  of  Charlottetown,  Prince 
Edward  Island,  a  fish-merchant,  was  called  and  gave  evidence  on  oath 
o.T  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  71,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  hy  Mr. 
Davies. 

The  Commission  ucljonrned  at  5.10  p.  m.  until  Monday,  the  22d  Octo- 
ber, at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  LXI. 

Recor'j  of  the  proceed  iufis  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  sixty  first  con 
p/ence,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia^  on  the  2'2il  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Coromisbion  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  aud 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


9T 


ed  States  and 


hy  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved  and  signed  by  the  GomoiissioQerSi 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Walter  M.  Fait,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  engaged  in  the  fishing  busi- 
ness, was  called,  and  gave  evidence  ou  oath  on  matters  connected  with 
the  inquiry,    (^fo.  72,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross  examined  by 
Mr.  S.  II.  Thomson. 

Mr.  Charles  H.  Pew,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  partner  in  the  firm  of 
John  Pew  &  Sous,  engaged  in  the  Ashing  business,  was  called,  and 
gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No.  73, 
Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
Davios. 

J^Ir.  George  W.  Plumer,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  a  commission  merchant 
and  tish  dealer,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  ou  matters  cou* 
!)ect«d  with  the  inquiry.    (No.  74,  Appendix  L.) 
The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Dana. 

The  Commission  adjourned  at  4.15  p.  m.  until  the  next  dav,  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
D WIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BEUGNB. 


Peotocoi.  LXII. 

Rec^)rd  of  tfie  proveodinfjn  of  the  Fixkeries  €!>^)%m'\mon,  at  the  sLvty-seo^nd 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Ifova  Scotia,  on  the  l!3rf  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
ot  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  Proaideiit,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  couf'ereuce,  which  were  approved  and  signed  by  the  Comiuissiouers, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  George  W.  Plumer  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Dana. 
I  The  witness  was  cross-exam intKi  by  Mr.  Weatherbe. 

Mr.  .James  A.  Pettes,  of  Grand  Manan,  a  hotel  keeper  and  fisherman, 
1  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the 
I  inquiry.    (No.  75,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescot  and  cross  examined  by  Mr. 
IS.  R.  Thomson. 

Mr.  Joseph  Rowf ,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  an  owner  and  fitter  of  tishing 
I  vessels,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  ou  oath  ou  matters  coimected 
[with  the  inquiry.    (No.  70,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  t:xamined  by  Mr.  Foster  and  cross-examined  by  Mr. 
iDavies. 

Mr.  Roger  W.  Wonson,  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  enga^red  in  the  fishing 
Imsiuess,  was  called,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  ou  matters  connected 
[with  the  inquiry.    (No.  77,  Appendix  L.) 


6» 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


The  witness  was  examiued  by  Mr.  Dana  and  cross-examiaed  by  Mr. 
S.  B.  Thomson. 
The  Commission  then  adjonrned  until  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

D WIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  LXIIL 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fuherieft  CommiHsion  at  the  aixtp-third 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  2ith  day  of  October^ 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  State!  Hm 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  i^econls  of  tlie 
last  conference,  which  were  approved  and  signed  by  the  Commis«ioner8, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Fitz  .).  Babson,  collector  of  customs  at  Glouo  ester,  Mass.,  wan 
called,  and  gave  evidence  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No, 
78,  Appendix  L.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  Trescott  and  cross  examiued  liv 
Mr.  Davies. 

Mr.  Babson  produced  a  statement,  collected  by  Inspector  Blatchfonl, 
of  the  results  of  fishing  operations  of  certain  Gloucester  firms. 

XJyton  the  presentation  of  this  paper  objection  was  made  by  Messrs. 
Thouieon  and  Davies  to  its  being  received,  upon  the  ground  that  tbe 
statements  therein  included  were  not  sworn  to. 

Mr.  Foster  submitted  that  under  tbe  treaty  be  had  the  right  to  file 
this  return  as  evidence,  to  go  for  what  it  was  worth  before  the  Commis- 
sioners. 

Tbe  Commissioners  so  decided,  and  the  paper  was  accordingly  filed. 
(No.  4,  Appendix  O.) 

Mr.  Foster  then  filed  thirty-two  affidavits,  made  by  various  persons, 
relative  to  the  present  inquiry.  (Nos.  219  to  280,  inclusive.  Appendix 
M.) 

Mr.  Foster  also  banded  in  a  statement  of  tbo  mackerel  inspected  at 
Portsmouth  and  Newcastle  for  the  years  18Gi)  to  1877,  inclusive.  (No. 
5,  Appendix  O.) 

Also  a  summary  of  the  annual  returns  of  the  inspector  general  of  M\ 
for  the  State  of  Maine  fur  the  years  1SG6  to  1873,  inclusive.  (No.  G,  Ap- 
pendix O.) 

Mr.  Foster  then  stated  that  the  case  of  the  United  States  was  now 
closed,  with  the  exception  of  certain  returns  of  the  inspector-general  of 
fish  of  Massachusetts,  which,  by  agreement,  were  to  be  introduced  when 
received. 

Mr.  Daniel  M.  Browne,  of  Ilalifax,  Nova  Scotia,  a  retired  navigating 
lieutenant  of  the  Royal  Navy,  and  now  a  clerk  in  the  marine  and  fish- 
eries department  of  Canada,  was  then  called  on  behalf  of  Her  Majesty's 
Government,  and  gave  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  tbe 
inquiry.    (No.  83,  Appendix  F.) 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


69 


The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  B.  Thomson  and  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Foster. 

This  closed  the  direct  evidence  on  behalf  of  Her  Majesty's  Govera- 
nient. 
The  Commission  tbcii  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

B.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


examined  by 


rROTOCOL  LXIV. 

Record  of  the  proceedinfls  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  sixty  fourth 
conference,  Iteld  at  Halijax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  2oth  day  of  October^ 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  tiiree  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Gn'at  I'ritilin,  respectively,  were  present. 

li\  (111  tion  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  rebuttal  evidence  on  uehalf  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  was 
r>rit,irn>'»nced. 

'"(,  Uenry  Youle  Hind,  M.  A.,  of  Windsor,  Nova  Scotia,  was  called, 
iiL  i  ^  !ve  evidence  on  oath  on  matters  connected  with  the  inquiry.  (No. 
1,  Appendix  Q.) 

The  witness  was  examined  by  Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  and  by  Mr.  White- 
way. 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  U.  G.  BERGNE. 


rilOTOCOL    LXV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commisnion  at  the  sixty  fifth  con* 
J'erence,  held  at  Ualijax,  Noca  IScoda,  on  the  2iith  day  of  October,  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  an<l  tho  Agents  of  the  United  Spates  .ar 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  road  tho  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commis- 
sioners, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agen'is. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  Henry  Youle  Hind  was  resumed  by  Mr. 
Whiteway.  The  witness  was  cross-ei:aniineil  by  Mr.  Dana  and  by  Mr. 
Foster. 


70 


AWABD   OF  THE  FISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


Mr.  Whiteway  then  read  an  affidavit  made  relative  to  the  present 
inquiry  by  Mr.  Thomas  Kumsey,  of  St.  John's,  Newfoundland.  (No.  1, 
Appendix  Q.) 

Mr.  Foster  filed  a  copy  of  an  insarance  policy  in  the  Gloucester  Mu- 
tual Fishing  Insurance  Company,  accompanied  by  the  by-laws  of  the 
said  company.    (Nos.  1  and  2,  Appendix  B.) 

Mr.  Foster  also  filed,  by  consent,  a  copy  of  a  fishing  shipping  paper 
(No.  3,  Appendix  B) ; 

And  presented  returns  of  the  mackerel  inspected  in  the  State  of  Mas- 
sachusetts for  several  years. 
A  summary  of  these  will  be  found  in  No.  7,  Appendix  O. 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  till  Thursday,  the  1st  of  November, 
at  noon. 

MADBIOB  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FBANCIS  CLABE  FOBD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTBB. 
J.  H.  G.  BEBGNE. 


Peotocol  LXVI. 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commissiim  at  the  sixty-sixth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax.  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  1st  day  ^^  Noveimber, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Whiteway  read  affidavits,  made  relative  to  the  present  inquiry, 
by  the  following  persons  resident  in  Newfoundland : 
Mr.  Bobert  Inkpen,  of  Burin.    (No.  2,  Appendix  Q.) 
Mr.  Stephen  Power,  of  Plaoentia.    (So.  3,  Appendix  Q.) 
Mr.  Stephen  Fiander,  of  Coomb's  Cove.    (No.  4,  Appendix  Q.) 
Mr.  Philip  Thornhill,  of  Anderson's  Cove.    (No.  5,  Appendix  Q.) 
Mr.  George  Bose,  of  Jersey  Harbor.    (No.  6,  Appendix  Q.) 
Mr.  Maurice  Bonia,  of  Placentia.    (No.  7,  Appendix  Q.) 
Mr.  Humphrey  Sullivan,  of  Plaoentia.    (No.  8,  Appendix  Q.) 
Mr.  Doutre  then  stated  that  the  case  of  Her  Mi^esty's  Government 
was  now  altogether  closed. 

Mr.  Foster  stated  that  he  hoped  to  be  prepared  to  address  the  court 
on  Monday,  the  5th  of  November,  and  the  Cummission  accordingly  ad- 
journed until  that  day  at  noon. 

MAUBTCE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FBANCIS  CLABE  FOBD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BEBGNE. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 
PHOTOCOL  LXVII. 


71 


Record  of  the  proceedingn  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  sixty  seventh 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  5th  day  of  Nncember, 
1877. 

Tbe  Commission  met  at  noon,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 
The  tbree  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Foster  commenced  the  closing  argument  on  behalf  of  the  United 
States.    (No.  4,  Appendix  J.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  3.30  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAUillCE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


sent  inquiry, 


Protocol  LXVIIL 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  sixty  eighth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  6th  day  of  November, 

1877. 

Tbe  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

Tbe  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  tbe  Commissioners, 
tbe  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 
Mr.  Foster  resumed  his  address  left  unfinished  the  previous  day. 
On  tbe  conclusion  of  his  speech  Mr.  Foster  requested  permission  to 
be  absent  for  a  few  days  on  urgent  private  atfairs.    He  suggested  that 
during  his  absence  the  records  should  be  signed  on  his  behalf  by  Mr. 
B.  H.  Dana,  Junr. 
The  proposal  was  accepted  by  the  Cammissioners. 
Tbe  Commission  then  adjourned  until  Thursday,  the  8th  of  Novem- 
ber, at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FOUD. 
RICH.  H.  DANA,  JiNii. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


12 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 
Pbotogol  LXIX. 


Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  sixty-ninth 
conference^  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  8th  day  of  November, 
1877. 

The  CoinmiHsioQ  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Gommissiouers,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  (Mr. 
K.  H.  Dana,  jr.,  acting)  and  of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  pres- 
ent. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  aad  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Trescot  addressed  the  Commissioners  in  continuation  of  the 
closing  argaments  on  behalf  of  the  United  States.    (No.  5,  Appendix  J.) 
On  the  conclasion  of  Mr.  Trescot's  address,  the  Commission  adjourned 
until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
RICH.  H.  DANA,  JuNR. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Peotocol  LXX. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  seventieth  con- 
ferencCf  held  at  Halifax^  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  9th  day  of  November.  1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  (Mr. 

R.  H.  Dana,  jr.,  acting)  and  of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 

last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 

the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Dana  addressed  the  Commissioners  in  continuation  of  the  closing 
arguments  on  behalf  of  the  United  States.    (No.  6,  Appendix  J.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


PROTOOOL  LXXI. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission,  at  the  seventy-first  | 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  lOth  day  of  November^ 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 
The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  (Mr.  I 
E.  H.  Dana,  jr.,  acting)  and  of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


73 


By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  coDference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents.  ^ 

Mr.  Dana  resumed  his  speech  left  nnfinished  the  previous  day. 
This  concluded  the  final  arguments  on  behalf  of  the  United  States. 
Mr.  Thomson  then  stated  that  the  British  counsel  would  be  prepared 
to  commence  the  closing  arguments  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's 
Government  on  Thursday,  the  15th  of  November;  and  the  Commission 
accordingly  adjourned  until  that  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BEKGNE. 


Protocol  LXXII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  seventy-sec- 
ond conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  I5th  day  of  Novem- 
ber, 1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  (Mr. 

B.  H.  Dana,  jr.,  acting)  and  of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 

last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 

the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Whiteway  commenced  the  closing  arguments  on  behalf  of  Her 
Britannic  Majesty's  Government.    (No.  7,  Appendix  J.) 
The  Commission  then  adjourned  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GAL 7. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  LXXIII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  seventy-third 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  mi  the  Idth  day  of  November, 

1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commission- 
ers, the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  Dontre  addressed  the  Commission  in  continuation  of  the  closing 
argnmeuts  on  behalf  of  Her  Majesty's  Government.  (No.  8,  Appen- 
dix J.) 


M 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISUEBY   U0MMI8SI0N. 


The  Commission  adjoorned  until  Saturday,  the  17th  November,  at  3 

MAURICE  DELFOSSB. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GAiiT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BEUGNE. 


8*. 


Protocol  LXXIV. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  seventy-fourth 
conference,  held  at  Halifax^  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  nth  day  of  November, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  3  p.  m.,  as  appointed. 
The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 
Mr.  Doutre  resumed  his  speech  left  unfinished  the  previous  day. 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4.20  p.  m.  until  Monday,  the  19th  of 
November,  at  noon. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSB. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


I 


Protocol  LXXV. 

Beeord  of  tfie  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  setjenty-Ji/th 
conference,  held  at  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  19th  day  of  November, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the  last 
conference,  which  were  approved,  and  sighed  by  the  Commissioners,  the 
Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  addressed  the  Commissioners  in  continuation  of  | 
tbe  closing  arguments  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment.   (No.  0,  Appendix  J.) 
The  Commission  adjourned  at  4  p.  m.  until  the  next  day  at  noon. 

MAUHICE  DELFOSSB. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GAI/r. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


d  States  and 


award  of  the  fishery  commission. 
Protocol  LXXVI. 


76 


Record  of  the  proceedingii  of  the  Fisheries  CommissioH  at  the  seventy-sixth 
conference^  held  at  Hali/ajt,  Nova  Hcotia,  on  the  20th  day  of  November, 

1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  noon,  as  appointed. 

The  three  Oommissionera,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  record:)  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Gommissioners^ 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  resumed  his  address  left  unfinished  the  previous 
day. 
The  Commission  adjourned  until  the  next  dav  at  11  a.  m. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FOUD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


Protocol  LXXVII. 

Record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Fisheries  Commission  at  the  seventy- seventh 
conference,  held  at  HaUfax,  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  21st  day  of  November, 
1877. 

The  Commission  met  at  11  a.  m.,  as  appointed. 
The  three  Commissioners,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and  of 
Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

Mr.  S.  R.  Thomson  resumed  his  address  left  unfinished  the  previous 
day,  and  on  its  conclusion  stated  that  the  case  on  behalf  of  the  United 
States  having  been  concluded,  that  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  was 
now  finally  closed. 

The  President  then  requested  the  Secretary  to  enter  on  the  minutes 
that  the  Commissioners  desired  to  record  their  thanks  to  Mr.  Bergne  for 
bis  services  as  Secretary  to  the  Commission,  and  their  sense  of  the  zeal, 
inteUigenoe,  and  accuracy  which  had  marked  the  discharge  of  his  duties. 
The  Commission  adjourned  until  Friday,  the  23d  of  November,  at  2 
p.  m. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
E.  H.  KELLOGG. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 
DWIGHT  FOSTER. 
J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


76 


AWAHD   OF  THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 

Protocol  LXXVIII. 


Record  of  the  prooeedinga  of  the  Fitheries  Oommiaeion  at  the  leventy-eighth 
conference,  held  at  Haltfax,  Nova  Seotiaj  on  the  23d  day  of  November. 
1877. 

Tbe  Gommiasioo  met  at  2  p.  m.,  parsaant  to  adjoarnment. 

The  three  CommissioDers,  and  the  Agents  of  the  United  States  and 
of  Great  Britain,  respectively,  were  present. 

By  direction  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  read  the  records  of  the 
last  conference,  which  were  approved,  and  signed  by  the  Commissioners, 
the  Secretary,  and  the  Agents. 

The  President  first  expressed  the  thanks  of  the  Commissioners  to  Mr. 
Foster  and  to  Mr.  Ford  for  the  able  manner  in  which  they  had  con- 
ducted the  proceedings,  and  his  best  wishes  for  the  welfare  of  all  those 
who  had  been  connected  with  the  inquiry. 

The  President  then  read  tbe  following  Award : 

The  undersigned  Commissionera  appointed  nnder  Articles  XXII  and  XXIII  of  the 
Treaty  of  Washington  of  the  8th  or  May,  1871,  to  determine,  having  regard  to  tlie 
privileges  accorded  by  the  United  States  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  u 
stated  in  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  of  said  treaty,  the  amount  of  any  compensation  which 
in  their  opinion  ought  to  be  paid  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  the  Gov- 
ernment of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  in  retnrn  for  the  privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens 
of  the  United  States  uuder  Article  XVIII  of  the  said  treaty ; 

Having  carefully  and  impartially  examined  the  matters  referred  to  them  according 
to  Justice  and  equity,  in  conformity  with  the  solemn  declaration  made  and  subscribed 
by  them  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  June,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy-seven : 

Award  the  snm  uf  five  millioDs  five  hundred  thousand  dollars,  in  gold,  to  be  paid  bj 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Mtyesty  in 
accordance  with  the  provisions  of  tbe  said  treaty. 

Signed  at  Halifax,  this  twenty-third  day  of  November,  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  seveuty-Heveu. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 
A.  T.  GALT. 

Tbe  United  States  Commissioner  is  of  opinion  that  the  advantages  accruing  to  Great 
Britain  nnder  tbe  Treaty  of  Washington  are  greater  than  the  advantages  conferred 
■on  tbe  United  States  by  said  treaty,  and  he  cannot  therefore  concur  in  the  oonclusions 
announced  by  bis  colleagues. 

And  the  American  Commissioner  deems  it  his  duty  to  state  further  that  it  is  qnea- 
tionable  whether  it  is  competent  fur  the  board  to  malce  an  award  under  the  treaty, 
«xcept  with  the  unanimous  consent  of  its  members. 

£.  H.  KELLOGG,  Commmioncr. 

Mr.  Foster  then  addressed  the  Commission  as  follows  : 

Oentlrmrn  of  the  Commission  :  I  have  no  instructions  from  the  Government  of  { 
the  United  States  as  to  the  course  to  be  pursued  in  the  contingency  of  such  a  result  as 
has  just  been  announced. 

But  if  I  were  to  accept  in  silence  the  paper  signed  by  two  Commissioners,  it  mif^ht 
be  claimed  hereafter  that,  as  Agent  of  the  United  States,  I  had  acquiesced  in  treatiui;  | 
it  as  a  valid  award.   Against  such  an  inference  it  seems  my  duty  to  guard.  I  therefore 
make  this  statement,  which  I  desire  to  have  placed  upon  record. 

Mr.  Kellogg  next  expressed  his  thanks  and  those  of  Sir  A.  T.  Gait  to  | 
Mr.  Delfosse  for  the  manner  in  which  ho  had  fulfilled  the  duties  of  Pres- 
ident of  the  Commission. 

The  President  then  announced  that  the  Commission  was  adjourned  | 
sine  die. 

MAURICE  DELFOSSE. 

E.  H.  KELLOGG. 

A.  T.  GALT. 

FRANCIS  CLARE  FORD. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER. 

J.  H.  G.  BERGNE. 


d  States  and 


j^i>PE3srr)ix  jl. 


FISHERY  COMMISSION  UNDER  THE  TREATY  OF  WASHING- 

TON,  OP  MAY  8, 1871. 


CASK    OF    HRR    MAJESTY'S    GOVBJRNMICNT. 


\0,  Cotnmiuioncr. 


INDEX. 

ISTRODUCnON 78 

PART  I.— CANADA. 
Chapter  1. 

Extent  and  valae  of  Canadian  sea  tiaheries 87 

Chapter  2. — Advantaget  derived  by  United  States  citizeni. 

1.  Liberty  of  fiRhinfc  in  British  waters 88 

2.  Libertv  to  land  for  the  purposes  of  drying  nets,  oaring  fish,  &,o 9^ 

X  Transshipping  cargoes  and  obtaining  supplies,  &o 94 

4.  Formation  of  fishing  establishnnents 94 

5.  Convenience  of  reciprocal  free  market 95 

(>.  Participation  in  improvement  resulting  {com  fluhery  protection  service  of 

Canada... 95' 

Summary 96 

Chapter  3, — Advantaget  derived  by  Brititli  subjects. 

1.  Liberty  of  fishing  in  United  States  waters  and  other  privileges  connected 

therewith 97 

2.  Castoms  remissions  by  United  States  in  favor  of  Canada 100 

Conclusion. 
i  Amonnt  of  compensation  claimed  in  respect  of  Dominion  of  Canada 100* 


PART  II.— NEWFOUNDLAND. 

Chapter  1. 
I  lotToduction  and  description  of  Newfoundland  fisheries 100' 

Chapter  2. — Advantages  derived  by  United  States  citizens. 

|1.  Tlie  entire  freedom  of  the  inshore  fisheries 103 

12.  The  privilege  of  procuring  bait  and  supplies,  refitting,  drying,  transshipping, 

&o 105 

'  The  advantage  of  a  free  market  for  fish  and  fish-oil  in  Newfoundland 106 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


m 

•15  0 


IIM    112.5 


ilM    2.2 

116 


m 


2.0 


1.8 


U    i  1.6 


% 


^ 


/a 


7. 


^ 


C»    o>' 


^% 


y 


/A 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


4\^ 


.•V 


« 


v> 


,<•'- 


"% 


V 


^1  JL- 


cS\ 


^' 


''%" 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


&? 


o^ 


78 


''  '  fait...;; 


<m' 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMIbSION. 
Chapter  3. — Advantages  derived  by  BrUish  aubjects. 


Page. 
Libert^'  of  iree  fi»LiDg  and  advantage  of  a  free  market  for  fish  and  fish-oil 1(J6 

Conclusion. 

Amount  of  compensation  claimed  in  respect  of  the  Colony  of  Newfoundland....      107 

Summary. 

Total  amount  of  compensation  claimed  by  Her  Majesty's  Government  on  behalf 

uf  Canada  and  Newfoundland,  collectively 103 


f;-'''-i'i*>i'f 


tH- 


M.^ 


INTRODUCTION. 

In  laying  tbe  case  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  belore  tUe  Commis- 
sioners, it  will  be  desirable  to  commence  by  a  brief  history  of  the 
fisheries  question  since  the  outbreak  of  the  War  of  Independence  iu 
1775. 

Before  the  commencement  of  this  war  all  British  colonists  enjoyed 
equal  privileges  in  matters  connected  with  fishing,  but  at  its  close,  and 
on  the  conclusion  of  peace,  it  became  a  question  how  far  such  privileges 
should  be  restored  to  those  who  had  separated  from  the  British  Crowu. 
The  matter  was  very  fully  discus.sed  in  the  negotiations  which  preceded 
the  treaty  of  the  3d  September,  1783,  and  though  Great  Britain  did  not 
deny  the  right  of  the  American  citizens  to  fish  on  the  Great  Banks  of 
Newfoundland,  or  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence,  or  elsewhere  in  the 
open  sea,  she  denied  their  right  to  fish  in  British  waters,  or  to  land  in 
British  territory  for  the  purpose  of  drying  or  curing  their  fish.  A  com- 
promise was  at  length  arrived  at,  and  it  was  agreed  that  United  States 
fishermen  should  be  at  liberty  to  fish  on  such  part  of  the  coast  of  New- 
foundland as  British  fishermen  could  use,  but  not  to  dry  or  cure  their 
fish  on  that  island ;  and  they  were  also  to  be  allowed  to  fish  on  the 
coasts,  bays,  and  creeks  of  other  British  possessions  in  North  America, 
and  to  dry  and  cure  their  fish  in  any  of  the  unsettled  bays,  harbors, 
and  creeks  of  Nova  Scotia,,  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  Labrador,  so 
long  as  they  should  remain  unsettled;  but  so  soon  as  any  of  tbem 
became  settled,  the  United  States  fishermen  were  not  to  be  allowed  to 
use  them  without  the  previous  permission  of  the  inhabitants  and  pro- 
prietors of  the  ground. 

The  in.  Article  of  the  Treaty  of  Paris  of  the  3d  of  September,  1783, 
is  as  follows : 

It  is  agreed  that  the  people  of  the  United  States  shall  continue  to  enjoy  unmolested 
the  right  to  take  fish  of  every  kind  on  the  Grand  Bunk  and  on  all  the  other  banks  of 
Newfoundland;  also  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence,  and  at  all  other  places  in  tbe  sea, 
where  the  inhabitants  of  both  countries  used  at  any  time  heretofore  to  fish;  and  also 
that  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States  shall  have  liberty  to  take  fish  of  every  kiud 
on  such  part  of  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  as  British  fishermen  shall  use  (but  nut  to 
dry  or  cure  the  same  on  that  island),  and  also  on  tbe  coasts,  bays,  and  creeks  of  all 
other  of  His  Britannic  Majesty's  dominions  in  America  ;  and  that  the  American  fish- 
ermen shall  have  liberty  to  dry  and  cure  fish  in  any  of  the  unsettled  bays,  harbors, 
and  creeks  of  Nova  Scotia,  Magdalen  Islands,  and  Labrador,  so  long  as  the  same  sliall 
remain  unsettled;  but  so  soon  ai^  tiie  same,  or  either  of  them,  shall  be  settled,  it  sball 
not  be  lawful  for  the  said  fishermen  to  dry  or  cure  fish  at  such  settlement  without  a  pre- 
vious agreement  for  that  purpose  with  the  inhabitants,  proprietors,  or  possessors  of  | 
the  ground. 


AWARD   or   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


79 


Page.  ..^ 

1U6     Ki 


d....      107 


behalf 


103 


le  Com  mis- 
ery of  the 
jadence  iu 

sts  enjoyed 

i  close,  and 

1  privileges 

tish  Crowu. 

;h  preceded 

bain  did  not 

at  Banks  of 

here  in  the 

r  to  land  in 

5h.    A  com- 

Qited  States 

>ast  of  New- 

r  cure  their 

fish  on  the 

ti  America, 

ys,  harbors, 

jabrador,  so 

\ny  of  them 

_  allowed  to 

its  and  pro- 

[mber,  1783, 

jjy  unmolested 
|(>tber  bauks  of  ] 
Tees  in  the  sea, 
I  tish ;  and  also 
J  of  every  kind 
liBe  (but  nut  to 
t  creeks  of  all 
[American  fish- 
Ibays,  harbors, 
Ithe  same  shall 
fettled,  it  sball 
|withont  a  pre- 
poasnBsurs  of 


It  should,  however,  be  observed  that  the  rights  conceded  to  the  United 
States  fishermen  under  this  treaty  were  by  no  means  so  great  as  those 
which,  as  British  subjects,  they  had  enjoyed  previous  to  the  War  of 
Independence,  for  they  were  not  to  be  allowed  to  land  to  dry  and  cure 
their  fish  on  any  part  of  Newfoundland,  and  only  in  those  parts  of  Nova 
Scotia,  the  Magdalen  Islands,  ami  Labrador  where  no  British  settle- 
ment had  been  or  might  be  formed,  expressly  excluding  Cape  Breton, 
Prince  Edward  Island,  and  other  places. 

So  matters  stood  until  the  war  of  1812  broke  out,  when,  of  necessity, 
the  right  of  American  citizens  to  fish  in  British  waters,  and  to  dry  and 
cure  their  fish  on  British  territory,  terminated.    In  the  course  of  the 
negotiations  whish  preceded  the  peace  of  1814,  this  question  was  re- 
vived, and  the  alleged  right  of  American  citizens  to  fish  and  cure  fish 
within  British  jurisdiction  was  fully  gone  into  by  the  British  and  Amer- 
jican  commissioners  who  were  assembled  at  Ghent  for  the  purpose  of 
-  drawing  up  the  articles  of  peace.    At  that  time,  however,  the  circum- 
stances had  very  considerably  changed  since  the  Treaty  o?  1783  had 
I  been  concluded.    The  British  North  American  possessions  had  become 
more  thickly  populated,  and  there  were  fewer  unsettled  bays,  harbors, 
[and  creeks  iu  Nova  Scotia  than  formerly.    There  was  consequently 
greater  risk  of  collision  between  British  and  American  interests ;  and 
{the  colonists  and  English  merchants  engaged  in  the  fisheries  petitioned 
(strongly  against  a  renewal  of  the  privileges  granted  by  the  treaty  of 
11783  to' the  American  fishermen. 

It  was  under  these  circumstances  that  the  negotiations  for  peace  were 

[entered  into.    At  the  first  meeting,  which  took  place  on  the  8th  of  Au- 

[gust,  1814,  the  British  commissioners  stated  "  that  the  British  Govern- 

jment  did  not  intend  to  grant  to  the  United  State  gratuitously  the  priv- 

[ileges  formerly  granted  to  them  by  treaty  of  fishing  within  the  limits 

jof  British  territory,  or  of  using  the  shores  of  the  British  territories  for 

[purposes  connected  with  the  fisheries."    They  contended  that  the  claim 

ladvauced  by  the  United  States,  of  immemorial  and  prescriptive  right, 

[was  quite  untenable,  inasmuch  as  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States 

lad  until  quite  recently  been  British  subjects,  and  that  the  rights  which 

they  possessed  formerly  as  such  could  not  be  (wntiaued  to  them  after 

tbey  luid  become  citizens  of  an  independent  state. 

Aftor  much  discussion,  it  was  finally  agreed  to  omit  all  mention  of 
this  question  from  the  treaty,  which  was  signed  at  Ghent  on  the  24th 
X'cember,  1814,  and  which  contains  no  reference  to  the  fisheries  ques* 
tion. 
Orders  were  now  sent  out  to  the  governors  of  the  British  North 
Liuerican  colonies  not  to  interfere  with  citizens  of  the  United  States 
^tigaged  in  fishing  on  the  Newfoundland  Banks,  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint 
jawreuce,  or  on  the  liigh  seas,  but  to  prevent  them  from  using  the 
British  territory  for  purposes  connected  with  the  fishery,  and  to  exclude 
|heir  fishing-vessels  from  the  harbors,  bays,  rivers,  and  creeks  of  all  Her 
lajesty's  Possessions.  Orders  were  also  given  to  tlie  British  naval 
ktticers  on  the  Halifax  station  to  resist  any  encroachment  on  the  part 
K  American  fishermen  on  the  rights  of  Great  Britain.  The  residt  was 
|he  capture  of  several  American  fishing-vessels  for  trespassing  within 
jritish  waters;  and  the  President  of  the  United  States  iu  1818  pre- 
ssed to  the  Prince  Eegent  that  negotiations  should  be  opened  for  the 
kurpose  of  settling  in  an  amicable  manner  disputed  points  which  had 
irisen  connected  with  the  fisheries.  Commissioners  were  accordingly 
|)pointed  by  both  parties  to  meet  in  London,  and  the  Convention  of  2()th 
jlctober,  1818,  was  eventually  signed. 


m 


80 


AWABD    OF   THE   f'ISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Article  1  of  this  Couveution  is  in  these  words : 

Whereas  differences  have  arisen  respecting  the  liberty  claimed  by  the  United  States 
for  the  inhabitants  thereof  to  take,  dry,  and  cure  fish  on  certain  coasts,  bays,  harbours, 
and  creeks  of  His  Britannick  Majesty's  dominions  in  America,  it  is  agreed  between  the 
High  Contracting  Parties  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  said  United  States  shall  have, 
forever,  in  common  with  the  subjects  of  His  Britannick  Majesty,  the  liberty  to  talce 
fish  of  every  kind  on  that  part  of  the  southern  coast  of  Newfoundland  which  extends 
from  Cape  Ray  to  the  Rameau  Islands,  on  the  western  and  northern  coast  of  New- 
foundland, from  the  said  Cape  Ray  to  the  Quin>on  Islands,  on  the  shores  of  the  Magda- 
len Islands,  and  also  on  the  coasts,  bays,  harbours,  and  creeks  from  Mount  Jolly,  on 
the  southern  coast  of  Labrador,  to  and  through  the  Straits  of  Belle  Isle,  and  thence 
northwardly  indefinitely  along  the  coast,  without  prejudice,  however,  to  any  of  the 
exclusive  rights  of  the  Hudson  Bay  Company ;  and  that  the  American  fishermen  shall 
also  have  liberty,  forever,  to  dry  and  cure  fish  in  any  of  the  unsettled  bays,  hirbours, 
and  creeks  of  the  sonthern  part  of  the  coast  of  Newfoundland,  hereabove  described, 
and  of  the  coast  of  Labrador;  but  so  soon  as  the  same  or  any  portion  thereof  shall  be 
settled,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  the  said  fishermen  to  dry  or  care  fish  at  such  portion 
BO  settled,  without  previous  agreement  for  such  purpose  with  the  inhabitants,  proprie- 
tors, or  possessors  of  the  ground.  And  the  United  States  hereby  renounce  f<  rever,  any 
liberty  heretofore  enjoyed  or  claimed  by  the  inhabitants  thereof,  to  take,  dry,  or  cure 
fish  on  or  within  three  marine  miles  of  any  of  the  coasts,  bays,  creeks,  or  harbours  of 
His  Britannick  Majesty's  dominions  in  America  not  included  within  the  above-men- 
tioned limits.  Provided,  however,  that  the  American  fishernien  shall  be  adniilf  ^d  to 
enter  such  bays  or  harbours  for  the  purpose  of  shelter,  and  of  repairing  damages  there- 
in, of  purchasing  wood,  and  of  obtaining  water,  and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever. 
But  they  shall  be  under  snch  restrictions  as  shall  be  necessary  to  prevent  their  taking, 
drying,  or  curing  fish  therein,  or  in  any  other  manner  whatever  abusing  the  privikgea 
hereby  reserved  to  them. 

Subsequeut  to  the  conclusion  of  this  Convention,  in  consequence  of 
numerous  complaints  on  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  of  en 
croachments  on  their  waters  by  American  fishermen,  tbe  United  States 
Government  issued  a  notice  warning  their  subjects  that  they  were  "  to 
observe  strictly  the  limits  assigned  for  talcing,  drying,  ami  curing,  dsli 
by  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States,  under  tbe  Lst  Article  of  the  Con- 
veation  of  the  20th  of  October,  1818,"  a  copy  of  which  was  annexed  to 
the  circular  notice. 

This  was  the  state  of  affairs  until  the  year  1847,  when,  in  consequence 
of  a  petition  addressed  to  the  Queen  by  tlie  Canadian  Parliament,  nego 
tiations  were  opened  between  the  two  governments  for  the  establish- 
ment of  reciprocal  free  trade  between  Canada  and  the  United  States;  I 
and  on  tbe  1st  of  November,  1849,  Sir  H.  Bulwer,  who  was  then  about  j 
to  proceed  to  Washington  as  British  Minister,  was  authorized  to  enter 
into  a  negotiation  by  which  access  to  tbe  fisheries  of  all  tbe  colonies 
(except  Newfoundland,  which  refused  to  consent  on  any  terms)  should  | 
be  given  to  tbe  citizens  of  the  United  States,  in  return  for  reciprocity  j 
of  trade  with  the  United  States,  in  all  natural  productions,  such  as  fish,  { 
wheat,  timber,  &c. 

Tbe  proposal  was  favorably  received  by  the  United  States  Govera- 
ment,  but  some  delay  occurred,  owing  to  tae  death  of  General  Taylor  iul 
1850.  The  new  President,  however,  doubted  whether  it  was  a  properl 
subject  for  a  Treaty,  and  thought  that  it  should  be  done  by  legislation,! 
and  accc  dingly  a  bill  was  brought  in  for  the  purpose.  Tbe  bill  was,! 
however,  thrown  out,  and  from  one  cause  or  another  nothing  was  donel 
from  that  time  until  1852,  when  a  desire  was  evinced  on  the  part  of  tbel 
United  States  Government  to  come  to  an  arrangement  on  the  subject,! 
and  a  draft  convention  having  been  prepared,  a  copy  thereof  was  seDil 
home  by  the  British  Minister  on  tbe  19th  December,  1852,  together  with] 
remarks  made  by  the  President  thereon. 

A  good  deal  of  correspondence  passed  between  the  two  Govern  mentsl 
OH  the  subject,  but.  owing  to  difficulties  connected  with  the  question! 
of  Tariff,  the  United  States  Government  appeared  anxious  to  havetbeS 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


81 


Fisheries  Question  dealt  with  separately,  but  to  this  the  British  Govern- 
would  not  assent.  The  flshiug  season  of  1853  accordingly  opened  with- 
out any  agreement  having  been  come  to  with  the  United  States,  and 
fortunately,  owing  to  the  measures  taken  by  both  Governments  for  the 
preservation  of  British  rights,  came  to  a  close  without  the  occurrence 
of  further  causes  of  dissatisfaction. 

In  the  mean  time,  negotiations  for  a  Treaty  had  been  continued  by 
the  two  Governments ;  and  in  the  month  of  May,  1854,  Lord  Elgin,  who 
was  on  his  way  to  resume  his  duties  as  Governor-General  of  Her  Majes- 
ty's North  American  Provinces,  received  instructions  to  visit  Washing- 
ton, and  to  ascertain  the  views  of  the  United  States  Government,  and 
if  any  favorable  opportunity  presented  itself,  to  conclude  a  Treaty  on 
the  subject.  So  successfully  were  Lord  Elgin's  negotiations  conducted, 
that  in  a  letter  dated  12th  June,  1854,  he  was  able  to  announce  that  he 
had  executed  a  Treaty  with  Mr.  Secretary  Marcy  relative  to  Fisheries 
and  Reciprocity  of  Trade  between  the  United  States  and  the  British 
Provinces  in  North  America.  This  was  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  signed  on 
the  5th  June,  1854,  and  confirmed  by  the  United  States  Senate  on  the 
3d  August  of  the  bame  year.    Its  main  provisions  were  as  follows: 

British  waters  on  the  east  coast  of  North  America  were  thrown  open 
to  United  States  citizens,  and  United  States  waters  north  of  the  3Gth 
degree  of  north  latitude  were  thrown  open  to  British  fishermen;  except- 
ing always  the  salmon  and  shad  fisheries  (which  were  exclusively  re- 
served to  the  subjects  of  each  country),  and  certain  rivers  and  mouths 
of  rivers  to  be  determined  by  a  Commission  to  be  appointed  for  that 
purpose.  Certain  articles  of  produce  of  the  British  Colonies  and  of  the 
United  States  were  admitted  to  each  country,  respectively,  free  of  duty. 
The  Treaty  was  to  remain  in  force  for  ten  years,  and  further  for  twelve 
months  after  either  party  should  have  given  notice  to  the  other  of  its 
wish  to  terminate  the  same. 

Some  difficulty  was  experienced  in  regard  to  Newfoundland,  but  at 
j  length  a  clause  was  agreed  to,  providing  that  if  the  Imperial  Parliament 
[of  Great  Britain,  the  Provincial  Parliament  of  Newfoundland,  and  the 
Congress  of  the  United  States  should  agree  that  Newfoundland  should 
[be  iucluded,all  the  provisions  and  stii)ulationsof  the  Treaty  should  apply 
I  to  that  Colony. 

The  Commission  for  the  designation  of  the  places  reserved  to  each 
[country  from  the  common  right  of  fishing  met  subsequently,  and  was 
Itngaged  for  some  years  in  determining  the  places  to  which  the  exclu- 
Isive  right  of  fishing  applied.  It  is,  however,  unnecessary  here  to  do 
jmoru  than  notice  this  tact,  as  the  reservations  in  question  are  expressly 
[luentioned  under  Article  XX  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington  of  1871. 

From  the  year  1854  until  18G5  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  continued  in 

lorce,  and  no  further  difficulties  appear  to  have  arisen  on  questions  con- 

^lected  with  the  Fisheries ;  but  on  the  17th  of  March  of  that  year,  Mr. 

Ulams,  the  United  States  Minister  in  England,  informed  the  British 

lovernmeut  that  he  was  instructed  to  give  notice  that  at  the  expiration 

)f  twelve  months  from  that  day  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  to  termi- 

Bate.    This  notice  was  given  in  pursuance  of  a  Resolution  of  Congress 

|ipi)roved  by  the  President  of  the  United  States. 

Ettbrts  were  made  on  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  toward 

renewal  of  the  treaty,  but  th^se,  from  various  reasons,  proving  unsuc- 

essful,  the  Treaty  came  to  an  end  on  the  17th  of  March,  1866;  and,  as 

consequence,  the  provisions  of  the  Convention  of  1818  revived  on  the 

lime  day,  and  remain  in  eft'ect  at  the  present  moment,  except  in  so  far 

6  F 


82 


AWARD    OF    TliE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


as  tbey  are  affected  by  tie  stipulations  of  the  Treaty  of  Washingtou  of 
1871. 

In  the  mean  time  a  notice  had  been  issued  by  Lord  Monck  warning  the 
citizens  of  the  United  States  that  their  right  to  fish  in  British  waters 
would  cease  on  the  17th  of  March,  18(JG ;  and  it  became  necessary  to 
consider  what  measures  should  be  adopted  for  the  protection  of  British 
rights.  Her  Majesty's  Government  were  very  desirous  to  prevent,  as 
far  as  possible,  the  injury  and  loss  which  must  be  inflicted  upon  citizeus 
of  the  United  States  by  a  sudden  withdrawal  of  the  privileges  enjoyed 
by  them  for  twelve  years ;  but  with  every  desire  in  this  direction,  tbev 
found  themselves  bound  by  acts  both  of  the  Imperial  and  Colonial  Leg. 
islatures  to  enforce  severe  penalties  upon  all  persons,  not  being  BritisL 
subjects,  who  might  be  found  fishing  within  British  jurisdiction. 

Eventually,  however,  on  the  suggestion  of  Lord  Monck,  it  was  de 
cided  that  American  fishermen  should  be  allowed  during  the  year  18(JC 
to  fish  in  all  provincial  waters  upon  the  payment  of  a  nominal  lic«nse  | 
fee,  to  be  exacted  as  a  formal  recognition  of  right.    This  system,  after  i 
being  maintained  for  four  years,  was  discontinued,  owing  to  the  neglect 
of  American  fishermen  to  provide  themselves  with  licensesj  and  in  1870  j 
it  again  became  necessary  to  take  strict  measures  for  the  enforceujeut  j 
of  British  rights.    Orders  were  given  to  Admiral  Wellesley  to  dispatch  | 
a  sufficient  lorce  to  Canadian  waters  to  insure  the  protection  of  Cana 
dian  fishermen  and  the  maiutenance  of  order,  and  to  instruct  the  seuior  j 
officer  of  such  force  to  cooperate  cordially  with  any  United  States  force 
sent  on  the  same  service.    It  was  also  found  necessary  to  employ  a  local 
marine  police  force  for  the  same  purpose. 

The  result  of  these  measures  was  the  capture  and  for^eirure  of  several  I 
American  vessels  for  infringing  the  provisions  of  tlie  Convention  oil 
1818,  both  by  fishing  within  British  waters  and  by  frequenting  Cana 
dian  ports  for  objects  not  permitted  by  the  Convention,  and  notwitb  I 
standing  the  steps  taken  by  the  British  Government  to  mitigate  as  far 
as  possible  the  stringency  of  the  orders  given  for  the  exclusion  of  Aiuwi  [ 
can  fishermen  from  British  waters,  it  was  found  at  the  close  of  tlicj 
season  of  1870  that  many  seizures  of  American  vessels  had  been  niadd 
by  cruisers  both  of  the  Imperial  and  Dominion  Governments. 

The  difficulties  caused  by  these  untoward  events  subsequently  led  Mj 
the  reopening  of  negotiations  for  the  settlement  of  questions  conuechd 
with  the  Fisheries. 

It  is  unnecessary  here  to  relate  the  circumstances  which  led  to  tlij 
appointment  of  the  Joiut  High  Commission  in  1871.  Suffice  it  to  sari 
that,  towards  the  end  of  1870  Sir  John  Hose,  having  been  commissioueiij 
to  proceed  in  an  unofficial  character  to  Washington  for  the  purpose  oil 
ascertaining  the  views  of  the  United  States  on  the  subject,  was  abkl 
in  the  month  of  February,  187J,  to  announce  that  the  Uuited  StateJ 
Government  were  prepared  to  refer  all  questions  between  the  tm\ 
countries  to  a  Joint  High  Commission. 

The  Commissioners  held  their  first  meeting  at  Washington,  on  tliJ 
27th  February,  1871,  and  the  treaty  was  signed  on  the  8th  of  Mayftf 
the  same  year. 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


83 


FISHERY  ART-;.LES  OF  THE   TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON. 

Tiie  articles  in  this  treaty  relating  to  the  Fisheries,  and  in  virtue  of 
wliich  this  commission  is  constitnted,  are  Articles  XVIII,  XIX,  XX, 
XXr,  XXir,  XXIII,  XXIV,  XXV,  XXXIl,  and  XXXIir.  They  are 
as  follows : 

AUTICLK  XVIII. 

It  is  aRreert  by  the  High  Contracting  Parties,  that  in  addition  to  the  liberty  secnred 
to  the  United  States  ti-*hernien  by  toe  Convention  l)etween  Great  Britain  and  the 
I'nited  States,  signed  at  London  on  the  20th  day  of  October,  1818,  of  taking,  curing, 
and  drying  fish  on  certain  coasts  of  tlie  Britisli  North  American  Colonies  therein  de- 
lined,  the  Inhabitants  of  the  United  States  shall  have,  in  common  with  the  subjects  of 
Her  Britannic  Mnjcsty,  the  liberty,  for  the  term  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII 
of  this  treaty,  to  take'  lish  of  every  kind,  except  shell-Hsh,  on  the  sea-coasts  and  shores, 
and  in  the  b.ays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  the  Provinces  of  Quebec,  Nova  Scotia,  and 
New  Brunswick,  and  the  Colony  of  Prince  Edward's  Island,  and  of  the  several  islands 
thereunto  abjacent,  without  being  restricted  to  any  distance  from  the  shore,  with  per- 
mission to  land  upon  the  said  coasts  and  shores  and  islands,  and  also  upon  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands,  for  the  purpose  of  drying  their  nets  aud  curing  their  fish  ;  provided  that, 
iu  so  <loiug,  they  do  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  private  property,  or  with  British 
tishernien,  iu  the  peaceable  use  of  any  part  of  the  said  coasts  lu  their  occupancy  for 
the  same  purpose. 

It  is  understood  that  the  above-mentioned  liberty  applies  solely  to  the  sea  fishery, 
aud  that  the  salmon  and  shad  tisheries  and  all  other  fisheries  iu  rivers  aud  the  mouth 
of  rivers,  are  hereby  reserved  exclusively  for  British  lishernien. 

Aarici.E  XIX. 

It  is  agn>ed  by  the  High  Jonlr.aoting  Parties  that  British  subjects  shall  have,  in 
common  with  the  ci'iz^ns  of  the  United  States,  the  liberty,  for  the  term  of  years  men- 
tioned in  Article  XXXIII  of  this  treaty,  to  take  fish  of  every  kind,  except  shell-tish, 
ou  the  eastern  sea  coasts  and  shores  of  the  United  States  north  of  the  thirty-ninth 
l)arallfl  of  north  latitude,  aud  on  the  shores  of  the  several  islands  thereunto  adjacent, 
and  in  the  Imys,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  the  said  sea-coasts  anil  shores  of  the  IJuited 
States  and  of  the  said  islands,  without  being  restricted  to  any  distance  from  the  shore, 
with  permission  to  laiul  upon  the  said  coasts  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  islands 
ui:>resai(l,  for  the  purpose  of  drying  their  nets  and  curing  their  fish;  i)rovi<lod  that,  in 
so  <.oiiig,  they  do  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  private  property,  or  with  the  tisher- 
iiie!'  i!J'  the  United  States,  in  the  peaceable  use  of  any  part  of  the  said  coasts  in  their 
occuiiiuicy  for  the  same  purpose. 

jt  is  understood  that  the  al>ovo-mentioued  liberty  applies  solely  to  the  soa  fishery, 
and  that  salmon  and  shad  fisheries,  and  all  other  fisheries  in  rivers  and  mouths  of  riv- 
ers, are  hereby  reserved  exclusively  for  fishermen  of  the  United  States. 

Aurici.K  XX. 


[e  8tU  ot  3Iay  4 


It  is  agreed  that  the  pl.accs  designated  by  the  Commissioners  appointed  under  the 
1st  Article  of  the  treaty  between  Great  Britain  aud  the  United  States,  concluded  at 
Washiugton  on  the  5th  of  .June,  1854,  ui>on  the  coasts  of  Her  Britanuic  Majesty's  Do- 
minions aud  the  United  States,  as  places  reserved  from  the  common  right  of  fishing 
under  that  treat)',  shall  be  regarded  as  in  like  manner  reserved  frotn  the  common 
right  of  tisbing  under  the  preceding  articles.     la  case  any  question  should  arise  be- 
tween the  Governments  of  the  United  States  and  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  as  to  the 
I  cuuimou  right  of  fishing  in  places  not  thus  designated  as  reserved,  it  is  agreed  that  a 
I  ConiinisNioii  shall  be  appointed  to  designate  sncii  places,  and  shall  bo  constituted  iu 
I  tlio  same  manner,  aiul  have  the  same  powers,  duties,  and  authority  as  the  Commission 
apiiointed  under  the  said  1st  Article  of  the  treaty  of  thj  5th  of  Juno,  I85i. 


AUTICI.K  XXI. 


It  is  agreed  that,  for  the  term  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII  of  this  treaty, 

Itish-oil  aud  Hsh  of  all  kinds  (except  tish  of  the  inland  lakes  and  of  the  rivers  falling 

liiito  them,  and  except  lish  preserved  in  oil),  being  the  produce  of  the  fisheries  of  the 

iriiited  .States,  or  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  or  of  Prince  Edward's  Island,  shall  be 

admitted  into  each  country  respectively  free  of  duty. 


84 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Article  XXII. 


If 


Inasmuch  as  it  ia  asserted  by  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  that  the 
privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Article  XVIII  of  this 
treaty  are  of  greater  value  than  those  accorded  by  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  of  this 
treaty  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  and  this  assertion  is  not  admitted  by 
the  Government  of  the  United  States,  it  is  further  agreed  that  Commissioners  shall  be 
appointed  to  determine,  having  resard  to  the  privileges  accorded  by  the  United  States 
to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  as  stated  in  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  of  this 
treaty,  the  amount  of  auy  compensation  which,  in  their  opinion,  ought  to  be  paid  by 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  iu 
return  for  the  privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Article 
XVIII  of  this  treaty  ;  and  that  any  sum  of  money  which  the  said  Commissioners  may 
BO  award  shall  be  paid  by  the  United  States  Government,  in  a  gross  sum,  within 
twelve  months  after  such  award  shall  have  been  given. 

Articlk  XXHI. 

The  Commissioners  referred  to  in  the  preceding  article  shall  be  appointed  in  tbo  fol- 
lowing manner,  that  is  to  say;  One  Commissioner  shall  be  named  by  Her  Britannic 
Majesty,  one  by  the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  a  third  by  Her  Britannic  Maj- 
esty and  the  President  of  the  United  States  conjointly;  aud  in  case  the  third  Cominiti- 
sioner  shall  not  have  been  so  named  within  a  period  of  three  months  from  the  date 
when  this  article  shall  take  effect,  then  the  third  Commissioner  shall  be  named  by  the 
Representative  at  London  of  His  Majesty  the  Emperor  of  Austria  and  King  of  ilun- 
gary.  In  case  of  the  death,  absence,  or  incapacity  of  any  Commissioner,  or  in  the 
event  of  any  Commissioner  omitting  or  ceasing  to  act,  the  vacancy  shall  be  filled  io 
the  manner  hereinbefore  provided  for  making  the  original  appointment,  the  period  of 
three  months  in  case  of  such  snbstitution  being  calculated  from  the  date  of  the  hap- 
pening of  the  vacancy. 

The  Commissioners  so  named  shall  meet  in  the  city  of  Halifax,  in  the  Province  o! 
Nova  Scotia,  at  the  earliest  convenient  period  after  they  have  been  respectively  named, 
and  shall,  before  proceeding  to  auy  business,  make  and  subscribe  a  solemn  declaratioo 
that  they  will  impartially  and  carefully  examine  and  decide  the  matters  referred  to  j 
them  to  the  best  of  their  judgment,  and  according  to  justice  and  equity;  and  aucl 
declaration  shall  be  entered  on  the  record  of  their  proceedings. 

Each  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  shall  also  name  one  person  to  attend  the  Com- 
mission as  its  Agent,  to  represent  it  generally  in  all  matters  connected  with  theCoiu- 
mission. 

Article  XXIV. 


The  proceedings  shall  be  conducted  in  such  order  as  the  Commissioners.  a]>pninte(l  j 
under  Articles  XXII  aud  XXHI  of  this  treaty,  shall  determine.    They  shall  be  bound  I 
to  receive  such  oral  or  written  testimony  as  either  government  may  present.    If  either  | 
party  shall  olfer  oral  testimony,  the  other  party  shall  have  the  right  of  cross-examina- 
tion, under  such  rules  as  the  Commissioners  shall  prescribe. 

If  in  the  case  submitted  to  the  Commissioners  either  party  shall  have  specified  oil 
alluded  to  any  report  or  document  in  its  own  exclusive  possession,  without  annexing  j 
a  copy,  such  party  shall  be  bound,  if  the  other  party  thinks  proper  to  apply  for  it,  to  I 
furnish  that  party  with  a  copy  thereof ;  and  either  party  may  call  upon  the  other, | 
through  the  Commissioners,  to  produce  the  originals  or  certitied  copies  of  any  papers  I 
adduced  as  evidence,  giving  in  each  instance  such  reasonable  notice  as  the  Commis^| 
sioners  ma^  require. 

The  case  on  either  side  shall  be  closed  within  a  period  of  six  months  from  the  date  I 
of  the  organization  of  the  Commission,  and  the  Commissioners  shall  be  requested  tol 

give  their  award  as  soon  as  possible  thereafter.    The  aforesaid  period  of  six  months  niajl 
e  extended  for  three  mouths  iu  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  among  the  Commissiouf 
ers  under  the  circumstances  contemplated  ia  Article  XXHI  of  this  treaty. 

Article  XXV. 

The  Commissioners  shall  keep  an  accurate  record  and  correct  minutes  or  notes  of  alll 
their  proceedings,  tvith  the  dates  thereof,  and  may  appoint  and  employ  a  Secretar;! 
and  any  other  necessary  officer  or  officers  to  assist  them  iu  the  trausactiou  of  the  bu8i| 
ness  which  may  come  before  them. 

Each  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  shall  pay  its  own  Commissioner  and  Agent  oil 
Counsel ;  all  other  expenses  shall  be  defrayed  by  the  two  governments  in  equal  moie| 
ties. 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


85 


AllTICLK  XXXII. 

It  is  further  agreed,  that  the  provisions  and  stipulations  of  Articles  XVIII  to  XXV 
of  this  treaty,  inclusive,  suall  extend  to  the  Colony  of  Newfoundland,  so  far  as  they  are 
appliL'iible.  But  if  the  Imperial  Parliament,  the  Legislature  of  Newfoundland,  or  the 
Coni^ress  of  the  United  States,  shall  not  embrace  the  Colony  of  Newfoundland  in  their 
laws  enacted  for  carrying  the  foregoing  articles  into  effect,  then  this  article  shall  be  of 
110  effect,  but  the  omission  to  make  provision  by  law  to  give  it  oft'ect,  by  either  of  the 
It'nisirttivo  bodios  nforesnid,  shall  not  in  any  way  impair  any  other  articles  of  this 

treaty. 

AiniCLK  XXXIII. 

The  foregoing  Articles  XVIII  to  XXV,  inclusive,  and  Article  XXX,  of  this  treaty 
Hliall  take  effect  as  soon  as  the  laws  required  to  carry  them  into  operation  shall  have 
Itueu  passed  by  tlie  Imperial  Parliament  of  Great  Britain,  by  the  Parliament  of  Canada, 
and  by  the  Legislature  of  Prince  Edward's  Island  on  the  one  hand,  and  by  the  Congress 
of  the  United  States  on  the  other.  Such  assent  having  been  given,  the  said  articles 
sliall  remain  in  force  for  the  period  of  ten  years  from  the  date  at  which  they  may  come 
into  operation ;  and  further,  until  the  expiration  of  two  years  after  either  of  the  High 
Contracting  Parties  shall  have  given  notice  to  the  other  of  its  wish  to  terminate  the 
Hiime;  each  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  being  at  liberty  to  give  snch  notice  to  the 
other  at  the  end  of  the  said  period  of  ten  years,  or  at  any  time  afterward. 

The  acts  necessary  to  enable  these  articles  to  be  carrieil  into  effect 
were  passed  by  the  Imperial  Parliament  of  Great  Britain  on  the  6th 
August,  1872;  by  the  parliament  of  Canada  on  the  14th  June,  1872 ;  by 
the  legislature  of  Prince  Edward  Island  (which  did  not  <at  that  time 
form  part  of  tha  Dominion)  on  the  29th  June,  1872 ;  and  by  the  United 
States  Congress  on  the  25th  of  February,  1873.  A  proclamation,  dated 
Washington,  7th  June,  1873,  fixes  the  Ist  of  July  of  that  year  as  the  day 
I  on  which  these  articles  should  come  formally  into  operation. 

Some  difficulties  having  arisen  in  the  case  of  Newfoundland,  it  was  not 
j  until  the  28th  of  March,  1874,  that  the  necessary  act  was  passed  by  that 
colony;  and  a  proclamation  issued  on  the  29th  of  May,  of  the  same 
[year,  fixed  the  Ist  day  of  June,  1874,  as  the  day  on  which  the  Fishery 
[Articles  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  so  far  as  they  relate  to  Newfonnd- 
[laud,  should  come  into  effect. 

In  the  case  of  Canada,  it  was  deemed  advisable  to  admit  American 
[fishermen  to  the  practical  use  of  the  privileges  specified  in  tha  treaty 
jiu  advance  of  the  formal  legislative  acts  necessary  for  that  purpose. 
IAu  official  communication  to  that  effect  was  made  early  in  1873,  and  by 
|a  circular  from  the  United  States  Treasury  Department,  dated  1st  April, 
1873,  American  fishermea  at  once  availed  themselves  of  the  freedom  of 
Canadian  inshore  waters.  This  was  fitly  acknowledged  by  the  United 
States  Government  as  "a  liberal  and  friendly "  act  on  the  part  of  the 
dominion  Government.  A  similar  concession  had  been  previously  made 
by  the  government  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  who  admitted  American 
5sliermeu  to  the  practical  freedom  of  their  waters  on  the  24th  of  July, 
1871. 

The  Treaty  of  Washington  having  been  ratified,  it  became  necessary 
^0  take  steps  for  the  constitution  of  the  Commission  api)ointed  to  meet 
It  Halifax,  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  the  treaty,  and  in  the  mean 
rhile.  Tier  Majesty's  Government  having  appointed  their  Agent  to  the 
pommission,  he  proceeded  to  Washington,  and  some  negotiations  were 
entered  into  with  a  view  to  substitute  an  arrangement  with  respect  to 
reciprocal  free  trade  between  Canada  and  the  United  States,  for  the 
pard  of  the  Commissioners,  as  provided  under  Article  XXII  of  the 
reaty ;  it  being  always  distinctly  understood  that,  in  case  of  the  failure 
H'  such  negotiations,  the  rights  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  with  re- 
])ect  to  the  appointment  of  the  Commission  should  in  no  way  be  pre- 
?diced.    These  negotiations  having  led  to  no  result,  it  became  neces- 


86 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERy   COMMISSION. 


PI' 


sary  to  revert  to  the  terms  of  the  treaty,  and  to  take  steps  for  the  con- 
stitution of  the  Commission  in  tlie  manner  prescribed  by  it. 

Having  thus  stated  the  circumstances  which  led  to  the  conclusion  of 
the  Fishery  Articles  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  having  recited  those 
articles  and  enumerated  the  legislative  enactments  which  have  been 
passed  for  the  purpose  of  rendering  them  affective,  it  is  submitted  that, 
in  order  to  estimate  the  advantages  thereby  derived  respectively  by 
subjects  of  the  United  States  and  of  Great  Britain,  the  following  basis 
is  the  only  one  which  it  is  possible  to  adopt  under  the  terms  of  the  first 
portion  of  Article  XVIII  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  of  1871,  viz: 
That  the  value  of  the  privileges  granted  to  each  country  respectively  by 
Articles  XVIII,  XIX,  and  XXI  of  that  treaty,  tchich  tcere  not  enjoyed 
tinder  the  Ist  Article  of  the  Convention  of  the  20th  October,  1818,  is  that 
which  this  Commission  is  constituted  to  determine. 

Article  I  of  the  Convention  of  the  20th  October,  1818,  provides  that— 

Tbe  inhabitants  of  the  United  States  shall  have  forever,  in  common  with  the  sub- 
jects of  His  Britannic  Majesty,  the  liberty  to  take  (ish  of  every  kind  on  that  part  of 
the  southern  coast  of  Newfoundland  which  extends  from  Cape  Kay  to  the  Rameau 
Islands,  on  the  western  and  northern  coast  of  Newfoundland,  from  the  said  Cape  Ray 
to  the  Quirpon  Islands,  on  tbe  shores  of  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  also  on  the  coasts, 
bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  from  Mount  Joly,  on  the  southern  coast  of  Labrador,  to  and 
through  the  Straits  of  Belle  Isle,  and  thence  northwardly  iiidelinitely  along  the  coast; 
without  prejudice,  however,  to  any  of  the  exclusive  rights  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com- 
pany ;  and  that  the  American  lishermen  shall  also  have  liberty  forever  to  dry  and  euro 
fish  in  any  of  the  unsettled  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  the  southern  part  of  the  coast 
of  Newfoundland  hereabove  described,  and  the  coast  of  Labrador ;  but  so  soon  as  tbe 
same,  or  any  portion  thereof,  shall  be  settled,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  the  said  fislier- 
men  to  dry  or  cure  fish  at  such  portions  so  settled  without  previous  agreement  for 
such  purpose  with  the  inhabitants,  proprietors,  or  possessors  of  the  ground.  And  the 
United  States  hereby  renounce  forever  any  liberty  heretofore  enjoyed  or  claimed  by 
the  Inhabitants  thereof  to  take,  dry,  or  cure  fish  on  or  within  three  marine  miles  of 
any  of  tho  coasts,  bays,  creeks,  or  harbors  of  His  Britannic  Majesty's  dominions  iti 
America  not  included  within  the  above-mentioned  limits  :  Provided,  however,  That  the 
American  fishermen  shall  be  admitted  to  enter  such  bays  or  harbors  for  the  purpose  of 
shelter,  and  of  repairing  damages  therein,  of  purchasing  wood,  and  of  obtaining  water, 
and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever.  But  they  shall  be  under  such  restrictions  as  may 
be  necessary  to  prevent  their  taking,  drying,  or  curing  lish  therein,,  or  in  any  other 
manner  whatever  abusing  the  privileges  hereby  reserved  to  them. 

Such  was  the  respective  position  of  each  country  under  the  Conven- 
tion of  1818  on  matters  connected  with  the  fisheries;  and  it  now  remains 
to  state  precisely  what  additional  liberties  are  acquired  by  each  under 
the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

Article  XVIII  and  XXI  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington  superadd  to  tbe 
privileges  conferred  upon  United  States  citizens  by  the  Convention  of 
1818— 

(1.)  The  liberty  to  take  fish  of  every  kind  except  shell-fish  on  the  sea-coasts  and 
shores,  and  in  the  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks,  of  the  provinces  of  Quebec,  Nova  Scotia, 
and  New  Brunswick,  and  the  colony  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  of  the  several  islands 
thereunto  adjacent,  without  being  restricted  io  any  distance  from  the  shore,  with  per- 
mission to  land  upon  tbe  said  coasts  and  shores  and  islands,  and  also  upon  the  Magda- 
len Islands,  for  the  purpose  of  drying  their  nets  or  curing  their  fish :  Provided,  That  in  I 
so  doing  they  do  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  private  property  or  with  British 
fishermen  in  the  peaceable  use  of  any  part  of  the  said  coasts  in  their  occupancy  for  the  ( 
same  purpose. 

It  is  understood  that  the  above-mentioned  liberty  applies  solely  to  the  sea-fishery, 
and  that  the  salmon  and  shad  fisheries,  and  all  other  fisheries  in  rivers  and  the  mouths  | 
of  rivers,  are  hereby  reserved  exclusively  for  British  fishermen. 

(2.)  The  admission  into  Canada  of  "  fish-oil  and  fish  of  all  kinds  (except  fish  of  the] 
inland  lakes  and  of  the  rivers  falling  into  them,  and  except  fish  preserved  in  oil),  being  I 
the  produce  of  the  fisheries  of  the  United  States,"  free  of  duty.  | 

\'3.)  The  enjoyment  of  these  privileges  to  continue  during  a  period  of  twelve  yearsl 
certain.  r 

Similar  privileges  are  granted  by  Article  XXXII  in  regard  to  the  colony  of  New- 
oundland. 


the  con- 

lusion  of 
tcd  those 
iive  been 
itetl  tbat, 
lively  by 
•ing  basis 
if  tl»e  first 
1871,  viz: 
etively  by 
%ot  enjoyed 
L8, is  that 

des  tbat— 

vitb  tbe  sub- 
tUat  part  of 
the  Rani«'an 

aid  Cape  Ray 

m  tbe  coasts, 

irador,  to  and 

itig  tbe  coast; 

m'8  Bay  Com- 

0  dry  and  cure 

rt  of  tbe  coast 

so  soon  as  the 

be  said  fisber- 

agreement  for 

ind.    And  the 
or  claimed  by 

aarine  miles  of 

a  dominions  ui 

vever,  That  the 
tbe  purpose  ot 
)taining  water, 
ictions  as  may 
)r  in  any  other 

the  (Jonven- 
ow  remains 
each  under 

)eradd  to  tbe 
onventiou  of 

sea-coasts  and 
c,  Nova  Scotia, 
several  islautls 
bore,  with  per- 
>ou  the  Magda- 
iw Wed,  That  in 
^r  with  British 
cupancy  for  the 

Ithe  sea-Rshery, 
lind  the  mouths  I 

Lpt  fish  of  the! 
^d  in  oil),  being  I 

jf  twelve  yean  I 

Icolony  of  New-| 


57° 


56' 

rrrr- 


1 


'1 


66' 


65* 


6V 


:,2'V~ 


■^ 


..     N 


.jh'':i^sL^*ii^ 


T 


E 


c 


^s 


i- 


^*i=:^^ 


,— •* 


II  V  lAIIJt 


G  TJ  J.  F 


Oi 


^^Alt}» 


^-.,.-  ^  «..^...  *,.6iM  t'r.m^' 


c/' 


.^ 


,t„MI  '^' 


DCLLI     aANK 


M>^ 


// 


.■JH^u 


/i '  ]>4  A-x^ 


OWw,*"" 


^--j^";;.'"--^w^— '*^*-*-^-'-  -<^*.Av^^ 


'tJuJ.^- 


,-'• 


47" 


^"^  AJ|^ 


!4«' 


ATI^^STTIC    COASTS  OP  CANADA 

AND     WITH  I  N     TMt 

GULF    OF    ST    LAWRENCE. 


^^ovc  KS  T  f-^ 


w 


**-  BKJDtLLI     (ANN 


M-»^ 


/' 


44° 


■Lf     M   .¥■,. 

■  ANI 


;;SAMBttO. 

.BANK..- 


6»° 


66° 


GS' 


tJ^" 


63° 


m'^i^. 


M 


■m 


AWARD    OF    tup:    IMHIIEIIY    COMMISSION. 


87 


'  .111 


Articl»'s  XIX  and  XXI  conrcr  tlui  followiii;,'  privilc^^cs  upon  Uritish 
Siilijccts  : 

(I.)  Tlii>  liUcrty  {•>  t;ikti  lisli  ot'ovtMy  kind,  oxcopt  Mhcll-lisli,  on  tli«  eastern  Boji-coasU 
Ln<l  sliorrM  of  tlif  I'liifcd  Si.ifc'i  norlli  of  tlm  fliirly-iiiiitli  piirallfl  of  iiortli  liififiide,  atul 
Lu  till' shores  of  tilt"  Ht'vcnil  isliindH  tliiTcmito  adjin'ciit,  and  in  tiic  l)ays.  liarliors,  and 
Iri'i'k-*  of  tlit>  Haid  Hiia<  iiait  and  Mlion's  of  tin^  Unit(<d'S:at<'s  and  of  tlio  said  islands, 
hiiliont  iii'in;^  restrictt'd  to  any  distance  from  the  shore,  with  iiemiission  to  land  upoix 
llie  sai"'  coasts  of  the  I'nited  Sialex,  ami  of  the  islands  atni  csaid,  for  the  piirpos«  of 
Ir.viii;;  Mie'r  nets  and  enrini;  their  tish  :  I'l-oriilrd,  'I'iiat  in  so  doin;;  they  do  not  inter- 
►cie  witii  the  riiihts  (if  private  jiroiierty  or  with  the  tisliermen  of  the  I'nited  States  ia 
Ihe  peae(>ahle  nst!  of  any  jiart  of  llii;  said  coast  in  their  occnii.incy  l\>r  tlie  same  jtur- 
(ise. 

It  is  understood  that  the  ahove-meni ioneil  liherty  a]ii>lies  solely  to  tlu>  sea-lishcry, 
liid  that  salmon  and  shad  llsherii's,  and  all  other  lisheries,  in  livers  and  inunths  uf 
fivers,  are  InMtdty  r«'served  escdnsively  for  lishermen  of  the  I'nited  Slates. 

('.'.)  Till' adinisHion  into  the  I'nited  States  of  "  fish-oil  and  lish  of  all  kinds  (except 
lish  of  inland    lakes  and  of  the  ii\i'is  faliinji    into  them,  and  except  lish  preserved  iu 
[)ir.  iiein^j  the  produce  of  the  fisheries  of  the  dominion  ol°(.'anada  orof  rrince  Kdwaril 
,-ianil."  free  ot  duly. 

['.'>.)  'I'he  enjoyment  of  these  pri vile;jes  to  conl iniu"  diirinj;  a  peiiodof  j'i  years  cer- 
tain. 

.\rlicle  XXXII  extends  the  above-nieiitioned  privile^^es,  so  tar  as  they  aro  applicahlc 
^u  the  colony  of  Ne\\  foiindland. 

I'poii  tliis  basis  (Ireat  liiitaiii  assorts  tliat  the  piivilo<;(>s  spocilied  iti 
lArticU'  XVIII  of  tlic  Tieaty  of  Wasliiii;;t()ii  of  Stli   May,  1S71,  exceed 
\\i  value  tlio  piivil(';j;t's  speeilied  in  Aitieles  XIX  and  XXI.     This  asser- 
tion is  nuule  upon   the  tollo\viii;,j  j^rontids,  \\hi(!h,  for  convenience  of 
ii';,Miinent,  liave  been  <livid»>d  into  two  paits.     Pait  I  deals  exclusively 
vith  the  case  of  the  Doniinion  of  Canada.     Part   II  ileals  exclusively 
Ivitli  the  case  of  the  i.-olonv  of  Xewfoundland. 


I 


I'AUr  1. -CANADA. 


ClIArTKR   I. — Krhnt  ami  I'dlur  of  Ciinmlian  Jisherics. 

It  will  probably  assist  the  Commission  in  arrivinfr  at  a  just  estimation 
lof  the  intrinsic  worth  of  the  concurrent  lishin;;  privilcfjes  accorded  to 
h'liited  Stat«'s  eiti/ens  l)y  the  Treaty  of  Washine;ton  to  refer  brietly  to 
(tlif  extent  and  value  of  the  sea  coast;  fisheries  of  the  maritime  provinces 

of  Canada,  as  evidenced  in  part  by  the  jirotitalile  operations  of  Uritish 
llislicrmeii. 

The  districts  within  whU'.h  Hritisli  subjects  carry  on  lishiny-  on  the 
[foasts.and  iu  the  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  Canada,  extend  from  the 
p'.iiy  of  Fundy  to  the  C.ulf  of  tSaint  Lawrence,  inclusive.  The  superficial 
(area  of  these  extensive  tlshin;;  p;i<^<'nds.  as  shown  on  the  accompanyinjr 
[iniip,  comprises  many  thonsands  of  stjiiare  miles,  forming  the  home  of 
lii  ;;icat  variety  of  the  most  prolitlc  and  valuable  of  sealish,  the  capture 

of  which  contributes  in  an  important  de<rree  to  lUitish  and  .\mericau 
{('oinmerce,  ami  supplies  vast  «piantities  of  food  to  several  millions  of 
[people.  The  chief  of  these  tish,  in  the  pursuit  of  which  British  subjects 
land  Ciiitetl  States  «'iti/.ens  now  participate  iu  common  under  treaty  ar- 

raiiocmcnts,  are  mackerel,  codllsh,  herriiijr,  halilmt,  haddock,  hake,  pol- 
[lack,  and  manv  of  the  smaller  varieties  taken  prim-ipally  for  bait. 

It  appears  by  the  subjoined  statement  (Appendix  A)  that  the  produce 
[of  these  ilsheries  caujjht  by  British  subjects  has  j^reatly  increased  <luring 
Iseveii  years  past.  Their  steady  development  and  increasinj;  wealth,  as 
iKliown  by  this  return,  proves'that  a  very  considerable  amount  of  in- 
Idnstry  and  enterprise  i.s  embarked  therein,  and  also  that  they  are  capable 
[of  Rtiil  further  expansion.    Tliis  marked  improvement  in  their  condition 

land  yield  tor  the  period  specitled  in  the  table  is  au  impi)rtant  oircum- 


1    '' 


1 

1" 


J 


88 


AWARD    OF    Tin:    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


ltfe>!»S 


stance  in  relation  to  the  present  inquiry.  It  shows  that,  as  an  aritclo 
of  commerce  and  a  source  of  food,  their  actual  jiroductiveness  keeps 
pace  with  the  yearly  increjusin^  demand  nia«le  on  theni  for  all  the  pur- 
poses of  foreign  and  domestic  trade  aiul  of  local  consumption.  Also. 
they  are  now  of  much  greater  value  than  they  were  during  the  existence 
of  the  reciprocity  treaty.  The  adnnssion  of  Anieriean  lishermen  to  con 
current  rights  under  the  Treaty  of  Washington  is,  tln'refore,  in  every 
respect  highly  advantagcijus  to  the  I'nitetl  States  citizens. 

CnArTi:u  II. — Adrnufojfcs  derived  hit  I'uHed  Stafis  eitizvns. 

1.   liberty  of  Jishimj  in  British  tcoterft. 

Liberty  to  prosecute  freely  the  sea  tislu'ries  ''on  the  roasts  and  shore- 
and  in  the  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks''  of  C'atiada  is  in  itself  a  very  valiis 
able  concession  to  United  States  citizens.  It  concciles  the  common  use 
of  extensive  and  productive  fishing  grounds,  which  are  readily  access! 
ble  to  American  lishermen,  and  are  advantageously  situated  as  regards 
their  home  mark«'t.  The  full  value  of  thi.-.  important  concession  can  be 
but  itnperfectly  determined  b>  reference  merely  to  the  precise  numl)ei 
of  vessels  and  fishermen  engaged  in  the  business  of  tishing  in  thesi' 
waters,  or  to  the  exact  (juantity  of  fish  taken  therefrom  in  the  cour.se  oi 
each  successive  season.  Doubtless  the  amt)unt  of  capital  thus  invested, 
the  enn»loyment  aflforded,  the  trade  and  industry  tliereby  promoteil,  and 
the  necessary  food  supplie<l  will  be  Justly  regarded  by  the  Comndssioti 
as  forming  material  elements  in  the  calculation  of  probable  benefits  de- 
rived by  tiie  American  nation  ;  but  as  it  is  desirable  to  refer  to  such 
specific  data  as  may  fairly  establish  tin*  equitable  foundation  an«l  prac 
tical  character  of  the  present  claim,  we  propose  to  show,  by  such  evi 
dence  as  the  case  admits — 

(1)  The  number  of  United  States  fishing-vessels  frecpienting  theso 
waters ; 

(-)  The  kinds  and  <piantities  of  fish  it  is  customary  for  theni  to  take. 
an<l  the  profits  accruing  to  tluMu  thereby  ; 

(3)  The  amount  of  capital  embarked  in  these  operations,  and  other 
advantages  accruing  to  United  States  citizens  thereby. 

First.  The  ofiicial  records  of  the  United  States  (Jovernment  show 
that  in  1S(»S  the  '•enrolled  and  licensed"  ve.s.sels  engage«l  in  the  cod  and 
mackerel  fisheries  numbered  li,lil.'(( ;  in  18(»'.>  there  were  1,7H  vessels  so 
employed  ;  in  ISTO  their  numbers  were  LV-1)2;  in  1871  there  were  -,!-'' 
ve.s.sels  thus  engaged  ;  and  in  1872  then;  were  L',.'5S."». 

The  classification  of  decked  fishing-ves.sels  in  the  United  States  is  con 
fined  nominally  to  the  cod  and  mackerel  fisheries,  but  no  doubt  includes 
such  ves.«<els  as  enibark  also  in  tin*  herring,  halibut,  hathlock,  hakf. 
pollack,  and  bait  fisherii's  on  the  <'oasts  of  (Janada.  Thero  are  certainly 
fluctuations  from  year  to  year  in  the  number  of  ves.sels engaged,  as  well 
as  in  the  8U<*cess  of  their  respective  voyages,  but  there  is  a  remarkable 
concurrence  in  the  stateujents  ma<le  by  various  informants  that  an  av«  r 
age  number,  ranging  between  70()  and  1,'J0(),  of  the  United  States  vessels 
have  annually  resorted  to  Hritish  waters  tor  fishing  purpo.ses  for  many 
years  past. 

These  vessels  are  variously  occupied  on  the  shores  of  Canada  through 
out  each  sea.son.  Some  of  them  resort  to  the  (lulf  of  Saint  Lawrenci' 
from  early  spring  time  to  late  autumn  in  pursuit  of  cod,  mackerel,  her- 
rings, and  halibut.  Others  frequent  the  western  coast  of  Nova  Scoti.i 
and  the  Bay  of  Fundy  throughout  the  season.  During  the  existence  ot 
the  Ueciprocity  Treaty,  when  free  access  was  afforded  to  British  waters. 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


8a 


it  was  admitted  by  an  American  anthority,  Mr.  E.  11.  Derby,  that  about 
0(M>  of  these  vessels  fished  every  year  for  mackerel  alone  on  the  gulf 
coasts  of  Canada;  and  it  is  probable  that  as  many  more  lished  alonpr 
the  Atlantic  coasts  of  Canada,  and  also  on  the  banks  and  ledges  off 
sliore.  Captain  S(!ott,  If.  N.,  commanding  the  marine  police,  and  Cap- 
titiii  Nickerson,  of  the  same  force,  both  state  that  as  many  as  1,200 
United  States  lisliing-vesscls  have  been  known  to  |>a8s  through  the  Gut 
of  Caiiso  in  a  single  season.  Inspector  Venning  states  that  during  the 
cxisteiuie  of  the  Iteeiprocity  Treaty  the  annual  number  was  from  1,200 
to  l,r)(IO.  The  executive  council  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  in  a  minute 
dated  17th  Eebruary,  1874,  states  that  1,000  sail  of  United  States  ves- 
sels were  engaged  in  the  mackerel  fishery  alone  in  the  year  1872.  The 
tornier  commander  of  the  government  cruiser  La  Canadienne,  in  his  re- 
l)ort  for  18(io,  estimates  that  there  were  in  that  year  from  1,(»50  to  1,200 
American  vessels  engaged  exclusively  in  the  nuickerel  fishery  of  the  Gulf 
of  St.  Lawrence.  Subse<piently,  in  1800,  the  a(!tual  number  of  United 
States  vessels  duly  license«t  by  the  Canadian  Governujent,  on  passing 
through  the  Gut  of  Canso  for  the  in.shore  mackerel  fisheries,  was  454  as 
shown  by  ollicial  returns  of  the  local  collectors  of  customs.  The  exact 
iiuinber  of  other  vessels  which  then  refused  to  take  out  licenses  on  the 
pretext  that  they  intended  fishing  in  outside  waters,  was  not,  of  course, 
recorded;  but  we  are  justified  in  assuming  from  th«^  observations  of 
•  lualified  persons,  whose  oral  or  written  testimony  will  be  ofiored  to  the 
("oiiiniission  if  required,  that  at  least  000  more  wore  also  engaged  in  the 
mackerel  and  other  fisheries  in  British  waters. 

It  is  stated  in  the  annual  report  of  the  United  States  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  for  1871  that  "The  «listrict  of  Gloucester  is  most  extensively 
engaged  in  this  occupation;  her  cod  and  mackerel  fieet,  amounting  to 
."(IS  vessels,  28,501)  tons,  showing  an  increase  of  07  vessels  since  .luue 
^50,  1870.*'  The  vsame  authority  states  in  the  annual  re|)ort  for  1"72  that 
"  the  tonnage  employed  in  the  coil  and  mackerel  fisheries  has  increased 
somewhat  for  the  past  three  years." 

Thirty-nine  new  fishing-vessels  were  built  at  the  port  of  Gloutjcstor, 
Mass.,  alone,  in  1874,  and  about  lifty  more  were  to  be  built  in  the 
next  following  year ;  and  as  there  an?  several  other  important  out- 
titling  ports  in  the  same  State,  besides  many  others  in  the  States  o*" 
Maine,  New  Hampshire,  lihode  Islanil,  Connecticut,  and  New  York,  it 
is  tair  to  infer  that  a  (torresponding  increase  in  the  fishing-fieet  from 
tliese  numerous  ports  will  also  take  place  now  that  the  Canadian  fisheries 
an'  reopened  to  their  vessels.  These  tive  States  added  213  schooners  to 
their  lishing-lleet  in  180(),  when  the  inducements  to  build  were  less  cer- 
tain. There  is  therefore  good  reason  to  anticii)ate  that  in  the  course  of 
tlic  twelve  years  stipulated  in  the  present  treaty,  a  still  greater  impetus 
will  be  given  to  the  fishing  industry  and  commerce  of  the  United  States. 
Such  a  result  may  be  more  confulently  expected  in  consequence  of  the 
ia|)id  increase  of  population  and  extension  of  settlements,  the  more 
numerous  markets  opened  up  by  railway  enterprises,  and  the  growing 
tleniand  for  fish-food  from  the  seaboard  to  replace  the  failing  supplies 
IVom  inland  waters. 

The  withdrawal  of  New  England  tonnage  from  the  whale  fishery,  in 
consequence  of  the  rapid  decline  of  that  pursuit  as  a  paying  adventure, 
will  most  likely  have  the  effect  of  engaging  other  sail  in  the  more  lutira- 
tive  branches  of  marine  industry.  Mr.  K.  1>.  Cutts,  iu  an  able  report  to 
the  United  States  Government  on  the  political  importance  and  economic 
(Mmditions  of  the  fisheries,  expre.s.ses  some  apprehension  of  the  imminent 
failure  of  the  cod  and  other  fisheries  on  the  Grand  Banks.     Should  such 


IP- 


k:.:;;** 


«*?-H 


90 


AWARI>    OF   TMK    ^'I.SHKRY    COMMISSION. 


ousiu>,  it  would  probcily  (M1}j:><;o  additional  tomia<;t'  in  tlic  iiishoro  fish. 
ori»'S  around  tlu'  coasts  of  Canada. 

Wo  aro  tlu'reforo  \varrant«'d  in  icckoniu};  a  yoarly  avorajro  nunilMM-  ot 
vessels  asavailiufj  tliornselvosof  the|»rivilo};osaci'ord('d  to  ruitetl  Statrs 
<'itizons  by  tlio  Treaty  of  \Vashiny;ton  at  about  1,()(K),  reserving;  the  rii^lit 
to  show  the  probability  of  a  still  lar;;er  number  beinjj  so  enffajjed. 

Second.  American  fishermen  pursue  their  <^dlin;Lj  anuind  the  isIamU 
and  in  the  harbors  of  the  Itay  of  Fiimly,  and  alon^  j>arts  of  the  <'oasts 
of  Nova  Scotia  and  New  lirunswick  bordering;  the  said  bay;  down  the 
south   coast   of  Nova  Scotia,  an«l   around   the  island  of  Cape  Breton: 
thence  thn>u;jh  the  Strait  of  Caiiso,  alonjr  the  northern  coast  of  Nov.k 
Scotia  and  New  l>runswick  :  thence  throuj:ch  the  Strut  of  Northumbcr 
land,  and  all  around  I'rince  Edwanl  Island,  particularly  on  its  west«Mii. 
northern,  an«l  eastern  coasts,  resortiJij;  especially  to  the  bays  and  liiu- 
bors  of  the  southern  shore  to  transship  carfjoes  and  procure  supplit's; 
thence  into  Miramit-hi  Hay,  the  Hay  of  Chaleur,  atul  (ias[)«'  Hay;  thento 
around  the  Ma<;dalen  Islantis  and  Anticosti  Island  ;  thence  up  the  south 
shore  of  the  river  Saint  Lawrenci>  to  I'ather  I'oiut,  and  down  the  north 
shore  of  the  river  ami  jjidfof  Saint  Liwrence  from  Point  des  Monts  tn 
lilanc  Sabloii  Hay.     These  localities  aboumi  with  codtish,  mackerel,  her 
rin^s,  halibut,  haddock,  pollack,  hake,  and  a  variety  of  otiier  an«l  smaller 
fishes  used  expressly  for  bait,  such  as  sprins■herrin;,^capel•n.  smelts,  saml 
launce,  {jaspereaux,  also  such  bait  as  scjuid  and  (dams.     These  are  tlu' 
prijicipal  dcsj-riptionsof  tish  captured  by  I'nited  States  citizens  in  Hrit 
ish  waters.     They  ^''tn'i'idly  frequent  the  iiishores,  and  are  there  cau«;ht 
in  the  lar^jest  quantities  and  of  the  finest  tpiality,  and  with  greater  cer- 
tainty and  facility  than  elsewhere.     A  considerable  portion  of  the  cod 
fish  taken  by  American  fishermen  is  doubtless  caught  on  the  banks  ami 
ledp;es  outside,  such   as  (Jreen,  Miscou,  Hradelle,  and  Orphan   Hank>;. 
and  within  treaty  limits  around  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  on  the  soiitli 
em  coast  of  Labrador.     L.itterly  it  has  been  the  practice  to  use  coil 
seines  close  insln)re,  atid  to  fish  with  trawls  and  lines  near  the  coast  et 
Nova  S(H)tia,  New  Brunswick,  Quebec,  and  Anticosti.     There  is  also  a 
small  portion  of  the  other  fishes  iiamed  taken  at  various  distances  from 
the  shore. 

A  niajoiity  of  the  fishinj:  fleet  frecpientinj;  British  waters  bein;j  fittctl 
almost  exclusively  for  the  mackerel  fishery,  that  pursuit  will  be  first 
<'onsitlered  as  to  the  «piantity  taken  by  ea«'h  vessel,  lu  an  ordinary 
voya^jo  or '' trip"  from  an  American  port  to  the  (lidf  tishinjjtrrouiids 
and  back,  without  the  liberty  of  res(Mtin<r  fn'ely  to  tlu'  bays,  creeks,  ami 
harbors  and  the  inshores  generally,  to  fisli,  refit,  transship,  »\:c,,  but  with 
oidy  illii-it  opportunities  to  use  these  privilejjfes,  the  profits  of  each  vcs 
sel  would  be  ccunparatively  insi;,'nilicant ;  but  beinjj  privileged  to  fish, 
and  to  land  and  lelit,  and  to  transfer  each  tare  to  steamers  or  railways 
in  Canada,  and  afU'rward  t»»  replenish  st<ues  ami  resume  operations. 
the  vessels  would  return  imme«liately,  while  the  fishinj;  was  {jood,  to 
<'atch  a  secontl  fare,  which  is  similarly  tlisposed  of,  and  wouhl  often 
make  a  third  trip  before  the  season  (tloses.  Captain  P.  A.  Scott,  \i.  N.,  et 
Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  states  that  these  facilities, combined  with  freedom 
of  inshore  fishing;,  enable  eaidi  tnackerelman  to  averajje  about  SOO  bar 
rels  i)er  season,  worth  ^\'2,HH).  ('aptain  1).  M.  Brown,  U.  N.,  of  llalifa\, 
makes  the  .same  statement.  Captain  J.  A.  Tory,  of  (tuyslM»ro,  Nov;i 
Scotia,  states  that  it  is  common,  with  such  advantaj^es,  for  each  vessel 
to  catch  from  1,(MM>  to  l,.''»tM)  barrels  of  mackerel  in  throe  trips.  Mr.  E.  11. 
Derby  estimates  the  catch  of  vohhcIs  "in  the  mackerel  business  from  r)(Hi 
to  7(M)  barrels.''    Mr.  William  Smith,  late  controller  of  customs  at  St. 


AWARD    OK    Tin:    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


'Jl 


.Idliii,  Now  IJniiiswick,  now  deputy  minister  of  niaiino  and  lishciies, 
(•iiiiii»iit«'s  the  eatcli  of  ?na<'ken'l  by  Amerit^an  vessels  at  10  barrels  per 
Ion.  'I'lie  late  Mr.  INI.  II.  I'erley,  !ler  Majesty's  Commissioner  nrider  the 
trciity  of  ISfil,  rej)orts  in  ISll)  havinj;  a(!coste<l  five  I'nited  States  vessels 
;i'  tiveiy  (Ishinj;  about  three  miles  from  I'aspebiae,  in  Ohalenr  15ay,  and 
several  in  Miramiehi  l>ay,  havin;;  upward  of  W{)  barrels  of  maitkcrel 
tMcli.  It  appears  from  a  return  made  by  the  (tollector  of  customs  at  I'ort 
Miil;irave,  iu  th(»  (lut  of  ('anso,  tiiat  ainon;;  l.'i.">  vessels  of  the  Anit-rican 
iiiacUerel  fleet  whicth  were  casually  spoken  at  that  port  in  1S7.'{,  the 
nanus  of  which  he  },m\cs,  there  were  .'{.'{ havin<j over  .'500  Itarrels  apiece,  "m 
liuN.n;;  ovei-  100  barrels  ('ach,  L'S  havin;^  «)ver  r>0(>  barrels  cacli,  12  hav- 
inj;  over  000  barrels  each,  and  7  havin;,'  over  700  l)arr<'ls  apie(!e.  Prob- 
acy tli«'se  were  not  the  largest  fares  secured,  as  the  vessels  were 
reported  before  the  fall  fishery  (usually  tlu'  best)  had  taken  place.  In 
the  year  1S71,  101  I'nitetl  States  fishing-vessels  took,  at  the  east  point 
oi  Prince  ICdward  Island, .'{S;;  barrels  per  vessel.  The  catch  of  mackerel 
ill  that  scasfUi  by  the  island  fishermen,  who  are  few  in  iinniliers,  ami 
lish  mostly  in  open  boats  and  with  seines,  was  altojj»'tlier  inslioic,  and 
;iiiioiiiited  to  L'7,.'>!7  barrels. 

We  may  confidently  state  that,  at  a  very  moderate  C(»iii[iiitation,  each 
American  fishiiifj  vessel  ftH'cuu'nting  British  waters  obtains,  tliroiii^li  the 
inivileycs  conferred   by  the  treaty,  a  catch  of  at   least  'MM  l)arrels  of 
iiiackeiel  alone,  worth  J?  12  per  barrel,  at  each  trip,  or  a  ^ross  value  of 
s;;,t;oo  per  vessel. 

The  proportion  of  <'odtish  talien  and  forminj;  part  of  the  mixed  fares 
would  be  comparatively  small  wl'en  distriluit«'d  among  a  large  number 
of  vessels  fishing  prin.'ii)ally  for  mackerel  and  herring.  It  is  estimated 
that  vessels  fisliing  for  cod,  herring,  and  other  fish  during  the  intervals 
of  niackereling  usually  take,  of  heiring,  .'JOO  barrels;  codfish,  100  (piin- 
tiils;  halibut,  200  (piintals;  haddock,  ]iollack,  and  hake,  100  <piintals, 
iiiid  bait  fishes  (exclusive  of  herring,  used  fresh),  .*200  worth,  each  ves- 
sel averaging  about  •i'2,000  worth  in  all.  Many  of  these  vessels,  or 
nfliers  of  smaller  tonnage,  are  engaged  in  fishing  aroumi  the  western 
coasts  of  Nova  Scotia  and  in  the  ISay  of  Fiuuly,  l»otli  before  and  after 
their  regular  voyages  to  the  eastern  and  (Jult  fishinggronnds.  lint  the 
iiiaxJmnm  number  of  A'cssels  and  the  value  of  catch  reckoned  iu  this 
claim,  for  the  purpose  of  stating  a  basis  of  computation,  without  preju- 
dice, liowever,  to  whatever  addition  to  the  nurid>er  of  vessels  engaged 
and  the  (piantify  and  value  ot  fish  caught  may  be  substantiated  in  fur- 
ther evidence,  does  not  specifically  include  the  cafcli  of  those  smaller 
\essels  which  are  consrantly  occupie<l  in  the  inshoie  fishings  of  the 
Western  coasts  of  the  maritime  provinces  for  <tther  kinds  besides  mack- 
erel. This  reservation  is  necessarily  due,  if  not  to  the  moderation  of  the 
flaiiii  involved,  r.t  all  events  to  the  obviiuis  difliculty  of  ascertaining 
with  exactness  the  movements  and  operations  of  a  fleet  of  tbreign  ves- 
sels, of  varied  tonnage,  numbering  between  1,000  and  .">,000,  besides  the 
many  small  boats  attached,  which  are  continually  moving  about  in  dif- 
tereiit  a!id  distant  localities,  or  frequenting  throughout  each  season  the 
i'oiintless  indentations  of  u  sinmuis  <'oast  nearly  1,0(M)  miles  in  linear 
ext»'tit. 

In  recapitulation  of  the  above,  It  is  estimated  that  each  Tnited  States 
fishing  vessel  will,  on  a  moderate!  computation,  take  within  British 
•anadian  wafers  $;{,(iOO  worth  of  mackerel,  and  $2,000  worth  of  other 
lish;  or  a  total  of  $.'),()00  worth  of  Hsh  of  all  kinds  as  an  average  for 
caeh  trip.  This  estimate  is,  however,  made,  as  stated  in  the  (!ase  of  the 
iiMinberof  vesselH  engaged,  without  prejudice  to  any  larger  catoh  per 


if'' 


1^1 


1'  i...r 


I   "i 


92 


AWAKI)   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


It 


h 


.^ 


«>W'iJr:  f 


r* 


H 


vessel,  whicli  we  may  be  able  to  substantiate  in  evidence  before  the 
Commission. 

Tliirtl.  The  estimated  amount  of  (*apital  embarked  in  this  business  by 
Unittul  States  citizens  exceeds  $7,0(K>.(M)0.  Mr.  Lorenzo  Sabin*',  tni. 
nierly  president  of  the  Boston  Board  of  Trade,  estimates  it  at  i!<7,L*S(M"M», 
It  employs  about  1(J,00(>  men  atloat,  besides  many  others  ashore.  That 
the  investment  is  a  protitable  one  is  provetl  by  the  lar;je  amount  of  ves 
sels  and  men  enp>;;in^  in  it,  and  also  the  more  costly  appliances  which 
are  provided  in  these  lishiiifj  pursuits.  If  the  construction  and  e(iui|) 
ment  of  vessels  for  the  various  tishcries  which  United  States  citizens  s() 
persistently  follow  in  liritish  waters  was  not  proved  to  be  hijjhly  ad- 
vantajjeous,  it  is  reasonable  to  assume  that  it  would  cease  to  enjjafjc  a 
larjjfe  amount  of  capital,  for  the  use  of  which  st)  many  other  attractive 
enterprises  exist.  It  must  be  concluded,  therefore,  that  the  inshore 
fisheries  atfonl  neverfailin^j  occupation  for  men  and  money  prelerable 
to  many  other  lucrative  industries. 

The  advantages  resulting  to  the  conimerce  and  sn|)ply  of  United 
States  citizens  geneially  from  the  jirivileges  to  which  American  fisher 
men  are  admitted  by  this  treaty  are  most  important.  The  demand  loi 
lish-food  in  all  parts  of  the  American  Union  is  yearly  increasing,  and 
immense  elVorts  are  now  being  made  to  supply  this  want.  A  popnla 
tion  already  exceetling  4tMK»0,00(»,  constantly  augmenting  in  numbers 
by  immigration  from  foreign  countries,  ami  where  the  pet>ple  consume 
the  jjroducts  of  the  sea  to  a  very  largo  extent,  requires  much  more  oi 
this  kind  of  food  than  the  failing  fisheries  of  the  United  States  can  now 
produce.  Their  productive  power  is  no  longer  e«pial  to  the  consumptive 
capacity  of  the  nation.  The  rapid  means  of  transport,  and  the  improved 
methods  of  preservation  now  available,  are  fast  bringing  the  iidialu 
tants  of  the  interior  i)ractically  within  easy  reach  of  the  seaboard  ;  and 
fish  of  all  kinds,  even  the  most  inferior  descriptions,  and  qualities  not 
hitherto  saleable,  are  reijuired  to  supply  the  public  want.  The  magni 
tudeof  the  present  fish  trade  of  the  United  States  is  hardly  conceivable 
from  the  meagre  and  partial  statements  derived  from  ollicial  returns. 
These  tables  publish  only  the  "products  of  American  tisheries  received 
into  the  customs  districts,"  which  form  but  a  small  proportion  of  the 
enormous  <piantities  of  lish  landed  from  Unite«l  States  boats  and  ves 
sels,  and  much  of  which  is  obtained  from  the  seacoasts  of  Uanada. 

We  have  referretl  elsewhere  to  reports  made  by  American  ollicials  re 
garding  the  tleteriorate«l  condition  of  the  fisheries,  on  the  coasts  of  the 
New  England  States.  They  atfirm  that  owing  to  such  decline  ''  the 
])eople  are  obliged  to  resort  to  far-distant  regions  to  obtain  the  supply 
Mhich  formerly  could  be  secured  almost  within  sight  of  their  homes." 
The  above  state  of  things  already  renders  it  necessary  for  United  States 
citizens  to  secure  access  to  Canadian  fisheries  ;  and  the  growing  demand 
tor  local  consum|)tion  before  mentioned,  apart  from  the  rcipiirements  ol 
their  ftueign  trade,  mu.st  tend  greatly  to  increase  this  necessity. 

AVere  United  States  citizens  unable  to  supply  such  an  extensive  de 
mand  inconsecpience  of  being  precluded  from  fi.shing  in  British  Canadian 
waters,  it  wouhl  no  doubt  be  supplied  through  British  subjects,  who 
would  also  catch  more  fish  in  their  own  exclusive  waters  than  if  tishiii^' 
in  the  same  limits  con(;urrently  with  American  hshermen.  This  consid 
eration,  therefore,  forms  un  additional  reason  for  the  compensation 
which  we  now  claim. 

2.  Liberty  to  himl  for  the  purpmeH  of  drying  nets^  curing  finh^  lir. 

The  lu'ivileges  secured  to  United  States  subjects  in   this  respect  by 
the  Treaty  of  Washington  are  the  liberty  to  land  for  purposes  connected 


AWARD   OF   THE   FJS.IERY   COMMISSION. 


98 


14 


with  tisliiiig  on  the  coasts  of  Lubra<1or,  the  MagdaltMi  Ishuuls,  and  the 
otliiT  portions  of  the  pinboard  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada.  As  the 
rifilits  thus  secured  to  United  States  fisliernien  for  a  jjcriod  of  twelve 
years  vary  somewhat  in  the  different  localities  above  named,  it  will  be 
well  to  consider  them  separately. 

TntU-r  the  convention  of  1818,  United  States  citizens  were  ])rivileged 
to  tish  on  certain  parts  of  the  coast  of  Labrador,  but  were  restricted  in 
tiie  liberty  of  drying  and  curing  Hsh  to  unsettled  places.  Such  districts 
as  were  then  occupie«l,  or  might  su'aequently  become  settled,  were  re- 
served for  the  exclusive  use  of  Hritish  fishermen,  and  rights  and  proper- 
ties possed  by  the  llndson^s  Hay  Company  were  likewise  reserved  from 
common  user.  Cradual  settlement  during  fifty  years  past  has  tilled  up 
iieaily  all  available  landing  places  along  the  southern  coast  of  Labra- 
dor, between  lilanc  Sablon  and  Mount  Joly ;  and  the  establishments 
maintained  by  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company,  whose  rights  and  privileges 
are  now  ac(]uired  by  Canada,  have  confirmed  the  exclusive  occupancy 
eoiitemplated  by  the  Convention.  Under  such  altereJ  circumstances 
Tiiited  States  fishermen  might  have  been  excluded  under  the  terms  of 
tiie  Convention  from  using  these  landings,  without  the  free  use  of  which 
the  tisheries  cannot  be  profitably  pursued.  The  fish  taken  in  these  wa- 
ters include  herring,  codfish,  and  sometimes  mackerel,  which  are  seined 
oil  the  main  shore,  and  among  the  islands  throughout  that  region,  and 
the  famous  "  Fiabrador  herring,"  which  abounds  there. 

The  Convention  of  1818  entitled  United  States  citizens  to  fish  on  the 
shores  of  the  Magdalen  Islands,  but  denied  them  the  j)rivilege  of  land- 
ing there.  Without  such  permission  the  practical  use  of  the  inshore 
tisheries  was  impossible.  Although  such  i>ermission  has  tacitly  existed, 
as  a  matter  of  sutterance,  it  might  at  any  moment  have  been  withdrawn, 
and  the  operations  of  United  States  fishermen  in  that  locality  would 
thus  have  been  rendered  ineffectual.  The  value  of  these  inshore  fish- 
eries is  great ;  mackerel,  herring,  halibut,  capelln,  and  launce  abound, 
and  are  caught  inside  of  the  principal  bays  and  harbors,  where  they 
resort  to  spawn.  IJetween  three  huiulred  and  four  hundred  United 
States  fishing-vessels  yearly  fretjuent  the  waters  of  this  group,  and  take 
huge  (luantities  of  fish,  both  for  curing  and  bait.  A  single  seine  has 
been  known  to  take  at  one  haul  enough  of  herrings  to  fill  ;{,01M>  barrels. 
Seining  mackerel  is  similarly  productive.  During  the  spring  and  sum- 
mer tisliery  of  the  year  1875,  when  the  niackerel  were  closer  inshore  than 
usual,  the  comparative  failure  of  the  American  fishermen  was  owing  to 
tlieir  l)eing  unprepaied  with  suitable  hauling-nets  and  small  boats, 
tlieii  vessels  being  unable  to  approach  close  enough  to  the  beaiihes. 

Ill  the  case  of  the  remaining  portions  of  the  seaboard  of  Canada,  the 
teuns  of  the  Convention  of  J8I8  debarred  United  States  citizens  from 
landing  at  any  part  for  the  pursuit  of  operations  connected  with  fishing. 
This  privilege  is  essential  to  the  successful  prosecution  of  both  the  in- 
shore and  deep-sea  fisheries.  By  it  they  would  be  enabled  to  prepare 
their  tish  in  a  superior  manner,  in  a  salubrious  climate,  as  well  as  moro 
expeditiously,  ami  they  would  be  relieved  of  a  serious  embarrassment 
as  regards  the  disposition  of  fish  oflals,  by  curing  on  shore  the  lish 
which  otherwise  would  have  been  dressed  on  board  their  vessels,  and 
the  refuse  tlirown  overl)oard. 

All  the  advantages  above  detailed  have  been  secured  for  a  period  of 
twelve  years  to  Unite!  States  fishermen.  Without  them,  fishing  opera- 
tions on  many  parts  of  the  coast  would  be  not  only  unremunerative  but 
impossible;  and  they  may  therefore  be  fairly  claimed  as  an  important 
item  in  the  valuation  of  the  liberties  granted  to  the  United  States  under 
Article  XVllI  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 


i 

hi 


Ml 


^mc^^ 


%^  ^ 


94 


A\VAKl>    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


^i 


.'{.   I'raniishiiipinii  raifioeK  and  oblaininfi  supplies,  dr. 

VvvviUnw  to  transl'iT  caifioos,  to  outliL  vtv<st»Is,  buy  sn|»|)li»»s,  obtain  itc, 
iMi;;a^(>  sailors,  procarc  bait, and  tratlit;  };imi orally  in  British  ports  and  iiai 
bors,  or  t«> transact  otiu'r  bnsint'ssashoro,  nt>t  nri'ossarily  coniu'ctt'd  with 
lisliin};  pnrsnits,  an'  srcontl.iry  privd»';;t's  whicli  inattMially  iMdiainu'  liic 
principal coin'i'ssions  to  United  Stat»'si'iti/,iMis.  Tlirse  ailvantaj;<'s  arc  in 
ilis|H'nsabh'  to  the  sncccHsollort'ij;n  li.shin^ionCanatlian  t'oasis.  Witlioiii 
such  tacilitics,  ti.shin<;  operations,  Itoth  inside  and  outside  ot'lhe  inslnMo, 
eannttt  be  con«lnctc»l  on  an  j'xti-nsive  and  remunerative  seaU>.  I'luii'i 
th«'  lleiMprociiy  Treaty,  these  ctinveniences  provetl  v»'ry  important,  nKtiv 
l>articularly  as  rtspeets  olnaininy;  bail  iind  translerrinj;  carjjoes.  Tin 
Anu'riean  lishernicn  then  came  inshore  everywlu're  alonj;  thi'  coast,  and 
caught  l)ail  tor  themselves,  insteaJ  ol  re(purinj,%  as  previously,  to  buy. 
and  preserve  it  in  ices  saving  theu'by  much  time  iind  expense.  Tlitv 
also  transshippetl  their  lish  and  relumed  with  their  vj'ssels  to  the  lisliini;. 
gr»)und  ;  thus  securing  two  »)r  ihici' lares  in  one  season,  lioth  oflht'sc. 
thcret(U»',  are  distinct  benetits.  There  are  other  indirect  ajlvantagt^ 
attending  these  privi'u>ges,  su«'h  as  carrying  on  tlsliing  operatioirs  nearer 
the  coasts,  and  ther«'by  avoiding  risks  to  ble  and  property,  as  well  while 
lishing  as  in  voyaging  homeward  and  bacU  ;  also  liavnig  always  at  com 
mand  a  <'onvenient  and  commodious  base  of  (jpi'rat ions.     They  pioriiif 


cheap  and  leguhir  s 


upplit 


es  williout  loss  of  time,  enaiiling  tlu'Ui  alwa\.- 


to  send  oil'  their  i-argoes  of  lish  pi'omptly  by  pad  and  steanuMs  t(t  nu'ct 
tlu'  current  market  demand  tin  doiiiestn' lonsnmpticui  or  ioreign  expoit, 
instead  of  being  compelled  to  '•  iu-at  up"  to  Clhuifester  or  lioston  witL 
each  cargo,  srldom  leturning  for  a  s4'«-ond  ;  and  it  may  be  reniarkcil 
that  all  their  fit-ight  business  in  lisli  trom  provincial  ports  is  carried  on 
in  American  bottoms,  thus  creating  a  prolitable  business  tor  I'Miini 
^>tatcs  cUi/ens, 

'Jhe  advantages  abo\e  described  of  being  able  to  m.ike  secoml  aiu! 
third  full  fares,  undoubtedly,  in  most  instances,  tloulde  the  e^ttch  wliiii: 
i-an  be  made  in  Ibitish  Canadi.in  waters  by  a  vessel  during  one  seas.ni, 
ami  it  therefoie  may  be  reasonably  e.Ntimated  that  it  eiialiUs  riiiliii 
Stat«'S  hshermeli  to  double  their  piolits. 

4.  Fonnatitni  of  Jishuuf  (s((thli.slnnints. 

The  privilege  of  establishing  permanent  tishing  stations  on  the  shoit^ 
of  Canadian  bays,  creeks,  ami  harbors,  akin  t«>  that  of  landing  to  div 
ami  cure  lish,  is  of  material  advantage  to  I'mted  States  I'itizeiis.  i^c 
tore  the  Treaty  the  common  practice  with  American  vessels  was  t«)  take 
away  their  cargoes  ot  codlish  in  a  green  state  and  to  diy  them  ii' 
home.  Those  codlish  c.iught  on  the  banks  oil  shore  are  usually  liin. 
well  c«uiditioned  tish,  but,  being  cured  in  bulk  instead  ot  being  cured  oi 


jiacked  ashoie,  are  of  inlerior  valmv 


Apart   from  the  lishing  facilii 


and  business  con\enienccs.  thus  alVordetl  to  Americans  for  prosecuting 
both  the  deep-sea  and  inslnire  lishcries,  there  are  climatic  advanta^v^ 
coniK-cted  with  this  privilege  of  a  peculiar  nature,  which  attach  tu  i' 
a  special  value.     It  is  a  fact  universally  known  and  undisputed,  tlmt 
codhsh,  tor  example,  cured  on   our   coahts,  command    a    much    higlm 
price  in  Ioreign  markets  than  those  cured  in  the  I'nited  States,     fli^ 
IS  due  in  a  great  measure  to  the  saluluity  of  the  climate  and  the  |iii'\ 
imity  of  the  lishing  grounds.     I'ermam-nt  <'uring  establishments  aslmh 
iilHu  enable  the  lishermeii  to  (d>tain  m«>re    Ireipieiit   ^' lares,"  and 
dealers  to  carry  on  the  business  otCuiing  and  sliippingon  a  much  m 
extensive  and  economic,  scale,  than  if  tiieir  operations  weie  ctmdmifi 
alloat.     There  are  lurther  ail  vantages  deriva«»le  from  permanent  est;il 
'^'hinents  iu«hure,  such  as  the  accumulation  o\  Htock  and  fresh  (ish  |ii< 


nil 
(III' 


AWAKU    OF    VUK    FISIIKKY    COMMISSION. 


95 


srrvrd  in  simw  or  \vo,  sitiil  otlins  lu'pt  in  fur/AHi  and  frt'sh  state  by  arti- 
licial  \'\vvy.\uii  ;  also,  tlu^  picscrvation  of  lisli  in  cans  lu'iinolically  sraltMl. 
Till'  ii\vi\\  savin;j  ol<;ost  and  ot  snUstaniu',  and  tim  rapid  preparation  of 
ii  more  saliiblc,  more  iioitabU',  and  more  nutritive  article  of  tbod,  which 
iiMuend  these  improved  methods  of  ircatiiif,'  edible  fishes  to  ^fn'ral 


(•(I 


iitloption,  will,  nndonbtedly,  indni*«»  enterpiisiny;  dealers  to  avail  them- 
selves very  extensively  of  I  lie  remaikal)le  opportnnities  whi»;h  freeace«'ss, 
iiiKlan  assnred  footing  on  Canatlian  coasts,  are  calcniated  toatVoi'd.  Tii(> 
IdOiid  elVect  of  these  increased  tacilitics  is  to  be  found  in  the  abundant  and 
iiuicasin.j;  supply  to  the  American  puiilic  of  clic;i|>  and  wholesome,  fish, 
wliicli  supply  woiiNI  certainly  diminish  or  f.iil  w  jtliour  the  advantajjes 
sccuumI  by  tlu'  Treaty  of  \Vashinj;ton. 

.").  Ciini'miinc)'  of  rccipviH-al  free  maihit. 

A  reciprocal  fr«'e  market  for  any  ncedlul  commodity,  such  as  lisli, 
ciitci  \\\\i.  extensively  into  daily  consumption  by  rich  and  pO(U',  is  so  man- 
ilcst  tin  advanta<;e  t(>  everybody  concerned,  the  piodiici'r,  the  frei;;hter, 
the  seller,  and  consumer  alike,  that  the  remission  of  Canadian  <Iiitieson 
Ainerican-cau^ht  tish  imported  into  Canada  <'aiiiiot,  in  our  opinion,  form 
;i  very  material  eleuu'iit  ibr  C(»nsideration.  Tlie  benelits  conferred  by  a 
I  clieap  ami  al)umbuit  sup|)ly  of  food  are  evident,  especially  to  countries 
wlicr»',  as  in  the  I'nited  Slates  and  Canada,  the  chief  necessaries  of  life 
arc  expensive,  and  it  is  so  dtvsiiable  to  cheapen  the  means  of  livinjj  to 
tlic  woi kinjj  classes. 

(!.  J'artiripation  in  itiijiroi  cniciits  rcxultiinj  from  the  Fisheries  Protection 
,SVrr/(T  <>/'  (iinadtt. 

In  aihlition  to  the  statutory  enactments  protecitiiiff  the  C.mailian  fish- 
eries aj;aiiist  torei;,'ners,  and  rej;ulatiu^:  jiarticipation  in  them  by  the 
Initcil  States  citi/-ens.  under  treaty  stipulations,  the  provincial  "jovern- 
iiieiits  have  ft»i'  many  yi-ais  past  applied  an  orf^ani/.t'd  system  of  munici- 
pal protection  and  r<-striction  desi;;iM'd  to  preserve  tlu'in  tioiii  injury  and 
lo  render  them  more  productive.  A  marked  increase  in  their  prodnite 
(liiriii;;  the  last  ilccade  attests  the  jiiatifs  iiij;  lesults  of  these  measures. 

A  larjic  number  of  lishery  otliceis  is  employctl  by  the  (lovernmeiit  of  the 
hdiiiiiiioii  ill  the  man  time  stales  at  an  annual  cost  of  al>oiit  ><7r»,(Mlb,  This 
.^tall  IS  actively  t'iiy;a;;ed  under  an  or;:aiiizc»l  system  <'ontiolIed  by  the 
department  of  marine  and  tisheiies,  in  Ictsterinjj  and  supi'rint«'iiilin<f  lish 
ciilimc  in  the  rivers  and  estuaries.  i;e;iulati»uis  are  eiitbreed  Ibr  the 
|ii(iiection  ot  thesi'  nurseries,  and  consi«lera!)le  cx|>ense  has  been  incurred 
111  ailaptin}:  ami  improviii};-  the  streams  tor  the  reprtuliiction  of  liver  tish. 

The  intimate  coniKction  between  a  thiixiny;  condition  of  river  and 
r.sliiaiy  lishiiiKs  and  an  abiintiant  supply  in  the  nei;:hborin<<;  deep-sea 
fislieiies  has  not,  perhaps,  as  \et  been  sutbcieiitly  appreciated.  It  is, 
linwcxcr,  oh\  ions  that  the  supply  of  bait  lislies  thus  produced  attracts 
tlie  deep-sea  ti.sli  in  laij^e  numbers.  Their  resort  is  <'onsc<piently  nearer 
iiisiidie  than  lornierly.  and  the  i-atch  of  the  tishermeii  who  have  the 
pii\ile;;e  ot  insiiore  lishintr  is  proportionately  increased,  while  they  pur- 
sue their  (tperations  in  safer  waters  and  within  easier  reach  of  suppli»'s. 
Ill  addition  to  the  measines  above  described  ibr  the  increase  of  the  lish- 
eiies,  s|)ecial  i!are  has  been  tlevoted  to  the  protecti«m  ot  the  spawning- 
jiioiiiHls  of  sea  lishes,  and  the  inshores  now  swarm  with  valuable  tish  of 
all  kinds,  which,  ovviiiy;  to  the  expense  incurred  by  the  Canadian  (lovi 
ciiiiiHiit,  are  now  abundant  in  places  hitherto  almost  desertetl. 

It  \\  ill  also  be  necessary  tor  the  i»roper  inamtenanee  of  these  improve- 
iiu'iiis  and  for  the  preservation  of  order  in  the  lishinji-^rounds,  as  well 
in  the  interest  of  the  United  States  iis  of  the  Canatlian  tishermen,  to 
supplement  the  exist inj;  lisheries  service  by  an  adtlitional  number  of 


^4 


IF 


96 


AWARD    OK   THE    FI8HKUY    COMMISSION. 


l    ! 


1^ 


orti('or«  and  men,  which  will  urobably  entail  an  increase  of  at  least 
)*l(K),0(M)  on  the  present  expeiulitnre. 

In  all  these  important  a(lvant)i(;eH  prodnced  by  the  restrictions  iiiid 
taxation  imposed  on  Canadians,  United  States  lisliermen  will  now  share 
to  the  fullest  extent,  without  havini;  as  yet  in  any  way  contributed  toward 
their  cost ;  it  nuiy  then  fairly  bo  claimed  that  a  ])ortion  of  the  awanl  tn 
be  demanded  of  the  I'tiited  States  (Tovernment  shall  be  in  considera 
tion  of  their  participation  in  the  fruits  of  additional  expentllture  borne 
by  Canadians  to  the  annual  extent,  as  shown  above,  of  nearly  ^LMM»,(mmi, 

SUMMARY. 

The  privileges  secured  to  United  States  citizens  untler  Article  X\  ill 
of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  which  have  b«»en  al)ove  described  particii 
larly  and  in  tletail,  may  be  sumnuiri/.ed  as  follows: 

1.  The  liberty  of  tishiuf;  in  all  inshore  waters  of  the  Dominion;  the 
value  of  which  shown  by  the  kinds,  quantity,  and  value  of  the  fish  an 
nually  taken  by  United  States  lishermen  in  those  waters,  as  well  as  In 
the  number  of  vessels,  haiuls,  and  capital  employed. 

2.  The  liberty  to  land  for  the  purpose  of  dryinj;  nets  and  curing;  tisli, 
a  privilejje  essential  to  the  successful  prosecution  of  fishing  operations. 

3.  Access  to  the  shores  for  pur|K)ses  of  bait,  supply,  i\:o.,  includiiif; 
the  all-important  advantage  of  transferring  cargoes,  which  enables 
American  tishermen  to  double  their  proHts  by  securing  two  or  more  full 
fares  during  one  season. 

•t.  Participation  in  the  improvements  resulting  from  the  tlsheries  serv 
ice  maintained  by  the  (lovernment  of  the  Dominion. 

The  above  privileges  may  be  considered  as  susceptible  of  an  approx 
imate  money  valuation,  which  it  is  respecifully  submitted  should  be 
assessed  as  well  with  refereiu-e  to  the  (pumtity  and  value  of  ttsh  taken, 
and  the  fifhingvessels  and  tishermen  employed,  as  to  other  collattnil 
advantages  enjoyed  by  United  States  citizens. 

It  has  been  stated  in  the  preceding  ))ortions  of  this  (chapter  that  an 
average  number  of  at  least  1,(KK)  United  States  vessels  annually  fre 
quent  British  Canadian  waters.  The  gross  catch  of  each  vessel  per  trip 
has  been  estimated  at  )|'."»,<5(K>,  a  considerable  portion  of  which  is  net 
profit,  resulting  from  the  i)rivileges  conferreil  by  the  treaty. 

These  privileges  prolital»iy  employ  men  and  niaieiials  represent injj  in 
industrial  capital  several  millions  of  <lollars;  the  industries  to  the  ad 
vancenuMit  of  which  they  conduce  sujjport  domestic  trade  and  forcijrn 
commerce  of  great  extent  and  increasing  value  ;  they  also  serve  to  niakc 
a  necessary  and  lu'althful  article  of  food  pleiititut  and  cheap  for  the 
American  nation.  It  is  nf»t  nu-rely  the  value  of  "raw  material''  in  li>ii 
taken  out  of  British  Caiiatlian  waters  which  constitutes  a  fair  basis(»f  com 
pi'iisation;  the  right  of  this  fishery  was  an  exclusive  privilege,  the  siilc 
use  of  which  was  highly  prized,  and  for  the  common  enjoyment  of  wliidi 
we  demand  equivalents  to  be  measured  t)y  our  just  estimation  ol  its 
worth  ;  we  eidiance  the  main  concession  on  this  point  by  according 
kindred  liberties  and  indispensable  facilities,  all  of  which  are  direct  ad 
vantages;  and,  in  order  to  illustrate  the  assessable  value  of  the  grant. 
•we  adduce  certain  data  relating  to  the  number  of  United  States  fishing' 
vessels  more  immediately  interested,  and  the  gross  quantity  and  value 
of  their  catch  in  British  Canadian  waters. 

In  addition  to  the  advantages  above  recited,  the  attention  of  the  Coin 
missioners  is  res{>ectfully  drawn  to  the  great  importance  attaching  to 
the  beneficial  consequences  to  the  United  States  of  honorably  acquiring 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISIIKRY    COMMISSION. 


9T 


.'or  tlit'ir  llsliontuMi  full  fnMMloin  to  pursm'*  tln'ir  a(lv<Mitt:roii.s  callinj:  with- 
out iiicmiiii^  (ronstuiit  liskH,  and  rxposiii^  tlu'm.s«'Iv<'s  and  tlmir  fidlow- 
(•((iiiitiymt'ii  to  tlu^  iiM'vitalilo  n'proacli  of  willfully  tr«*s|»assiii<;  on  tlio 
vi^rjittiil  dotiiaiii  of  frioiidly  n('i<;lil)ors.  Paraiiioiuit,  liow(<iv«>r,  to  tliis 
cDiisidcratioit  is  the  avoidanct^  of  irritating  dispiiics,  (;al(Mihit('<l  to  din- 
<|iiict  tln>  |>nl)li(;  mind  of  a  spirited  and  rntiM'prisin;;  p)>opl(>,  and  liable 
always  to  hccoiiio  a  (^anst^  of  inntnal  anxiety  and  ('nil)arrassiniMit. 

It  was  repeatedly  stated  l»y  the  American  members  of  the  Joitit  Iligli 
fommissioh  at  Washington,  in  disenssinj;  proposals  n'^^ardinj;  the  ('ana- 
(lian  lislieries,  ''that  the  I'nited  States  desired  to  seeiire  their  enjoy- 
ment, not  for  their  commereial  or  intrinsic  valne,  but  for  the  purpose  of 
M'liittvinir  a  soun*e  of  irritation."  This  eommendabh^  <lesire  evidently 
\\asreci|»roeate<l  by  the  liritish  Commissioners  in  assentinj^  to  the  propo- 
sition that  the  matter  of  disajjreement  as  re;;ards  a  money  eqnivalent 
'•slioulil  be  referred  to  an  impartial  Commission.''  It  shouhl  not  be  lost 
si;.'lit  ol  that  an  offer  for  the  ret-iproeal  free  atlmission  of  coal,  salt,  tish, 
and  biinber  had  previously  been  made  by  the  United  States  Coinmis- 
sioners,  "entirely  in  the  interest  of  a  pi'arefnl  settlement,"  but  was  de- 
clined by  the  Hritish  ('ommissioners  as  inadetpiate.  It  is  now  shown 
that  the  (contention  of  the  Hritish  ('ommissioners  re^rardin;;  the  "  j;reat 
value"  of  these  fisheries  was  well  founded,  and  that  the  |>rivilej;es  s-ib- 
s('<|tu'ntly  accorded  by  the  Treaty  of  \Vashini,'ton  as  in  part  compeusa- 
tuiy  are  of  no  appreciable  vabu'. 

It  must  be  admitted,  thcr"fore,  that  the  concessions  made  by(rreat 
Britain  iti  the  intert'sts  of  American  fishermen,  (piite  irrespective  of  their 
conitncrcial  value,  are  indeed  extremely  valuable  to  the  United  States. 
I'roitably  it  will  be  said  that  in  this  respect  there  is  an  international 
;:ain.  Ibit  it  seeM)s  impossible  for  Hritish  subjects,  if  unmolested  in 
tlu'ir  rijihtsajid  privilt'};«'s,  to  occasion  any  such  irritation  as  the  United 
States  Commissioners  expressed  their  anxiety  to  avoid.  The  provoca- 
tion would  be  confined  entirelv  to  forei;;:i  intruders  seekin;^  their  own 
fjains  ;il  the  cost  and  injury  of  Hritish  fishermen,  thereby,  perhaps,  in- 
vdlviii};  both  nations  in  serious  difliculties  and  incalciilal)le  expense. 
The  duty  (with  its  attendant  cost)  of  jjuardinjj  a-^ainst  any  such  vexa- 
tions oil  the  j>art  of  United  States  citizens  dt!Volves  solely  on  the  Ameri- 
tan  (iovernmeiit.  If,  to  avoid  the  onerous  resp()nsil)ility  of  fulfillinj;  it, 
and  at  the  same  time  to  secure  for  tlu^  inhabitants  and  trade  of  tho 
country  the  concurrent  use  of  these  valnable  privilej^es,  the  Crovernment 
(»t  the  United  States  reciuires  to  pay  fair  equivalents,  it  certainly  can- 
not be  expetcted  th;it  Creat  Hritain  would  abate  tho  just  estimation 
lilacfd  on  them  bei'ause  of  a  mere  assertion  by  tho  United  States  aa 
IxMii'liciiiry  '*  that  their  value  is  overestimated,"  or  that  any  further  meas- 
iiri' of  ciuicession  is  due  to  international  amity.  (Ireat  IWitain  (ilaims 
to  have  fully  ret!iprocated  the  desire  expressed  by  the  United  States 
t'oinniissicuH'rs;  and  beinj;  in  poss«'ssion  of  proprietary  rij,'hts  of  special 
inipoitaiice  and  valne  to  herself,  the  mutual  enjoyment  of  which  was 
volniitaiily  sou;j;ht  on  behalf  of  United  States  cit /.ens,  wo  are  justified 
in  asUiiij;  the  present  ('ommission  to  consider  these  circumstances  in 
(it'teiiiiiiiiiifr  the  matter  ttius  referred  toecjuitable  assessment  under  tho 
iwosciit  treaty. 

I'liAPTKR  III. — Adrantagcs  derived  hy  British  suhjeds. 

I.  hiheriy  of  finhing  in  United  States  waters  and  other  privileges  con- 
\ natal  titereicith. 

The  privileges  granted  to  British  subjects  by  Article  XIX  of  the 
7  F 


%: 


m 


8 


98 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISllKRY   COMMISSION. 


y  "S 


ft 


I 


Tn'aty  of  Wa.sliinjrton  arc  the  mxmo  rixJit  of  tlshini?  anil  laiuliii;;  for 
|)ur|>o.s(>N  coiinertcd  with  tishin^  in  Unitt'tl  Ht!it«'N  waters,  norih  t»f  tli*> 
MtU  iiainlh'l  of  north  hitituiie,  an  are  granted  to  ('niteil  Htates  (;iti/i>tis 
in  llriti.sh  Nortli  Atneriean  waters.  It  may,  at  the  outset,  be  stated 
that  this  eoneession  is  ahsohitely  valneh'ss. 

That  the  s«>veral  kinds  of  sea  tlsln's  formerly  ahnndant  on  the  norfli- 
eastt-rn  sea  t'oasts  of  the  Tnited  Htales  havt*  not  merely  hee«>ine  \*'iv 
searee,  but  are  in  some  l(M;alities  almost  ixtinet,  is  an  nni|uestiou:ilili- 
fact.  An  exhaustive  inv«>.sti(;ation  into  the  eaus4's  of  their  deelitie  \v,is 
eommeneed  in  1S71  by  I'rofessiu'  Kaird,  the  (;hi«'f  of  the  United  States 
Fisheries  Commission,  and  is  still  in  proofless.  This  eminently  tlM)roiiyh 
and  scientiiie  investigator  reports,  substantially,  that  the  failing  sMpjily 
of  edible  eoast  tishcs  is  mainly  due  toovernettiiiu  ai;:^  incessant  tislnn^ 
by  other  means.  These  causes,  joined  to  contiiMUuis  havoc  mad<>  liy 
prt^laceous  fishes,  have  considerably  exhauste*!  the  (Mtast  lisheries  aloiij; 
the  stuithern  and  northeastern  seaboard  of  th<!  Tnited  !Stat<^H.  The 
Fishery  Commissioners  of  the  Stat«'  of  Maine,  iu  their  reports  lor  iHTli-'Tt, 
indorse  the  otUcial  statetneuts  (»f  the  Federal  CommissiornT,  that  tlif 
sea  lishes  on  the  coasts  »)f  New  Knj;land  have  *»  almost  entirely  dis.ip 
l>eared,"  and  that  "  the  people  areobli«je«l  to  resort  to  t'.irdistant  regions 
to  obtain  the  supply  which  formerly  coidd  be  m^cured  almost  witlnii 
si^'ht  of  their  homes." 

The  followiiij;  extract^i  from  Trofessor  Baird's  report,  published  iu 
lAlii,  are  conclusive: 

In  view  <»f  tin*  fiirtn  adilii 1  in  rffcn-nrc  to  tlu'  ulioro  tlnherit-H,  tlMT<>  ciin  Iw  no  he*- 

itiitJiiM  in  u<'r<'|itiii;;  tin-  MtiittMnt-nt  th;tt  lliiTf  Iiiih  Ix-i-n  an  iMiornioiis  (liininiitioii  in  tliiir 
niinilxT,  altlii>n;;li  I  Ins  liuil  alrcalv  ocrnrrt-il  to  u  conNiiliTulfle  ilt-grci-,  >>uli  Htinie  h|ii'. 
ties,  liy  tl)»«  lu-^iniiin^  nf  lln>  ])ri-^-nt  rciitiiry. 

Tile  ttNtiinony  rvt-rv wIhm)'.  witli  Ncarrfiy  an  •'Xc«''|)tion,  tMtfti  from  lini*-ini'ii  iinil 
tr.'ijiixT.H,  witM  tli:tt  till-  wliiilf  liiinincHN  tit  tiMliiii);  wum  ixctty  lu-aily  nt  an  ftid,  ami  ili.it 
it  \Minl(l  hcarcfly  pay  |)artitH  in  uttt-nipt  to  runtinnu  tlir  work  on  a  lui^c  Ncalf  m  I'M. 

^Vhen  the  above  statements  are  fairly  consi.leretl,  and  wlien  we  also 
consider  that  the  only  lemetly  for  this  state  of  decline  is  to  diminish  the 
numbers  and  restrict  the  i-atehmerit  powers  of  tishin^  engines  in  u.^»',  it 
is  hi;:hly  im|»robablc  that  any  foreij^ner  ^^ill  resort  to  thewj  waters  lur 
tisliin;;  purposes. 

In  a  «eo;:raphical  sense,  the  fishery  jjronndH  tlius  formally  open«'<l  ht 
]>ritisli  Miltjects  compris(>  about  L'.tKKl  sipiare  miles,  distant  and  uiipm 
ductive,  and  which,  for  these  and  other  reasons, are  praitically  niiavai- 
able  to  the  British  tislicrman.  It  is  shown  above  that  the  best  I'luttd 
States  authorities  concur  in  opinion  that  these  fisheries  are  rapi<ll.v  le 
cominjj  exhausted,  atlordinj;  scaiccly  remunerative  emph)yment  tor 
American  lishermen,  who  have  been  themselves  oblijjetl  to  abaiidoii 
these  grounds  and  resort  in  larjje  numbers  to  the  more  |U'(Hlm*tive  waters 
ot  Canada,  it  is  as  impossible  t«»  ccmceive  in  theory  that  British  lisln-r 
men  should  forsake  their  own  abundant  waters  to  undertake  a  Ion;:  ami 
arduous  voyaj:e  to  thos4' distant  and  nnremunerative  fisheries,  as  it  isau 
nudispnted'  matter  of  iact  that  they  do  not,  and,  in  all  i»robability,  never 

will  tlo  80. 

A  similar  concepsion  embodied  in  the  Keciprocity  Treaty  of  1^'>i 
which  embraced  three  decrees  more  in  a  southerly  direction,  exteiitliii;' 
along  the  coasts  of  Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  and  part  of  N«rili 
Carolina,  to  the  thirty  sixth  parallel  of  north  latitude,  provetl,  diiiin;: 
the  twelve  years  it  existed,  of  no  practical  value  whatsoever,  ii»)t  a 
Kingle  British  fisherman  having  utilized  it. 

The  queHtiou  of  bait  muut  now  be  considered,  as  some  importaoce  may 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISIIKRY   COMMISSION. 


99 


porli:M'*'  ''<*  ftttftchod  l»y  tlio  llniti'd  Stiitos  to  tho  HuppoHod  ndvnnta^cs 
(It'iivt'il  ill  thiH  roMprrt  by  Hriti.sli  siibjjM'ts.  It  mijjlit  upp«nir,  sit  (Irst 
i4i;:lit,  tliiit  tlio  privil('t;«^  of  n'Mortint;  to  tlio  iiiMli<»i-c.>^  of  the  Ka.steru 
Stiitr.H  to  procnu^  hiiit  tor  iiDirkcirol  tishiii^  wjih  of  priU^tuMl  iiso.  Mimi- 
liiilni  arc  Mjii<l  to  lu«  t'oiiiid  only  in  United  Stiit«\s  waters,  and  are  used 
extensively  in  the  iiiaekerel  tlnhiii^,  which  is  olten  siieiiesHfiilly  pursued 
wiih  this  desirriptioii  of  liait,  especially  by  its  use  for  teediii;^  and  attract- 
in;:  tlic  shoals.  It  is,  ..owever,  by  no  means  imlispensable;  other  tlsh* 
biiits,  plei.tifiil  in  British  wat«>rs,  are  ipiite  as  snccesst'iilly  used  in  this 
]i;iiti('iiiar  kind  of  tlshin^  business,  and  very  generally  in  other  bran(;hes, 
liotti  of  deep  sea  and  inshore  fishing,  as,  fur  example,  liesh  herrings, 
alfwivcs,  capelin,  sandlaiince,  smtilts,  s<|(iids,  clams,  and  other  small 
tlHlics  caught  chietly  with  seines  close  inshore.  Ibitish  tishermeii  can 
thus  find  siinicit'iit  Itaitat  home,  and  can  purchase  from  American  deal- 
IIS  any  «|Maniities  th«'y  require  much  idieaper  than  by  making  voyages 
t(»  liiited  ^States  waters  in  order  to  (!at«!h  it  for  themselves.  It  is  a  re- 
iiiarkaltle  fact  that  for  six  years  past  American  tishermen  have  boufcht 
tidiii  Canadians  more  herriii;{  bait  alone  than  all  the  menhaden  bait  im- 
|ii)iicd  into  Canada  during  tlie  same  period.  The  menhaden  bait  itself 
can  also  be  bretl  and  restored  to  phu-es  in  the  Hay  of  Kundy,  on  the 
Western  <'oast  o(  Nova  Scotia,  where  it  existed  up  to  the  time  ot  its  local 
extcriiiination. 

It  is  notorious  that  the  supply  both  of  food  and  bait  tlsliea  has  be- 
coiiie  alarmingly  scaii-e  aloiijj  the  United  States  coast.  At  (lloucestev 
jiIdiic  some  thirty  vessels  are  en^ap'd  <liiriii^  about  six  months  in  each 
\eiir  catcliin^  menhadt'ii  tor  bait.  They  sell  about  .i^lOO,*!*!!*  worth  an- 
nually, atid,  iiy  (^itcliiii^  them  immoderately  in  nets  and  weirs  tor  siip- 
pl\iii;i  Itait  and  to  tiirnish  the  oil  mills,  tliey  are  rapidly  exterminatin;; 
tlieiii.  The  Massachusetts  I'ishery  ('oinmissioiier.>,  in  their  report  lor 
ISTJ,  stale  that  "  It  takes  many  hands  woikin^f  in  many  ways  to  catcli 
liait  eiHMi^h  lor  our  tisliin;;  tieet,  wli:cli  may  easily  \n>  uiulerstood  when 
il  is  leiiiembered  that  eacli  (leorjje's  man  takes  tifteen  or  twenty  barrels 
lira  trip;  and  that  each  mackeivler  lays  in  from  To  to  1J(»  barrels,  or 
even  untie  than  that."  Jiie  of  the  principal  modes  tor  the  capture  of 
liait  and  other  tlshes  on  tlu^  New  Kiiffland  coast  is  by  tixed  traps  or 
lioiiiids  on  the  slH)re.  IJy  means  of  these,  lierrinKf^.  alewives,  and  ineii- 
liadeii  are  caujjht  as  bait  for  the  sea  tlshery,  ln'sich's  merchantable  tish 
li'i  tlu'  markets,  and  the  coarser  kinds  for  the  supply  of  the  oil  factories. 
Tlieie  are  upward  of  sixty  of  these  factories  now  in  operation  on  the  New 
Kii^rlaiid  coast.  The  capital  invested  in  them  approaches  )jf;i,(K>(>,0(K>. 
Tiiev  employ  1,107  men,  .{S.}  sailing  vessels,  and  !.".>  steamers,  besides 
iiiiiiierniiH  other  boats.  The  tlsh  material  which  they  consume  yearly  is 
t'lKinitoiis,  c(Miiputed  at  alxuit  1,11M,1(U)  barrels,  rei|iiiiini;  whole  fishes 
totlieiiumlierof  aluMit  .■{(>b,0(MI.(UM».  These  modes  of  lishin^  fcu"  menhaden 
ami  other  bait  are  furthermore  siuih  as  to  preclmle  straii{j;ers  from  par- 
ti<i|tatiii^  in  them  without  exceetlin;;  the  terms  of  the  treaty;  and  even 
>*itli(»iit  this  dilllculty,  it  must  bo  apparent  that  such  extensive  native 
iiiteiprises  would  bar  the  competition  and  sutlice  to  insure  tbo  virtual 
ixi'liision  of  foreifiners. 

Thf  attention  of  the  Commissioners  is  therefore  respectfully  drawn  to 
tlie  tollowiiifj  points: 
1.  The  "sea  fishery"  is  distant  and  unproductive. 
-.  The  inshores  are  occupied  to  the  fullest  possible  extent,  and  the 
sni)|>ly,  especially  in  the  matter  of  bait,  is  rapidly  becoming  exhausted. 
'^.  British  tishermen  have  not,  either  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty 
I  or  the  Treaty  of  VV^ashington,  availed  themselves  of  the  freedom  of  tisL- 
I'lg  ill  the  United  States  waters. 


'■■i   ^ 


'','*  f  J 

V       •  i  ,     I    (S 

'*  i'  iff'l 

'^    \l« 

\  *  J 

s 

.Si 


^m 


100 


AWARD   OF    THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


'M)» 


ml 


I 


fel 


.V  careful  consideration  of  those  i)oint8  will,  we  believe,  lead  to  tlio 
eoiivirtioii  that  in  tijis  respect  noadvantay;o  uliatever  accrues  to  lUiiisli 
suUjects. 

H.  Cusfonis  rchUKsions  hy  the  Fnital  Siatrs  in  favor  of  Canndn. 

The  privile;;e  of  i  free  market  in  the  I  iiited  States  for  the  prodiico 
of  the  tisheri«'s  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  exc«'ptinj^  lish  of  the  irlaiid 
lakes  and  tribntary  rivers,  and  lish  pki'served  in  oil,  remains  to  be  ((ui- 
sidered.  It  forms  the  onl.v  appn-ciable  concession  alfonU'd  b>  the  treaty 
for  the  rij;ht  of  free  tislu-ry  in  llritish  waters,  and  the  collateral  advaii- 
ta^'cs  derived  by  Unitinl  States  citiziMis.  We  have  alr«'ady  advertt'il 
in  para}.M-a|>h  a  of  chapter  '2  of  this  (.^tse  to  the  mutual  benetit  ol  a 
recipr(n-al  fiee  market  for  fish.  This  is  so  clearly  an  i'dvanta^je  to  all 
ctuicerned,  and  particularly  t(»  the  nation  c«>aiprisin<;  the  lar;iest  nninliiT 
of  tislM"*men,  traders,  and  consumers,  that  it  cannot  l»e  contended  that 
i':  this  resp»'ct  any  advantaj;e  is  conceileil  to  Canada  which  is  not  par 
licipated  in  by  the  United  States. 

COXCLI'SION. 

For  these  and  other  reasons  Her  Majesty's  (lovernment,  for  the  con 
cession  of  tliesj'  ptivilejjes  in  r»'sp«M-t  of  the  Dominion  of  Cana«la,  ciaiiii, 
ovt'r  and  above  the  value  of  any  advanta;;es  cont'errcd  on  IJntish  siii). 
jects  under  the  Fishery  Articles  of  the  Treaty  of  \Vashinj;ton,  a  ^mi).>s 
sum  of  ^'llIjO*^"'"'*^^  to  be  i»aul  in  accordance  with  the  terms  ol  the 
treaty. 

PART  H.-NKWI(>IN1)I,AM). 

CilArJ'EK  I. — IntrotlmtioH  and  (h'scription  of  ycirfoiimJland  fislicrim. 

It  has  been  already  submitted,  on  pa;i«'  l."»of  the  introductory  portiiMi 
of  this  case,  that  tin-  lollowiiij;  bas's  is  the  oidy  one  which  it  is  possililf 
to  adi>|»t  uihUt  tlu' trrms  of  th«' liist  part  of  Artich-  XVlll  of  tin-  I  ita'y 
o\'  Washinj^lon,  bSTl,  namely,  that  tin*  vabu*  of  the  privilejics  {^raiittil 
t«»  each  ronntry  n'spt-ttivi'Iy  by  Aitidrs  Will,  XIX,  and  XXI  of  ili.it 
ticaty,  ir/j/c/j  inrf  n<>t  iiiJuj/dI  lunUr  the  l.st  ArticU of'  tin:  Conrcntidn  nf 
tin  'JOtli  of  October,  1S18,  is  that  which  this  Commission  is  constituted  tn 
dett-rmine. 

Tin*  p«>siti»MJ  occnpitMl  by  Newfonndlaml  in  re^j^ard  to  the  ri^htof  li^ll■ 
in;i  enjoyeil  by  the  I'nited  States  citi/.ens  on  hi-r  coasts  is.  howevei.  i<i 
many  points  distinct  from  that  uf  Canada,  and  it  is  desirable  tu  stiite 
precisely  how  the  case  stands. 

liy  Article  I  of  the  Convention  of  ISIS  the  inhabitants  ot  the  I'liittil 
States  acipiircd  '"forever  the  lil>erty  to  take  lish  »>f  every  kind  on  that 
l»arl  of  the  southern  coast  of  N»'wfoundland  which  extends  from  <'ipi' 
Kay  to  the  Kauieau  Islands;  on  the  wt'stern  and  northern  coast  ot  Nc"- 
loiindland  from  the  said  Cape  Uay  to  the  (^iiirpon  Islands,  and  also  mi 
the  coasts,  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  from  .Mount  .loly,  on  the  souiiii'iii 
coast  ot  Labrador,  to  anil  tliiouj;h  the  Straits  of  Ilelle  Isle,  and  tlitnti' 
north\var«lly  indelinitely  alon^  the  coast,  ami  the  liberty  forever  to  tliv 
and  <;ure  lish  in  any  of  the  nnsettle«l  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  ot  tin' 
southern  part  of  the  coast  of  >'ewl(»undlaml,  hen'above  described,  ami 
the  coast  of  Labrador;  but  so  soon  a.s  the  Hame,  or  any  part  tlieicut, 
shall  be  settleil,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  l<)r  the  said  lisluunu'ii  to  dry 'U 
cure  lish  at  such  portions  so  settleil  without  i)revioU8  agreement  tir 
such  ))urpose  with  the  inhabitants,  ])roprii'tors,  or  possessors  of  the 
ground;  and  the  Uuited  States  renounced  foiever  any  liberty  hcnio 


ii*!:»cv^!«l««*«*rf'''^ 


■a Wii-  ■ '- :L,i,i.^t,-f-^^ ,., .irtMtMc^v-^.iw -  ■'  ■ .  i)tJt.*.'/mV.v»t-i\'t^fm'AM*c 


i 


tl 


^  /.«it  ,|. 


it,:''  ■:)& 
'4 


'K:  •  "•' 


^^!!  h-^ 


ilteMa^^ 


aBiawftiWMWM'W'tf^*"*'''  "'''"*'"*''''"'*''°'' 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   nOMMISSION. 


101 


fore  enjoyed  or  claimed  by  the  iDhabitants  thereof,  to  take,  dry,  or  care 
tisli  on  or  within  three  marine  miies  of  any  of  the  coasts,  bays,  creeks, 
or  harbors  of  His  Majesty's  dominions  in  America  not  included  within 
the  above-mentioned  limits;  provided,  however,  that  the  United  States 
fishermen  shall  be  admitted  to  enter  snch  bays  or  harbors  for  the  pur- 
pose of  shelter  and  of  repairing  damages  therein,  of  purchasing  wood 
and  of  obtaining  water,  and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever;  but  they 
shall  be  under  such  restrictions  as  shall  be  necessary  to  prevent  their 
taking,  drying,  or  curing  fish  therein  or  in  any  other  matter  whatever 
abusing  the  privileges  hereby  reserved  to  them." 

Tn  addition  to  the  privileges  so  enjoyed  under  the  Convention  of  1818, 
Articles  XVIII  and  XXI  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington  granted  to  United 
States  citizens : 

(I.)  The  liberty  to  take  fish  of  every  kind,  except  shellfish,  on  the  re- 
maining portion  of  the  coast  of  Newfoundland,  with  liberty  to  land  on 
the  said  coast  for  the  puri)ose  of  drying  their  nets  and  curing  their  flsli; 
provided,  that  in  so  doing  they  do  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  pri- 
vate property  or  with  British  fishermen  in  the  peaceable  use  of  any  part 
of  the  said  coast  in  their  occupancy  for  the  snid  purpose;  the  salmon 
and  shad  fisheries  and  all  other  fisheries  in  rivers  and  mouths  of  rivers 
being  reserved  exclusively  for  British  fishermen. 

(2.)  The  admission  into  Newfoundland  of  tishoi!  and  fish  of  all  kinds, 
except  fish  of  the  inland  lakes  and  rivers  falling  into  them,  and  except 
fish  preserved  in  oil,  being  the  produce  of  fisheries  of  the  United  States, 
free  of  duty. 

The  enjoyment  of  these  privileges  to  continue  for  the  period  of  twelve 
years  certain. 

In  return  for  the  privileges  so  granted  to  United  States  citizens, 
British  subjects  acquired  under  the  same  treaty — 

1.  Similar  rights  of  fishing  and  landing  on  United  States  coasts  north 
of  the  39th  parallel  of  north  latitude ;  and, 

2.  The  admission  into  the  United  States  of  fish-oil  and  fish  of  all 
kinds,  except  fish  preserved  in  oil,  being  the  produce  ot  the  fisheries  of 
Newfoundland,  free  of  duty. 

These  privileges  are  also  to  continue  for  a  period  of  twelve  years 
certain. 

A  reference  to  the  accompanying  map  will  show  that  the  coast,  the 
entire  freedom  of  which  for  fishing  purposes  has  thus  been  acquired  by 
the  United  States  for  a  period  of  twelve  years,  embraces  that  portion 
extending  from  the  Bameau  Islands  on  the  southwest  coast  of  the 
island  eastward  and  northwardly,  to  the  Quirpon  Islands.  This  coast 
contains  an  area  of  upwards  of  11,000  square  miles,  including  admit- 
tedly the  most  valuable  cod-fisheries  in  the  world.  Fish  of  other  de- 
ficriptions,  namely,  herring,  capelin,  and  squid,  which  are  by  far  the 
best  bait  for  the  successlul  prosecution  of  the  cod  fisheries,  can  be  taken 
in  unlimited  quantities  close  inshore  along  the  whole  coast,  whilst  in 
some  parts  are  turbot,  halibut,  and  lance. 

The  subjoined  tables  (Appendix  B)  of  the  exports  of  fish  from  New- 
foundland for  the  past  seven  years  will  show  the  enormous  and  increas- 
ing value  of  these  fisheries ;  and  the  census  returns  also  annexed  ( Ap- 
Ipeiidix  C)  afiford  the  clearest  evidence  that  the  catch  is  very  large  iu 
proportion  to  the  number  of  men,  vessels,  and  boats  engaged  in  fishing 
[operations  on  the  coasts  of  Newfoundland,  which  have  been  thrown  open 
[to  Qnited  States  citizens  under  the  '''  eaty  of  Washington. 

Ill  addition  to  the  value,  as  shown  .ibove,  of  the  iushore  fisheries,  the 
;)roximity  of  the  Bank  fisheries  to  the  coast  of  Newfouudlaud  forms  a 


102 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Tery  Important  element  in  the  present  inqniry.  These  fisheries  are  sit- 
uated at  distances  varying  from  35  to  200  miles  from  the  coast  of  New- 
foundland, and  are  productive  in  the  highest  degree.  Although  they 
are  open  to  vessels  of  all  nations,  their  successful  prosecution  depends 
almost  entirely  in  securing  a  commodious  and  proximate  basis  of  opera- 
tions. Bait,  which  can  be  most  conveniently  obtained  in  the  inshore 
\raters  of  Newfoundland,  is  indispensable,  and  the  supply  of  capeliu, 
squid,  and  herring  is  there  inexhaustible  for  this  purpose. 

With  reference  to  the  importance  which  has  from  earliest  times  been 
attached  to  the  value  of  the  fisheries  of  Newfoundland,  it  is  to  be  ob- 
served that  a  great  portion  of  the  articles  in  the  treaties  of  1783  and 
1818  between  Great  IBritain  and  the  United  States  is  devoted  to  careful 
stipulations  respecting  their  enjoyment;  and  it  will  not  escape  the  ob- 
servation of  the  Commissioners  that  the  privileges  granted  to  United 
States  fishermen  in  those  treaties  were  always  limited  in  extent,  and 
did  not  confer  the  entire  freedom  for  fishing  operations  which  is  now 
accorded  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  even  on  those  portions  of  the 
coast  which  were  then  thrown  open  to  them.  Thus,  whilst  according 
the  ])riviiege  of  fishing  on  certain  portions  of  the  coast,  the  treaty  of 
1783  denied  the  right  of  landing  to  dry  and  cure  on  the  shore,  and  the 
result  was  that,  so  far  as  concerned  dried  codfish,  the  concession  to  the 
United  States  was  of  little  or  no  advantage  to  them.  It  was  indispen- 
sable to  the  production  of  a  superior  article  of  dried  codfish  that  there 
should  be  a  speedy  landing  and  curing  in  a  suitable  climate.  The 
climate  of  the  United  States  is  not  adapted  for  this  purpose,  whilst  that 
of  Newfoundland  is  peculiarly  suitable.  This  fact  is  evidenced  by  the 
United  States  having  never  competed  with  Newfoundland  in  foreign 
markets  in  the  article  of  dried  codfish,  whilst  they  were  debarred  from 
landing  on  Newfoundland  shores.  Again,  it  is  necessary  for  the  prose- 
cution of  the  fisheries,  with  reasonable  prospects  of  lucrative  results, 
that  the  fishermen  should  be  in  proximity  to  their  curing  and  drying 
establishments. 

The  treaty  of  1783  was  annulled  by  the  war  of  1812,  and  the  stipula- 
tions of  Article  I  of  the  Convention  of  1818,  quoted  in  extenao  on  page 
4*  of  this  case,  made  important  modifications  in  the  privileges  hereto- 
fore enjoyed  by  United  States  fishermen.  Although  they  had,  under 
this  convention,  the  liberty  of  drying  and  curing  fish  upon  the  southern 
coast  of  Newfoundland  from  the  Bameau  Island  to  Cape  Kay,  it  was 
confined  to  the  unsettled  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  within  these  limits, 
and,  it  being  provided  that  so  soon  as  any  portion  thereof  should  be 
settled,  the  liberty  should  cease,  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States 
have  been  prevented,  by  the  coast  becoming  generally  settled,  from 
availing  themselves  of  the  liberty  so  conceded.  Previously,  therefore, 
to  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  United  States  fishermen  did  not  inter- 
fere with  the  Newfoundland  fishermen  as  regards  the  article  of  dried 
codfish,  although  they  prosecuted  the  herring-fishery  at  Bonne  Bay  and 
Bay  of  Islands  on  the  western  coast. 

The  question  of  the  privileges  of  fishing  on  certain  portions  of  the 
Newfoundland  shores  enjoj'ed  by  French  fishermen  does  not  come  within 
the  scope  of  this  Commission,  yet  a  passing  allusion  may  be  made  to  it. 
These  privileges  consist  in  the  freedom  of  the  inshore  fisheries  frotu 
Cape  Bay  northwardly  to  Quirpon  Islands,  and  from  thence  to  Cape 
John,  on  parallel  50°  of  north  latitude;  and  the  value  attached  to  this 
jight  by  the  French  Government  is  attested  by  their  solicitude  in  main- 

*  Page  60  of  this  editiou. 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


103 


tipula- 
page 
lereto- 
under 
them 
it  was 
llimits, 
luUi  be 
States 
from 
Irefore, 
inter- 
dried 
,y  and 

lof  the 
Iwithin 

to  it. 

froitt 

Cape 
this 

main- 


taining it,  nnd  by  the  amount  of  French  capital  embarked  in  the  prose- 
cution of  these  fisheries.  This  affords  another  proof  of  the  produc- 
tiveness of  the  waters  of  the  island. 

Ghapteb  II. — Advantages  derived  by  United  States  citizens. 

It  will  not  be  a  matter  of  surprise  that  there  should  be  an  absence  of 
exact  statistical  information  when  the  faxsts  are  taken  into  consideration 
that,  until  the  Washington  Treaty,  this  vast  extent  of  (ishery  was 
exclusively  used  by  the  people  of  Kewfoundhind — sparsely  scattered 
over  a  long  range  of  coast,  for  the  most  part  in  small  settlements,  be- 
tween the  majority  of  which  the  only  means  of  communication  is  by 
water,  and  where,  up  to  the  present  time,  there  was  no  special  object 
in  collecting  statistical  details.  It  is  proposed,  however,  to  show,  by  such 
evidence  as  will,  it  is  believed,  satisfy  tbe  Commissioners,  the  nature 
and  value  of  the  privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  tlte  United  States 
under  the  Treaty  of  Washington.  These  may  be  conveniently  divided 
into  three  heads,  as  follows: 

I.  The  entire  freedom  of  the  inshore  fisheries. 

II.  The  privilege  of  procuring  bait,  refitting,  drying,  transshipping, 
and  procuring  supplies. 

III.  The  advantage  of  a  free  market  in  Newfoundland  for  fish  and 
fish-oil. 

The  privileges  granted  in  return  to  British  subjects  will  be  treated 
subsequently,  and  consist  of — 

1.  The  liberty  of  prosecuting  fishing  operations  in  United  States 
waters  north  of  the  39th  parallel  of  north  latitude  ;  and, 

2.  The  advantages  of  a  free  market  in  the  United  States  for  fish  and 
fish-oil. 

I.  The  entire  freedom  of  the  inshore  fisheries, 

Newfonndland,  from  ^hat  part  of  its  coast  now  thrown  open  to 
United  States  fishermen,  yearly  extracts,  at  the  lowest  estimate, 
$5,()0U,0U0  worth  of  fish  and  fish-oil,  and  when  the  value  of  fish  used  for 
bait  and  local  consumption  for  food  and  agricultural  purposes,  of  which 
there  are  no  returns,  is  taken  into  account,  the  total  may  be  fairly 
stated  at  $G,OUO,OUO  annually. 

It  may  possibly  be  contended  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  that 
their  fishermen  have  not  in  the  past  availed  themselves  of  the  New- 
foundland inshore  fisheries,  with  but  few  exceptions,  and  that  they 
would  and  do  resort  to  the  coasts  of  that  island  only  for  the  purpose  of 
procuring  bait  for  the  Bank  fishery.  This  may  up  to  the  present  time, 
to  some  extent,  be  true  as  regards  codfish,  but  not  as  regards  herring, 
turbot,  and  halibut.  It  is  not  at  all  probable  that,  possessing  as  they 
now  do  the  right  to  take  herring  and  capelin  for  themselves  on  all  parts 
of  the  Newfoundland  coasts,  they  will  continue  to  purchase  as  hereto- 
fore, and  they  will  thus  prevent  the  local  fishermen,  especially  those  of 
Fortune  Buy,  from  engaging  in  a  very  lucrative  employment  which 
formerly  occupied  them  during  a  portion  of  the  wiuter  season  for  the 
supply  of  the  United  States  market. 

The  words  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  in  dealing  with  the  question 
of  compensation,  make  no  allusion  to  what  use  the  United  States  may 
or  do  make  of  the  privilegv^^s  granted  them,  but  simply  state  that,  inas- 
much tis  it  is  asserted  by  Her  Majesty's  Government  that  the  privileges 
accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Article  XVII [  are 
of  greater  value  than  those  accorded  by  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  to  tbe 


104 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


subjects  of  Her  Britaunic  Majesty,  and  this  is  not  admitted  by  the 
[Jiiited  States,  it  is  further  agreed  that  a  Cominission  shall  be  appointed, 
having  regard  to  the  privileges  accorded  by  tlie  United  States  to  Uer 
Britannic  Majesty's  subjects  in  Articles  Nos.  XIX  and  XXI,  the  amount 
of  any  compensation  to  be  paid  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
to  tliat  of  Her  Mtijesty  in  return  for  the  privileges  accorded  to  the 
United  States  under  Article  XVIII. 

It  is  asserted,  on  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,  that  the 
actual  use  which  may  bo  made  of  this  privilege  at  the  present  moment 
is  not  so  much  in  question  as  the  actual  value  of  it  to  those  who  may,  if 
they  will,  use  it.  It  is  possible,  an<l  even  probable,  that  United  States 
flshermen  may  at  any  moment  avail  themselves  of  the  privilege  of  fish- 
ing in  Newfoundland  inshore  waters  to  a  much  larger  extent  than  they 
do  at  present;  but  even  if  they  should  not  do  so,  it  would  not  relieve 
them  from  the  obligation  of  making  the  just  payment  for  a  right  which 
they  have  acquired  subject  to  the  condition  of  making  that  payment. 
The  case  may  be  not  inaptly  illustrated  by  the  somewhat  analogous  one 
of  a  tenancy  of  shooting  or  fishing  privileges ;  it  is  not  because  the 
tenant  fails  to  exercise  the  rights  which  be  has  acquired  by  virtue  of 
his  lease  that  the  proprietor  should  be  debarred  from  the  recovery  of 
liis  rent. 

There  is  a  marked  contrast,  to  the  advantiige  of  the  United  States 
citizens,  betweeu  tlie  privilege  of  access  to  fisheries  the  most  valuable 
and  productive  in  the  world,  and  the  barren  right  accorded  to  the  in- 
habitants of  Newfoundland  of  fishing  in  the  exhausted  and  preoccupied 
wafers  of  the  United  States  north  of  the  thirty-ninth  parallel  of  north 
latitude,  in  which  there  is  no  field  for  lucrative  operations  even  if  British 
subjects  desired  to  resort  to  them ;  and  there  are  strong  grounds  for 
believing  that  year  by  year,  as  United  States  fishermen  resort  in  greater 
numbers  to  the  coasts  of  Newfoundland  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  bait 
and  supplies,  they  will  become  more  intimately  acquainted  with  the 
resources  of  the  inshore  fisheries  and  their  unlimited  capacity  for  ex- 
tension and  development.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  United  States  vessels 
have,  since  the  Washington  Treaty  came  into  operation,  been  success- 
fully engaged  in  these  fisheries ;  and  it  is  but  reasonable  to  anticipate 
that,  as  the  advantages  to  be  derived  from  them  become  more  widely 
known,  larger  numbers  of  United  States  fishermen  will  engage  in  them. 

A  participation  by  fishermen  of  the  United  States  in  the  freedom  of 
these  waters  must,  notwithstanding  their  wonderfully  reproductive 
capacity,  tell  materially  on  the  local  catch,  and,  while  affording  to  the 
United  States  fishermen  a  profitable  employment,  must  seriously  inter- 
fere with  local  success.  The  extra  amount  of  bait  also  which  is  required 
for  the  supply  of  the  United  States  demand  for  the  bank  fishery  must 
Lave  the  effect  of  diminishing  the  supply  of  cod  for  the  inshores,  as  it 
is  well  known  that  the  presence  of  that  fish  is  caused  by  the  attractioa 
offered  by  a  large  quantity  of  bait  fishes,  and  as  this  quantity  diminishes 
the  cod  will  resort  in  fewer  number  to  the  coast.  The  effect  of  this 
diminution  may  not  in  all  probability  be  apparent  for  some  years  to 
come,  and  whilst  United  States  fishermen  will  have  the  liberty  of  enjoy- 
ing the  fisheries  for  several  years  in  their  present  teeming  and  remu- 
nerative state,  the  effects  of  overfishing  may,  after  their  right  to  parti- 
cipate in  them  has  lapsed,  become  seriously  prejudicial  to  the  interests 
of  the  local  fishermen. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


105 


II. —  The  privilege  of  procuring  bait  and  supplies^  refitting^  drying,  tranS' 

shipping,  &C. 

Apart  from  the  immense  value  to  United  States  fishermen  of  partici- 
pation in  the  Newfoundland  inshore  fisheries,  must  be  eatitnated  the 
important  privilege  of  procuring  bait  for  the  prosecution  of  the  bank 
uud  deep-sea  fisheries,  wliich  are  capable  of  u  iilinnted  expansion.  With 
^^ttwfoundland  as  a  basis  of  operations,  the  right  of  procuring  bait,  re- 
tittiiig  tlieir  vessels,  drying  and  curing  fish,  procuring  ice  in  abundance 
for  the  preservation  of  bait,  liberty  of  transshipping  their  cargoes,  &ij., 
an  almost  continuous  prosecution  of  the  bank  fishery  is  secured  to  them. 
By  means  of  these  advantages  United  States  fishermen  have  acquired, 
by  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  all  the  requisite  facilities  for  increasing 
their  fishing  operations  to  such  an  extent  as  to  enable  them  to  supply 
thw  demand  for  fish  food  in  the  United  States  markets,  and  largely  to 
liirnish  the  other  fish-markets  of  the  world,  and  thereby  exercise  a  com- 
I)etition  which  must  inevitably  prejudice  Newfoundland  exporters.  It 
must  be  remembered,  in  contrast  with  the  foregoing,  that  United 
States  fishing  craft,  before  the  conclusion  of  the  Treaty  of  Washing- 
ton, could  only  avail  themselves  of  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  for 
obtaining  a  supply  of  wood  and  water,  for  shelter,  and  for  necessary 
repairs  in  case  of  accident,  and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever;  they 
therefore  prosecuted  the  bank  fishery  under  great  disadvantages,  not- 
withstanding which,  owing  to  the  failure  of  the  United  States  local 
fisheries,  and  the  consequent  necessity  of  providing  new  fishing  grounds, 
the  bank  fisheries  have  developed  into  a  lucrative  source  of  employ- 
ment to  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States.  That  this  position  is  ap- 
]ireciated  by  those  actively  engaged  in  the  bank  fisheries  is  attested  by 
the  statements  of  competent  witnesses,  whose  evidence  will  be  laid  be- 
fore the  Commission. 

It  is  impossible  to  o£fer  more  convincing  testimony  as  to  the  value  to 
United  States  fishermen  of  securing  the  right  to  use  the  coast  of  New- 
foundland as  a  basis  of  operations  for  the  bank  fisheries  than  is  contained 
iu  the  declaration  of  one  who  has  been  for  six  years  so  occupied,  sailing 
from  the  ports  of  Salem  and  Gloucester,  in  Massachusetts,  and  who 
declares  that  it  is  of  the  greatest  importance  to  United  States  fisher- 
men to  procure  from  Newfoundland  the.  bait  necessary  for  those  fish- 
eries, and  that  such  benefits  can  hardly  be  overestimated ;  that  there 
will  be,  during  the  season  of  1876,  upwards  of  200  United  States  ves- 
sels in  Fortune  Bay  for  bait,  and  that  there  will  be  upwards  of  300 
vessels  from  the  United  States  engaged  in  the  Grand  Bank  fishery; 
that  owing  to  the  great  advantage  of  being  able  to  run  into  Newfound- 
land for  bait  of  ditt'erent  kinds,  they  are  enabled  to  make  four  trips 
during  the  season;  that  the  capelin,  which  may  be  considered  as  a  bait 
peculiar  to  Newfoundland,  is  the  best  which  can  be  used  for  this  fish- 
ery, and  that  a  vessel  would  probably  be  enabled  to  make  two  trips 
during  the  capelin  season,  which  extends  over  a  period  of  about  six 
weeks.  The  same  experienced  deponent  is  of  opinion  that  the  bank 
fiisheries  are  capable  of  immense  expansion  and  development,  and  that 
the  privilege  of  gettip  ?  bait  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  is  indispen- 
sable for  the  accomplishment  of  this  object. 

As  an  instance  of  the  demand  for  bait  supplies  derived  from  the  New- 
foundland inshore  fisheries,  it  may  be  useful  to  state  that  the  average 
amount  of  this  article  consumed  by  the  French  fishermen,  who  only 
]>rosecute  the  Bank  fisheries  during  a  period  of  about  six  months  of  the 
year,  is  from  $120,000  to  $160,000  aunaally.    The  herring,  capelin,  and 


106 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


'^11' 


«>' 


pqaid  amply  meet  these  requirements  and  are  supplied  by  the  people  nf 
Fortune  and  Placeutia  Hays,  the  produce  of  the  Islands  of  St.  Pierre 
and  Miquelon  being  insufficient  to  meet  the  demand. 

It  is  evident  from  the  above  considerations  that  not  only  are  the 
United  States  fishermen  almost  entirely  dependent  on  the  bait  supply 
from  Newfoundland,  now  open  to  them  for  tlie  successful  prosecution  of 
the  Bank  fisheries,  but  also  that  they  are  enabled,  through  the  privi- 
leges conceded  to  them  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  to  largely  increase 
the  number  of  their  trips,  and  thus  considerably  augment  the  profits  of 
the  enterprise.  This  substantial  advantage  is  secured  at  the  risk,  sis 
before  mentioned,  of  hereafter  depleting  the  bait  supplies  of  the  New- 
foundland inshores,  and  it  is  but  just  that  a  substantial  equivalent 
should  be  paid  by  those  who  profit  thereby. 

We  are  therefore  warranted  in  submitting  to  the  Commissioners  that 
not  only  should  the  present  actual  advantages  derived  on  this  heatl  by 
United  States  fishermen  be  taken  into  consideration,  but  also  the  prob- 
able effect  of  the  concessions  made  in  their  favor.  The  inevitable  con- 
sequence of  these  concessions  will  be  to  attract  a  larger  amount  of 
United  States  capital  and  enterprise  following  the  profits  already  made 
in  this  direction,  and  the  effect  will  be  to  inflict  an  injury  on  the  local 
fishermen,  both  by  the  increased  demand  on  their  sources  of  supply  and 
by  competition  with  them  in  their  trade  with  foreign  markets. 

III. — The  advantage  of  a  free  market  for  ji»h  and  Jishoil  in  Newfound- 

land. 

It  might  at  first  sight  appear  from  the  return  of  fish  exports  from  the 
United  States  to  Newfoundland  that  this  privilege  was  of  little  or  no 
value ;  indeed,  the  duties  wheu  collected  ou  this  article  were  of  insig- 
nificant amount.  There  is,  however,  an  important  benefit  conferred  by 
it  on  United  States  fishermen  engaged  in  the  Bank  fisheries.  In  fi.sli- 
ing  on  the  banks  and  deep  sea,  heretofore  large  quantities  of  small  fisli 
were  thrown  overboard  as  comparatively  useless,  when  large  fish,  suita- 
ble for  the  United  States  market,  could  be  obtained  in  abundance ;  this 
practice  was  highly  prejudicial  to  the  fishing  grounds. 

Under  the  Washington  Treaty,  two  ol>jects  are  attained :  first,  a 
market  for  the  small  fish  at  remunerative  prices  in  Newfoundland;  and 
secondly,  the  preservation  of  the  fishing  grounds. 

It  is  evident  that,  although  at  the  present  time  United  States  fisher- 
men have  been  in  enjoyment  of  the  privileges  conferred  by  the  Treaty 
of  Washington  only  for  a  short  period,  and  may  not  have  availed  them- 
selves to  the  full  extent  of  this  privilege,  the  actual  profits  derived 
thereby,  and  which,  in  certain  instances,  will  be  substantiated  before 
the  Commissioners  by  the  evidence  of  competent  witnesses,  will  be  more 
fully  appreciated  during  the  remaining  years  of  the  existence  of  the 
right,  and  this  item  must  form  a  part  of  the  claim  of  Newfoundland 
against  the  United  States. 

Chapter  III. — Advantages  derived  by  British  subjects. 

Having  now  stated  the  advantages  derived  by  United  States  fisher- 
men under  the  operation  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  it  remains  to  es- 
timate the  value  of  the  privileges  granted  thereby  in  return  to  the  peo* 
pie  of  Newfoundland. 

In  the  first  place,  the  value  of  the  right  of  fishing  on  the  United 
States  co^st  coucedtid  to  them  mast  be  cousidered.    This  consists  iu 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEHT   COMMISSION. 


107 


the  liberty  of  flshinpr  operations,  viiih  certain  exceptions  already  set 
lortb,  on  that  part  of  tbe  United  States  coast  nortb  of  tbe39tb  parallel 
of  north  latitude. 

The  arguments  on  this  head  contained  in  section  1  of  chapter  3,  iu 
thi>  ^^case"  of  Canada,  will,  it  is  believed,  have  satisfied  thoCoiiiiniMsiou- 
ers  that  no  possible  benedt  can  be  derived  by  the  Qsliermen  of  New* 
fonndland  in  this  respect.  Indeed,  all  that  has  been  said  with  reganl 
to  Canada  applies  with  even  greater  force  to  tbe  more  distant  colony  of 
NewloundUind.  Evidence  has,  however,  been  collected,  and  will  be 
laid  before  tbe  Commissioners,  if  required,  to  prove  that  no  fishermen 
troin  Newfoundland  resort  to  United  States  waters  for  Ashing  opera* 
tions. 

Second,  and  finally,  tbe  remission  of  tbe  duty  by  the  United  States 
on  Newfoundland  exports  of  fish  and  tlsb-oil  mnst  be  taken  into  ac- 
count, and  this,  no  doubt,  will  be  viewed  as  the  most  important  item  of 
setot}  to  the  privileges  conferred  on  United  States  citizens. 

This  privilege  is,  however,  reciprocal,  and  enables  the  people  of  the 
United  States  to  dispose  of  tbeir  tish  in  Newfoundland  markets.  When 
the  comparatively  small  export  of  Newfoundland  fish  and  fish-oil  to  the 
United  States  is  taken  into  consideration,  the  amount  of  duty  remitted 
thereon  is  so  insignificant  that  it  could  not,  under  any  circumstances, 
be  entertained  as  an  otfset  for  a  participation  iu  the  privileges  accorded 
under  Article  XVIII  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

The  tables  annexed  (Appendix  D)  will  show  not  only  the  small  amount 
of  exports  of  this  article  from  Newfoundland  to  the  United  States,  but 
also  the  large  and  increasing  trade  with  other  countries.  Even  if  a  pro- 
hibitory duty  were  imposed  iu  the  United  States  on  exports  of  fish  from 
Newfoundland,  it  would  be  a  matter  of  small  moment  to  that  colony, 
which  would  readily  find  a  profitable  market  for  the  small  quantities  of 
iiHh  which  would  otherwise  be  exported  in  that  direction. 

Again,  upon  an  article  so  largely  consumed  as  fish  is  in  the  United 
States,  a  remission  of  duty  must  be  admitted  to  be  a  benefit  to  tbe 
community  remitting  the  duty,  as  in  reality  it  relieves  the  consumer, 
while  it  affords  no  additional  remuneration  to  tbe  shipper;  and  this,  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  has  been  particularly  the  case  as  regards  Newfound- 
land fish  shipments  to  the  United  States. 

The  opening  up  of  the  fishing-grounds  iu  Newfoundland,  and  their 
bait-supply  to  United  States  enterprise,  enables  tbe  people  of  that 
country  to  meet  the  demand  for  fish-food  in  their  markets ;  already  an 
appreciable  falling  off  has  taken  place  iu  tbe  exports  to  that  country  of 
Newfoundland-caught  fish  (which  has  always  been  very  limited),  and 
wbich,  it  may  not  unreasonably  be  supposed,  will  soon  cease,  owing  to 
the  extension  of  United  States  fishing  enterprise. 

CONCLUSION. 


It  has  thus  been  shown  that  under  tbe  Treaty  of  Washington  there 
has  been  conceded  to  the  United  States — 

First.  The  privilege  of  an  equal  participation  in  a  fishery  vast  in  area, 
teeming  with  fish,  continuously  increasing  in  productiveness,  and  now 
yielding  to  operatives,  very  limited  in  number  when  considered  with 
reference  to  tbe  field  of  labor,  the  large  annual  return  of  upwards  of 
$6,000,000,  of  which  20  per  cent,  may  be  estimated  as  net  profit,  oj 
$1,200,000. 

It  is  believed  that  the  claim  on  the  part  of  Newfoundland  in  respect 
of  this  portion  of  tbe  privileges  acquired  by  United  States  citizens  uq< 


108 


AWARD  OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


der  the  Treaty  of  Washinf^ton  will  he  confined  to  the  moot  moderate  di- 
meuslons  when  estimated  at  one-tenth  of  this  amount,  namely,  $12U,0U() 
per  annum,  or,  for  the  twelve  years  of  the  operation  of  the  treaty,  a  total 
sum  of  $1,440,000. 

Secondly.  There  has  also  been  conceded  to  the  United  States  the 
enormous  privilege  of  the  use  of  the  Newfoundland  coast  as  a  basis  for 
the  prosecution  of  those  valuable  fisheries  in  the  deep  sea  on  the  banks 
of  that  island  capable  of  unlimited  development,  and  which  develop- 
ment must  necessarily  take  place  to  supply  the  demand  of  extended  and 
extending  markets.  That  the  United  States  are  alive  to  the  importance 
of  this  fact,  and  appreciate  the  great  value  of  this  privilege,  is  evidenced 
by  the  number  of  valuable  fishing-vessels  already  engaged  in  this 
branch  of  the  fisheries. 

We  are  warranted  in  assuming  the  number  at  present  so  engaged  as 
at  least  300  sail,  and  that  each  vessel  will  annually  take,  at  a  moderate 
estimate,  fish  to  the  value  of  $10,000.  The  gross  annual  catch  made  by 
United  States  fishermen  in  this  branch  of  their  operations  cannot, 
therefore,  be  valued  at  less  than  $3,00l>,00U,  and  of  this  at  least  20  per 
cent.,  or  $000,000  per  annum,  may  fairly  be  reckoned  as  net  profit ;  of 
this  profit  Newfoundland  is  justified  in  claiming  one-fifth  as  due  to  her 
for  the  great  advantages  derived  by  the  United  States  fishermen  under 
the  Treaty  of  Washington  of  securing  Newfoundland  as  a  basis  of  op- 
erations and  a  source  of  bait-supply  indispensable  to  the  successful 
prosecution  of  the  Bank  fisheries.  An  annual  sum  of  $120,01)0  is  thus 
arrived  at,  which,  for  the  twelve  years  of  the  operation  of  the  treaty 
would  amount  to  $1,440,000,  which  is  the  sum  claimed  by  Her  Majesty'ii 
Government  on  behalf  of  Newfoundland  in  this  respect. 

In  conclusion,  for  the  concession  of  the  privileges  shown  above.  Her 
Majesty's  Government  claim,  in  respect  of  the  colony  of  Newfound- 
land, over  and  above  any  alleged  advantages  conferred  on  British  sub- 
jects under  the  fishery  articles  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  a  gross 
Bum  of  $2,880,000,  to  be  paid  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  the  treaty. 

SUMMARY. 


In  Part  I  of  this  case,  the  claim  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  in 
k'espect  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  has  been  stated  at  a  sum  of 
$12,000,000;  their  claim  in  respect  of  the  colony  of  Newfoundland  has 
been  stated  in  Part  II  at  a  sum  of  $2,880,000 — or  a  gross  total  of 
$14,880,000 — which  is  the  amount  which  they  submit  should  be  paid  to 
them  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  under  the  provisions  of 
Article  XXII  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington  of  the  8th  May,  1871. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


10» 


a 


1 

9 


» 


8 

en 

2^ 


3D  <  X 


o 

O 
H 

2  i 

0}    a 


^    3 


e:2 


?»     o 

o  ■» 


a  2 

<=•     1 

o 

to 


0 

u 

a 


■$  - 


s  «  "2 

■'a  S 

8-  g 

e  '«  « 

«  u  S 

^    B  S 

=   *  ■ 

>2  & 

s  s  :§ 

"Sua 

■"•  i  a 

t,C  S 


"s-s 


»  5    I 

«  -  s 


I 


94 

s 


i 

-a 


8 

a 
OP 


a 

-a 


9 

a 


88 


51 


ft  . 


s;  00 


-a 


88§aS 


Jf 


s 


^ 


t 


30 


.a 


sieeoo 
!-  3™  '5 

m     ct 


s 


TOO) 

o  ^ 


8SSSSS 


2SS-    « 


SS 

U 


?38 

|Q9S 
^  M  t?5 

-r    V 


88 


risr 


8388 


8 


SS 

ao'to" 


o  n 

in'i-r 


s 


of 


8 


8 


S 


8 


SS 

I' 


"■? 


88 


8f 


SS 

si -4 


88 


sss 


I-  SI  5 


88 

IS 

■AM 


IS 


SSSSSSSSfS 

fft  o  f- 1-  m  *  5  o  I-  5 


91         ccm 


X  M  rj 

tf  *N  -^ 


8"  as's's 


SS 


S3 

S^ 

Sn 

o 


SSS 

o  ^ 


irt  S  "r 

CO  *-  »w 


sss 

I-  71  •»• 

S22 


-r  cs  <•< 


ss:;; 

to  ^  »o 
IC  »  ?1 

O  iC  T 


So  3? 
V  rt  i" 


SP2 


sss 

Vo' sT 


5 '3  25 

sa 


o 

a 

be  be 


bi£ 


■    SO 


•5  o  o  q  3  o  o  e  ©  s  S  s  5  s  «  07?  5   •  s^ 

u 


0.5: 


0)   9 


®  at 


1 


ct 


a  a"  a"  a"  o  a      _ 

-O    is    ;^ «  55  a     Or'i     -•« 
ft    B    PHccosdiK    — 


o  a 


wH    •'Jm    hW 


110 


AWABD   OF  TBE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


S 


s 

•a 

> 


•g 

p 

a 

a 
o 

4. 


oe 


cs 

I 

«> 


1-4 

o 


S 

a 


o 

p 

I 


& 


2 


^ 


sss 


gSSo 


S 


1^       o 


3 


J3 

<a 

e 

a 
13 


s 


Sii 


s 


go   ,  3  e  X  c 1  a 


S88 


e  —  -' 
o  — 1« 


SSS 

i-foooo 


"SI"' 


SSS 

m  cjct  o 


a<maa 


111  iffi  "M 
^  M^   V 


ss 

i§ 


s 


3%SS 


SS'S 


ss 


»  It)  «  «     <     •  OC  OC  M 

B  £  g  t'^'C'g  fc  s -: 


liifM 


ID 

iS 

8^ 


II 


.a  a 
<3  a 


f«ll«  J^pil  l!|  sl  i|ll!|l^||l||f  fill  lli 


oil') 


13 


SSS 

to© 


Sis 


SSS 

III 


% 


POM 


S 


^SSSS 


tD  t  "^  3*  3f 


So o ^  t*  o 
9)  O  CC  'T4  A 


s 

(3  « 


kTSO  "^  w  to 


il?? 


OD  X  r-  cn  -H 
—  S '—  o  If; 
o  N  d  o  r- 


§5g 
O  ^ 


l^'S'S-S 


3 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


lit 


s 

S 

1 

T 

s 

* 

■v 

-i 

f 

» 

^ 

•8- 

^ 

^s 

r   <0 

^s 

i<* 

IS 

s 

A 

*P 

$ 

f^;; 

ef 

n 

<e 

3 

o 
H 


li 


1 

a 
a 


a 
o 


"S" 


I 


s 

9 

H 


•a 


"S^ 


8? 


K 


i 


a 
(> 


§ 

a 


s 

•a 


h 


a 


<3 


SISSaSS3SSSS!S§SSS8S9;SSSSSS;S8SSSSSSS2S;S§538?3 
*IIS8Sg||3SSs|SS2S2Si5SSS?;:S?agJ£5SS2SSS2§SSSg 


n"    cTef 


S8S 

ICf-  o 

SS3 


& 


I- 


Is 

a' '" 


si 

no 


tS  Q)  V 

^8S 


ssss 


qfaJof 


^  CI  v^ 


Si 

Sin 

tDf« 


eio 


8S 


S5 


J 


Wita 


;SS?.5IS 


"^8¥i3S' 


8ee>Kx3 


ssssss 


nejin^Jcix 


o  «^  u^  O  i^  A 
©  (C  t©  If?  t^  rt 

5*r-  ?:  r*  o  ^ 

n  ;o  OL  A  o 


oi'TL'ir;  i-rf  V 


Si 


s'§ 


11 


IS 


2  5*" 


& 


^1 


•S|S 


E. 


C5  ft!  r-  irt  -r  Oi 


SSSS88 


tC  '^  4f5  Q  CI  M 

o  M  au  OD  :^  >Xf 

©■   '?»*'i'cf»'' 


s  ;: 


Tl  13  W  W 


SSSS88 

•r  5  X  ift  ce  w 
f :  ©  ©  t*  o  ft 


is  "5- 


OD  Ci  V  E  ©  S 

s'  s^sf-s" 


88 

no  — 


?!2 


8S 


88 


S3 


S"S!f 


S3 


S-5f 


rfrs 


3 

^« 
s 

5Sao 


^1 


00 


||^. 


.s.£i 


,ii2 


1-2 


i£ 


I 


&:iU 


vi       O 


( 


112 


AWABD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


o 
H 


a 


5 II?  rt  <c  S  o  t 


>  5?  ^  Oi  op  «  ©»  irt  5 


3 

a 


o 

a 

•a 


a 

a 
o 


4 


.1 

s 


I 


g 


a 


3 


a 
©■ 


sf 


s 


s 


iHSiSe*."**^  —  ooe<oi-5no 

<e"efrtrJefr-"inefn"o"    iHto".H 


Oio>-i00it-c5>«»>oi»c 
oT    "-"    nt-T        a"sf    : 


SS8 


ss  •  •     ►< 


I 


a 


SSSSSS8 

o 'V  I- irt  CO  oj  o 


Iss 


»  oqEI 


Sort 


s^^ 


we 


QD   IS   OB   OD 


sS 


its 
ef 


§ 


—  e» 
ef 


a§s 


—  orf 

♦^  1^  11 

o 

of 


m  ^  9 

t-'-^"ef 

3 


Si2 


ss 

ooo 
fit* 


ef 


Sod  wS  w 
^  ^  3  ^  M 


go"jfoin< 

o>  ot     •—  s 


sas 


e*ti-i 
notf 


SS 

t-0» 

of  of 


go   go   00   gg 


C   «  *  c< 


OB   OD  •    «   ^   ^      *      *   <B   00   tt^      *   8>      •   OD   00   OD   OB 


S3    ^ 


go*  —  O  71 

n 


sss?s 

OS  Q0-* 

to*         rt'c* 


as5SS 


c  o  e  d  e 
«   •    ■ 

Ml 


^ 


-I 


si 

s  s 


>■  5. 
■<s.2 

8  ~ 
«■« 

9<S 


5 
■« 


•«1 


g 

1 

1 

*• 

•B 

■o '. 

S! 

B 

"S 

a; 

u 

« 

g' 

0 

0 

(D 

^ 

E 

1 

"S 

>? 

o 

3     . 

s^ 

s^ 

§*M 

a^-e 

a 

s 

0 

e  8 

1 

li? 

IS 

M 

If 

1«' 

■3 
u 

ig 

.8  » 

SS 

8x 

i 

» 


8 

e 

w 

s 

8 


8 

.s 


2  • 
3n 


S  !» 


H 


^■5 


s-J: 

srs 


04 
ST" 

u  e 


3 


a 


Si 


•9 

So 


1 


•8 
I 


'3 

•s 


o 
-B 

b 

e 


<o 


O 


1 


s 

■a 


•3 


i 


a 


d 

3 


I 


a 

-a 


'i 

I 


i 

B 

-a 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


113 


o '^v  o>  in  CD  o  no 


^v  —  gij-t 


SSoS'rSS 


^  V  M  g>  —  -^  1^ 
•?»  51  —  5>  71  CI  ^ 

«  n  ■<r  S  ■{«  n  (N 


no 


9S 


l^iilil 


irf" -«r  oT  oa' » irf  rf 


s 


SL 


—  ^  lO  P :  ifl  •* 

rc  M  CO  w  CO  f 


iHsSi^ 


:n-' a*  Oi  00  a  ^ 


frf 


i2« 


ST) 

=3^ 


IStf 


S"s' 


2'" 


if 


SxCSSSoD 


8  P 


114 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISIIERT  COMMISSION. 


as 


'g  S  S  9>  2  e>i  «•  00 


I 


noo     Q  00  n 


lis 


ill 


er 


efef 


S5'?f 


^  ^  ^ 

— '-I'oir 


s 


i 


?' 


a 


is 


S       M 


?f 


8*ig 


r' 


i 


S  ; 

e«  ■ 


S  !0  ^  F^  ^ 
OoSiM 


s'l^ 


os«n 


S 


maet 


i£ff 


iligiSfl 


'SS3 


fi? 


i 


111 


-I 


inoDW 

S?|2- 


s" 


s 


$88 

s"-gf 


;:% 


:8 

ii 

^  :^ 

a  •<» 
M     e 


^i| 


aQ»4ficfi>SU!39lh< 


a 


:a  .9  rR  rH  SB  It !« 1-1  ■  &  (55 


11 


^ 


5  11    S 


s 


a 


s 


3 


Sisi 


S';<l 


Si 


^  ft-* 

G«       O 
Of      ^' 


I 


as 


go 

53 

il 
3 


o 
o 

s 


e 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERT  COMMISSIOV. 


115 


u?t' 


8 


S 


e  ii 


!S 


SS' 


§  liiig 


S 


Si 


9 


S38 


^S" 


8 


S 


3 


■"TafoJ" 


SS 


828**8? 


I^i 


SSS"°*8 


s 


^%^ 


SS 


|S 


iii 


§§ 


sf 


I^ 


8    % 


s 


PS$ 


t^"l 


a 
H 


a 


Hi- 


5 

lap. 


3 


s 


1 
I 

i 


1  I?ll  I  IS 


2  1 


If 

!ll|||S^I  ^  fill  ^  lllliti  ^ 


"? 

u 


116 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


RECAPITULATION 
VALUES. 


ConntriM. 


TTnited  Kingdom 

Britiab  West  IndiM 

Dominion  of  Canada 

Spain 

Fortngal 

Italy 

Sicily 

Ionian  Islands 

Greece 

Hambnrg. 

Foreign  west  Indies 

SaintPierre 

BrasU 

United  States  of  America . 

Gibraltar 

France 

Madeira 


Total  .values . 


1868. 


1611, 491 

395,539 

66,469 

519, 413 

590,699 

53,913 

»,475 

7,999 

S8,000 

1,500 

187,650 

1,308 

727,567 

973,505 


1869. 


1930,995 

881,319 

80,353 

647, 113 

640,848 

957,180 

37,300 

40,953 


70,315 

1,500 

855,040 

191,346 


9,478,789  |4, 036, 890 


18(0. 


•931,658 

311,363 

163,311 

785,093 

535,318 

337,100 

73, 043 

31,166 

10,360 


65,739 


913, 475 

171. 643 

9,130 

4,156 


4,390,343  4,370,387 


1871. 


•690,695 
336, 831 
279,477 
811,037 
660,888 
347,007 
10,640 
48,188 


1,300 
119,864 


988,796 
189,731 


3,019 


1879. 


•646.759 
369,105 
64,873 
811,384 
794, 619 
157, 784 


48,133 
8,064 


196,039 


964,996 
179,943 


6,400 


1873. 


•694, 379 
310, 190 
163, 315 
887,160 
679,586 
196, 315 


17, 676 


960 
137,359 


1874. 


•584,213 
403,  m 
153, 986 
69fl,  m 
883,930 
422, 9!!5 
18,278 


8,294 
173, 074 


985,374 
114,339 


6,430 


1, 920,  .in 

324,574 

75,589 

8,571 


4,100,384  4,199,307 


5, 077, 938 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


117 


List  of  documents  filed  with  the  Secretary  of  the  Halifax  Commission  in 
support  of  the  Case  of  Her  Majesty's  Government. 

1.  Treaty  of  Paris,  1783. 

2.  Treaty  of  Ghent,  1814. 

3.  Convention  of  October  20, 1818. 

4.  Reciprocity  Treaty,  1854. 

5.  Instructions  to  Her  Majesty's  High  Commissioners  and  Protocols  of 

the  Conferences  held  at  Washington  between  February  27  and 
May  26, 1871. 

6.  Treaty  of  Washington,  May  8, 1871. 

7.  Imperial  Act  of  August  6, 1872. 

8.  Canadian  Act,  June  14, 1872. 

9.  Prince  Edward  Island  Act,  June  29, 1872. 

10.  Proclamation  issued  at  Washington,  June  7, 1873. 

11.  Proclamation  issued  at  Washington,  May  29, 1874. 

12.  Documents  admitting  United  States  fishermen  by  Prince  Edward 

Island  in  1871. 

13.  Annex  A.    (Attached  to  "  Case.") 

14.  United  States  Trade  and  Navigation  Reports,  1868-'69,  '70,  '71,  '72. 

15.  Mr.  E.  H.  Derby's  Report. 

16.  Minutes  of  Executive  Council  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  February 

17, 1874. 

17.  Report  of  Commander  of  "  La  Canadienne  "  in  1865. 

18.  Schedule  of  Fishing  Licenses  issued  to  United  States  citizens.  186  6, 

'67,  '68,  '69. 

19.  Cape  Ann  Advertiser,  March  6, 1874. 

20.  United  States  Trade  and  Navigation  Returns,  1866. 

21.  Col.  R.  D.  Cutt's  Report,  1869. 

22.  Mr.  W.  Smith's  Report,  1866  (p.  27). 

23.  Mr.  Perley's  Report,  1852  (pp.  28,  33, 44,  49,  52,  56). 

24.  Report  of  Collector  of  Customs  at  Port  Mulgrave,  1873. 

25.  Mr.  Lorenzo  Sabine's  Report,  1865. 

26.  Professor  Baird's  Report,  1871-'72. 

27.  Report  of  the  State  Commissioners  for  Maine,  1872-'74. 

28.  Mr.  Currie's  Report,  1873. 

29.  Mr.  Andrew's  Report,  1852. 

30.  Canadian  Fishery  Reports  for  last  ten  years. 

31.  Report  of  Massachusetts  Fishery  Commissioners,  1872  (p.  39). 

32.  Annex  B.    (Attached  to  "Case.") 

33.  Annex  C,  Census  Returns  of  Newfoundland.    (Attached  to  '<  Case.") 

34.  Annex  D,  Exports  from  Newfoundland  to  Foreign  Countries.    (At- 

tached  to  "  Case.") 


ANSW 
TO 


Befoi 
behalf  ( 
to  the  ] 
and  arc 

Byii 
the  Uni 
commei 
shell-fis 
creeks  < 
and  thi 
thereuD 
shore ; 
islands, 
their  iic 
interfer 
in  the  p 
for  the  I 

"  It  ii 
the  sea 
fisheries 
British 

By  A 
sioDers 
opinion, 
that  of 
the  citiz 

Comp 
United 
for  the  ( 
fisheruK 
kind ;  u 
nor  for 
United  i 
of  Wash 
of  Arti« 
Majesty 
amount 

These 
m  the  bi 
wick,  P] 
restricte 

2d.  Tl 
purpose 


j^PI^ENDlX    B. 


ANSWER  ON  BEHALF  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 
TO  THE  CASE  OP  HER  BRITANNIC  MAJESTY'S  GOVERN- 
MENT. 

I. 

Before  proceeding  to  cousider  the  case  which  has  been  presented  on 
behalf  of  Her  Majesty,  the  attention  of  the  Commissioners  is  first  called 
to  the  precise  question  which,  and  which  only,  they  have  been  appointed 
and  are  authorized  to  determine. 

By  Article  XVIII  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  the  inhabitants  of 
the  United  States  have  acquired,  for  the  term  of  twelve  years,  which 
commenced  July  1,  1873,  liberty  *' to  take  fish  of  every  kind,  except 
shcll-tlsh,  on  the  sea  coasts  and  shores,  and  in  the  bays,  harbors,  and 
creeks  of  the  Provinces  of  Quebec,  Nova  Scotia,  and  New  Brnns^^ 
and  the  Colony  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  of  the  several  islandn^ 
thereunto  adjacent,  without  being  restricted  to  any  distance  from  the^ 
shore ;  with  permission  to  land  upon  the  said  coasts  and  shores  and 
islands,  and  also  upon  the  Magdalen  Islands,  foi  the  purpose  of  drying 
their  nets  and  curing  their  fish ;  provided  that,  in  so  doing,  they  do  not 
interfere  with  the  rights  of  private  property,  or  with  British  fishermen 
in  the  peaceable  use  of  any  part  of  the  said  coasts  in  their  occupancy 
for  the  same  purpose. 

"  It  is  understood  that  the  above-mentioned  liberty  applies  solely  to 
the  sea  fishery ;  and  that  the  salmon  and  shad  fisheries,  and  all  other 
fisheries  in  rivers  and  the  mouths  of  rivers,  are  reserved  exclusively  for 
British  fishermen." 

By  Article  XXII  provision  is  made  for  the  appointment  of  Commis- 
sioners to  determine  the  amount  of  any  compensation  which,  in  their 
opinion,  ought  to  be  paid  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  to 
that  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  in  return  for  the  privileges  accorded  to 
the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Article  XVIII  of  the  treaty. 

Compensation  can  be  awarded  only  for  such  new  privileges  as  the 
United  States  acquired  by  virtue  of  Article  XVIII.  It  is  not  competent 
for  the  Commissioners  to  award  compensation  for  those  rights  which  the 
fishermen  of  the  United  States  enjoy  in  common  with  the  rest  of  man- 
kind ;  nor  for  the  liberty  secured  to  them  by  the  Convention  of  1818 ; 
nor  for  any  rights,  privileges,  liberties,  or  advantages  to  which  the 
United  States  are  entitled  by  virtue  of  any  other  articles  of  the  Treaty 
of  Washington.  Nothing,  except  the  privileges  newly  acquired  by  virtue 
of  Article  XVIII,  falls  within  the  claim  for  compensation  which  Her 
Majesty's  Government  is  entitled  to  make,  and  upon  the  validity  and 
amount  of  which  the  Commission  has  jurisdiction  to  determine. 

These  are,  Ist.  The  privilege  to  fish  on  the  sea-coasts  and  shores,  and 
m  the  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  Quebec,  Nova  Scotia,  New  Bruns- 
wick, Prince  Edward  Island,  and  the  adjacent  islands,  without  being 
restricted  to  any  distance  from  the  shore. 

2(1.  The  permission  to  land  on  said  coasts,  shores,  and  islands,  for  the 
purpose  of  drying  nets  and  curing  fish ;  provided  that  they  do  not  inter- 


120 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


fere  with  the  rights  of  private  property,  or  with  the  occupancy  of  British 
flsheroien. 

These  are  the  only  privileges  accorded  for  which  any  possible  com- 
pensation can  be  demanded.  The  liberty  extends  only  to  the  sea  fishery ; 
the  salmon  and  shad  fisheries,  and  all  other  fisheries  in  rivers  and  mouths 
of  rivers,  are  reserved  exclusively  for  British  fishermen. 

It  becomes  necessary  at  the  outset  to  inquire  what  rights  Americau 
fishermen,  and  those  of  other  nations,  possess,  independently  of  treaty, 
upon  the  ground  that  the  sea  is  the  common  property  of  all  mankind. 
For  the  purposes  of  fishing,  the  territorial  waters  of  every  country  along 
the  sea-coast  extend  three  miles  from  low-water  murk ;  and  beyond  is 
the  open  ocean,  free  to  all.  In  the  case  of  bays  and  gulfs,  such  only  are 
territorial  waters  as  do  not  exceed  six  miles  in  width  at  the  mouth,  upon 
a  straight  line  measured  from  headland  to  headland.  All  larger  bodies 
of  water,  connected  with  the  open  sea,  form  a  part  of  it.  And  wherever 
the  mouth  of  a  bay,  gulf,  or  inlet  exceeds  the  maximum  width  of  six 
miles  at  its  mouth,  and  so  loses  the  character  of  territorial  or  inland 
waters,  the  jurisdictional  or  proprietary  line  for  the  purpose  of  excluding 
foreigners  from  fishing  is  measured  along  the  shore  of  the  bay,  accord- 
ing to  its  sinuosities,  and  the  limit  of  exclusion  is  three  miles  from  low- 
water  mark. 

The  United  States  insist  upon  the  maintenance  of  these  rules;  believ- 
ing them  to  conform  to  the  well-established  principles  of  internatioual 
law,  and  to  have  received  a  traditional  recognition  from  other  powers, 
including  Great  Britain. 

Moreover,  the  province  of  the  present  Commission  is  not  to  decide 
upon  questions  of  international  law.  In  determining  what,  if  any,  com- 
pensation Groat  Britain  is  entitled  to  receive  from  the  United  States, 
for  the  privilege  of  using  for  twelve  years  the  inshore  sea  fisheries,  and 
for  the  permission  to  land  on  unoccupied  and  desert  shores  for  the  pur- 
pose of  curing  fish  and  drying  nets,  it  is  the  manifest  duty  of  the  Com- 
missioners to  treat  the  question  practically,  and  proceed  upon  the  basis 
of  the  status  actually  existing  when  the  Treaty  of  Washington  was 
adopted. 

The  Commissioners  who  framed  the  Treaty  of  Washington  decided 
not  ''to  enter  into  an  examination  of  the  respective  rights  of  the  two 
countries  under  the  treaty  of  1818  and  the  general  law  of  nations,  but  to 
approach  the  settlement  of  the  question  on  a  comprehensive  basis." 

What,  then,  was  the  practical  extent  of  the  privileges  enjoyed  by 
American  fishermen  at  and  before  the  date  of  the  Treaty  of  Washing- 
ton? 

Even  before  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  adopted  June  5, 1854,  the  extreme 
and  untenable  claims  put  forth  at  an  earlier  day  had  been  abandoned ; 
and,  directly  after  its  abrogation,  the  colonial  authorities  were  instructed 
(April  12, 1866)  "  that  American  fishermen  should  not  be  interfered 
with,  either  by  notice  or  otherwise,  unless  found  within  three  miles  of  the 
shore,  or  within  three  miles  of  a  line  drawn  across  the  mouth  of  a  hay  or 
creek  which  is  less  than  ten  geographical  miles  in  widthy  in  conformity  with 
the  arrangement  made  with  France  in  1839." 

After  that  time,  till  1870,  the  Canadian  Government  issued  licenses  to 
foreign  fishermen.  And  when  that  system  was  discontinued  (May  14, 
1870),  the  minister  of  marine  and  fisheries  gave  orders  to  the  com- 
mander of  the  government  vessels  engaged  in  protecting  the  fisheries, 
not  to  interfere  "  with  any  American  fishermen,  unless  found  within 
three  miles  of  the  shore,  or  within  three  miles  of  a  line  dratcn  across  the 
mouth  of  a  bay  or  creek  which  is  less  than  ten  geographical  miles  in  width. 


AWAHO   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


121 


Ih  the  case  of  any  other  bay — as  tbe  bay  of  Cbaleurs,  for  example — you 
will  not  admit  any  Uuited  States  flsbiDg-vessel  or  boat,  or  any  Aireri> 
can  fishermen,  inside  of  a  line  drawn  across  at  that  part  of  soch  bay 
where  its  width  does  not  exceed  ten  tniles.^  It  is  not  apprehended  that, 
for  the  puri>oses  of  the  present  Commission,  there  would  be  any  appre- 
ciable practical  ditt'erence  between  extending;  the  headland  doctrine  to 
bays  ten  miles  wide  at  the  mouth,  and  limiting  it  to  those  which  are 
only  six  miles  wide. 

But,  as  soon  as  these  instructions  were  received  in  England,  Her 
Majesty's  Government  made  baste  to  telegraph  to  the  GovernorOeneral 
its  hope  '*  that  the  United  States  fishermen  will  not  be  for  the  present 
prevented  from  fishing,  except  within  three  miles  of  land,  or  in  bays 
which  are  Ichs  than  six  miles  broad  at  the  mouth."  Accordingly,  Mr. 
Peter  Mitchell,  the  minister  of  marine  and  fisheries,  was  compelled  to 
withdraw  his  former  instructions,  and  to  give  new  ones,  as  follows,  under 
tbe  date  of  June  27.  1870  : 

Until  further  instructed,  therefore,  yon  will  not  interfere  with  any  American  fishermen, 
UDJeRs  found  withiu  three  miles  of  the  shore,  or  within  three  milen  of  a  line  drawn  acroiig  the 
muuth  of  a  bay  or  creek,  which,  though  in  parts  more  than  $iz  miles  wide,  is  Ir.ss  than  six 
geographical  miles  in  width  at  its  mouth.  In  the  case  of  any  other  bay — as  Bay  des  Chaleurs 
tor  example — you  will  not  interfere  with  any  United  States  fishing  vessel  oi  boat,  or  any 
fishermen,  unless  they  urejound  within  three  miles  of  the  shore. 

In  connection  with  and  as  a  part  of  this  case,  the  United  States  sub- 
mit to  the  Commission  a  brief,  exhibiting  more  fully  the  history  of  this 
controversy,  and  the  authorities  upon  it,  which  conclusively  show  that 
tbe  instructions  just  quoted  correspond  exactly  with  the  well-established 
rules  of  international  law.  It  is  not  doubted  that  the  instructions  given 
were  carefully  framed  with  a  view  to  precise  coiitormity  with  these  rules, 
aud  in  order  that  Great  Britain  might  claim  no  more  than  it  was  pre- 
pared to  concede  to  all  foreign  governtueuts  in  dealing  with  a  question 
of  great  practical  importance. 

The  Uniteil  States  believe  that  Her  Majesty's  Government  are  now  in 
full  accord  with  their  own  on  this  subject,  and  that  all  more  extensive 
claims  formerly  made  are  regarded  by  it,  in  the  recent  and  forcible 
language  of  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  England,  "  as  vain  and  extravagant 
pretensions,  which  have  long  since  given  way  to  the  influence  of  reason 
and  common  sense.  *  *  *  These  asaertionsofsovereiguty  were  mani- 
festly based  on  the  doctrine  that  the  narrow  seas  are  part  of  the  realm 
of  England.  But  that  doctrine  is  now  exploded.  Who  at  this  day  would 
venture  to  affirm  that  the  sovereignty  thus  asserted  in  tbose  times  now 
exists  f  What  English  lawyer  is  there  who  would  not  shrink  from  main- 
taining, what  foreign  jurist  who  would  not  deny,  what  foreign  govern- 
ment which  would  not  repel,  such  a  pretension?" 

11. 


Having  ascertained  the  extent  and  limits  of  tbe  privileges  accorded 
to  tbe  United  States  by  Article  XVIII,  it  is  next  necessary  to  state 
wiiat  are  the  privileges  accorded  to  Her  Majesty's  subjects  by  Articles 
XIX  and  XXI  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington.  For  Article  XXII,  which 
defines  the  powers  and  duties  of  tins  Commission,  and  constitutes  its 
sole  authority  to  act,  expressly  directs  it  to  have  "  regard  to  the  privi- 
leges accorded  by  the  Uuited  States  to  tbe  subjects  of  Her  Britannic 
Majesty,  as  stated  in  Articles  XIX  and  XXI." 

By  Article  XIX,  British  subjects  acquire,  for  the  same  term  of  years, 
identically  tbe  same  privileges,  aud  upon  the  same  restrictions  of  land- 


122 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ing  to  cure  fish  and  dry  nets,  aod  of  flshiag  on  the  eastern  coasts  and 
shores  of  the  United  States  north  of  the  thirty -ninth  parallel  of  north 
latitude,  and  on  the  shores  of  the  adjacent  islands,  and  in  the  bays, 
harbors,  and  creeics  of  said  sea  coasts  and  shores,  without  being  re- 
stricted to  any  distance  from  the  shore,  as  by  Article  XVIII  had  been 
accorded  to  United  States  fishermen  in  regard  to  the  territorial  waters 
of  the  Atlantic  coast  of  British  North  America.  Mutatis  mutandis,  the 
privileges  conceded  by  each  side  to  the  other  are  of  the  same  character, 
and  expressed  in  precisely  the  same  language. 
Article  XXII  is  as  follows : 

It  ia  airreed  that,  for  the  term  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII  of  this  treaty,  fisli- 
oil  and  fiHh  of  all  kinds  (except  fish  of  tie  inland  lakes  and  of  the  rivers  falling  into  them, 
and  except  fish  preserved  in  oil),  beinf^  the  produce  of  the  fixheries  of  the  United  States,  or 
of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  or  of  Prince  Edward's  Island,  shall  be  aduiitied  into  each 
country,  respectively,  free  of  duty. 

The  right  to  admit  fish  and  flshoil,  free  of  duty,  from  the  United 
States  into  Ganada  and  Prince  Edward's  Ishind  is  regarded  in  the 
treaty  as  of  such  insignificant  and  inappreciable  importance  that  no  ac- 
count is  to  be  taken  of  it  in  the  estimate  and  adjustment  of  equivalents 
which  the  Commissioners  are  directed  to  make.  But  the  right  granted 
to  four  millions  of  people,  a  large  portion  of  whom  find  their  chief  iD- 
dustrial  interest  and  source  of  wealth  in  the  fisheries,  to  import  fish  and 
fish-oil  for  twelve  years,  duty  free,  into  the  markets  of  a  nation  of  forty 
millions  of  inhabitants,  the  Gommissioners  are  directed  to  weigh  and  ap 
predate.  The  magnitude  and  value  of  this  privilege  will  be  considered 
hereafter. 

In  regard  to  Newfoundland,  no  special  remarks  seem  to  be  required 
at  this  point,  except  that  by  Article  XXXII  the  provisions  and  stipu- 
lations of  Articles  XVIII  to  XXV  inclusive  are  extended  to  that 
island,  so  far  as  they  are  applicable.  But  there  is  no  previous  mention 
of  Newfoundland  in  the  treaty ;  and  it  seems  a  strained  and  unnatural 
construction  of  Article  XXXII  to  hold  that,  by  this  general  language, 
it  was  intended  to  make  the  provisions  as  to  this  Commission  applicable 
thereto.  The  United  States  assert  that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Commis- 
sioners does  not  extend  to  inquiring  whether  compensation  should  be 
made  for  the  inshore  fisheries  of  that  island,  both  because  the  language 
of  the  treaty  does  not  authorize  them  to  do  so,  and  because  the  exten- 
sive rights  to  the  inshore  fisheries  of  that  island,  and  to  dry  and  cure 
fish  upon  its  shores,  already  possessed  by  the  United  States  nnder  the 
Convention  of  1818,  render  it  extremely  improbable  that  any  idea  of 
possible  compensation  to  that  island  could  have  been  entertained  by 
either  of  the  high  contracting  powers  when  the  treaty  was  framed. 

III. 

It  is  proposed  next  to  consider  the  value  of  the  advantages  which  the 
United  States  derive  from  the  provisions  of  Article  XVII.  This  will  be 
done  in  the  light  of  the  principles  already  laid  down,  which,  it  is  trusted, 
have  been  established  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Commissioners. 

The  only  material  concession  is  that  of  fishing  within  British  terri- 
torial waters  over  which  jurisdiction  exists  to  such  an  extent  as  to  au- 
thorize the  exclusion  of  the  rest  of  mankind.  Such  jurisdiction  only 
exists  within  three  miles  from  low-water  mark,  both  on  the  shores  of 
the  sea  and  within  bays  less  than  six  miles  wide  between  their  head- 
lands, for  all  bays  and  gnlfs  of  larger  size  are  parts  of  the  open  ocean; 
and  whatever  lies  beyond  is  the  gift  of  God  to  all,  incapable  of  being 
monopolized  by  any  kingdom,  or  state,  or  people. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


12a 


The  necessity  of  reiterating  and  enaphasizing  these  positions  arises 
firom  the  surprising  circumstance  that  the  Case  of  Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment throughout  completely  and  studiously  ignores  any  such  distinction. 
"  From  the  Bay  of  Fundy  to  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence  inclusive,'^ 
over  "  an  area  of  many  thousands  of  square  miles,"  it  claims  the  whole 
asBritish  property  (p.  18).  Thisis  not  done,  indeed,  in  formal  and  explicit 
terms ;  if  it  had  been,  the  pretension  would  have  been  more  easily  re- 
futed, or  rather  its  extravagance  would  have  refuted  itself.  But  all  the 
assertions  as  to  value,  and  all  the  statistics  of  the  case,  though  vague 
and  indefinite,  nevertheless  are  based  constantly  upon  this  untenable 
and  long  since  exploded  theory.  The  afiSrmative  lies  upon  Her  Majesty's 
Government  to  show  the  value  to  American  fishermen  of  the  inshore 
fisheries  as  separated  and  distinguished  from  those  of  the  deep  sea ; 
but  this  distinction  the  British  Case  nowhere  attempts  to  draw.  The 
United  States  insist  that  the  true  issue  cannot,  be  evaded  thus;  and 
that  the  party  claiming  compensation  is  bound,  by  every  principle  of 
law,  equity,  and  justice,  to  show,  with  some  decree  of  definiteness  and 
precision,  wherein  consist  the  privileges  which  are  made  the  foundation 
of  an  enormous  pecuniary  demand. 

(1)  The  fisheries  pursued  by  the  United  States  flNherme'i  in  the 
waters  adjacent  to  the  British  provinces  on  the  Atlantic  coast  are  the 
balibut  and  cod  fishery,  and  the  mackerel  and  herring  fishery.  Tlie 
balibnt  and  cod  fisheries  include  hake,  haddock,  cusk,  and  pollack. 
These  fish  are  caught  exclusively  on  the  banks,  far  beyond  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  any  nation.  The  cod- fishery^  therefore,  iaaolely  a  deep-sea  fishery,  and 
)iot  a  subject  within  the  cognizance  of  this  Commission  This  appears  even 
by  the  inspection  of  the  maps  attached  to  the  British  Case,  highly  col- 
ored and  partial  as  those  are  believed  to  be,  they  having  been  drawn 
and  marked  without  any  discrimination  between  territorial  waters  and 
the  open  sea.  Moreover,  it  will  appear  in  evidence,  conclusively,  that 
there  is  substantially  no  inshore  cod-fishing  done  l)y  the  Americans. 

Nor  do  they  land  on  the  shores  to  dry  their  nets  or  cure  their  fish. 
These  customs  belonged  to  the  primitive  mode  of  catching  codfish  prac- 
ticed by  former  generations  of  fishermen,  and  have  been  disused  for 
many  years  past.  Codfish  are  now  salted  for  temporary  preservation  on 
shipboard,  but  are  cured  in  large  establishments  at  home  by  fish  packers 
and  cnrers,  who  make  this  a  separate  business,  and  to  whom  the  fish 
are  sohl  from  the  vessels  in  a  green  state. 

(2)  Nor  do  the  American  cod  fishermen  fish  for  bait  to  any  consider- 
able extent  in  the  territorial  waters  of  the  British  dominions.  Their 
vessels  are  so  large,  and  their  outfit  is  so  expensive,  that  they  find  it 
more  economical  when  the  first  supply  of  bait,  which  is  always  brought 
from  home,  is  exhausted,  to  purchase  fresh  bait  of  the  Canadians,  who 
flsh  for  it  in  open  boats  or  small  craft  near  their  own  homes,  to  wliicli 
they  return  every  night.  The  best  bait  for  cod  and  other  similar  fish  is 
the  frozen  herring,  large  quantities  of  which,  of  a  quality  too  poor  for  any 
other  use,  are  taken  in  seines  by  the  Canadians  and  sold  to  the  United 
States  fishermen.  The  importance  of  this  and  other  kinds  of  trafiic  to 
the  poor  inhabitants  of  the  Canadian  fishing  villages,  and  the  destitution 
to  which  they  were  reduced,  when,  from  motives  of  policy,  and  to  att'ect 
the  negotiations  between  the  two  governments,  it  was  broken  up  by  the 
Canadian  authorities,  will  appear  from  their  own  testimony  and  from 
official  documents.  This  subject  will  receive  attention  hereafter.  Suffice 
it  now  to  observe  that  the  claim  of  Great  Britain  to  be  compensated  for 
allowing  United  States  fishermen  to  buy  bait  and  other  supplies  of  British 
nubjects  finds  no  semblance  of  foundation  in  the  treaty,  by  which  no  right' 


124 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


M 


of  traffic  is  conceded.  The  United  States  are  not  aware  that  the  former 
inhospitable  statutes  have  ever  been  repealed.  Their  eulorcenient  may 
be  renewed  at  any  moment ;  and  the  only  security  nja^niust  such  a  course 
is  the  fact  that  such  uncivilized  legislation  is  far  more  inconvenient  and 
i:ijurious  to  the  Canadians  than  it  can  poMsibly  be  to  American  fisher- 
men. It  will  appear  in  the  sequel  that,  in  the  t^ianimous  opinion  ol 
that  portion  of  tho  Canadian.s  who  reside  on  the  seacoast,  the  benetitH 
•of  such  commercial  intercourse  are  at  least  as  jjreac  to  themselves  an 
to  foreign  fishermen. 

{■i)  It  is  further  important  to  bear  in  mind  tliat  the  fishery  claims  of 
the  Treaty  of  Washington  hare  already  been  in  formal  operation  during 
four  years,  one-third  of  the  whole  period  of  their  continuance;  while 
practically  both  fishing  and  commercial  intercourse  have  been  carried 
on  in  conformity  with  the  treaty  ever  since  .it  was  signed,  May  8,  1871. 
After  that  date,  the  provincial  authorities  desisted  from  the  system  of 
seizures  and  other  molestations  by  which  foiei^su  fishermen  had  been 
previously  annoyed.  And  what  has  been  the  result,  to  each  party,  of 
the  lilieral  policy  inaugurated  by  the  treaty?  Under  its  benign  influ- 
ences, as  the  British  case  declares,  ''the  produce  of  the  fisheries  caught 
by  British  subjects  has  greatly  increased  during  seven  j'ears  past." 
But  while  the  result  to  them  has  been  one  of  "steady  development  and 
increasing  wealth,"  the  United  States  cod  fishery,  even,  has  declined  in 
amount  and  value,  not,  to  be  sure,  to  such  an  extent  as  the  mackerel 
fishery,  but  sufficiently  to  demonstrate  that  the  American  fisheries  for 
halibut,  cod,  hiiddock,  pollack,  and  hake,  have  not  been  benefited  hy 
any  privileges  conceded  to  the  United  States  under  the  Treaty  of  Wasli- 
ingtou;  and  that,  in  respect  to  these  fisheries,  no  just  claim  for  compen- 
sation can  be  maintained  before  this  Commission. 

(4)  Almost  the  only  fish  ever  taken  by  Americans  within  the  three- 
miles  limit  off  the  coast  of  the  British  provinces  are  the  mackerel ;  and 
of  the  entire  catch  of  this  fish,  only  a  very  small  fractional  ])art  is  ho 
taken.  They  abound  along  the  Atlantic  coast  from  Ca|)e  May  north- 
wrad ;  great  quantities  of  them  are  found  in  tho  deep  sea ;  asd  the 
chief  use  made  of  the  inshore  fisheries  on  the  Canadian  coast  by  Ameri 
can  fishermen  is  to  follow,  occasionally,  a  school  of  fish  which,  in  its 
progress,  chances  to  set  in  towards  the  shore. 

The  method  of  taking  them  formerly  was  b-,  hand  lines  with  the  Jig 
hooks;  and  this  method  is  still  the  one  principally  practiced  of!' the 
British  coast.  Within  the  past  few  years,  the  use  of  purse  seines  l)as 
become  the  method  most  approved  and  most  generally  adopted  by 
United  States  fishermen.  By  means  of  them  the  schools  of  fish  can  be 
controlled  and  caught,  whether  they  are  inclined  to  take  bait  or  not. 
And  this  new  mode  of  taking  fish  has  revolutionized  the  bu.siness,  since 
American  fishermen  now  refjuire  no  bait,  and  are  enabled  to  take  an 
abundant  supply  of  mackerel  in  American  waters  diroughout  the  whole 
fishing  season. 

The  migration  of  mackerel  in  the  spriujj;  begins  on  the  Atlantic  coast 
from  a  point  as  far  so^ith  as  Cape  Hi>^tteras.  The  first-comers  reucb 
Trovincetown,  Mass.,  about  May  10.  Here  they  begin  to  scatter,  and 
thiiy  are  fountl  during  tho  entire  season  along  the  New  England  coast. 

Whatever  ni»y  be  the  theory  of  othpri  on  the  subject  [saj'R  Professor  Baird],  the  Amori- 
can  mackerel  fisher  knows  perfectly  well  that  in  spring,  about  May,  he  will  tind  the  scIjooIs 
of  mackerel  off  Capo  Hatteras,  ami  that  ho  cau  follow  them  uorthward,  day  by  day,  as  tliej 
niovr\  in  countless  myriads  on  to  the  coast  of  Maine,  if  Novu  Scotia,  and  into  the  Gulf  "< 
Saint  Lawrence.  Tliey  may  be  occasionally  lost  sight  of  by  their  sinkinjif  below  the  sur- 
face ,  but  they  are  sure  to  present  themselves  shortly  after  to  those  who  look  for  thein  far- 
ther north  and  cant. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


125 


Leaving  it  to  naturalists  to  account  for  the  reasons,  the  fact  is  uui> 
verfiallj  acknowledged  that,  for  a  number  of  years  past,  the  value  of  the 
niackerei  fisheries  in  British  waters  has  dimiuished,  while,  dmiDg  the 
same  period,  the  quantity  and  quality  of  these  isb  taken  off  tiie  coast 
of  New  England  lias  greatly  improved. 

As  early  as  18(>8,  the  following  statement  appears  in  the  annual  re- 
port of  marine  and  tisheries : 

Owinp  to  some  unknown  caiiHe,  the  net  as  well  aa  the  Jmit  mackerel  fishfrv  han  n^ariy 
faileJ  on  our  coasts.  As  already  stated,  th«  spring  fishing  at  Ma|;dalen  Islandx  had  yieid^'l 
ahiKisi  nothing  to  the  inhabitautH,  and  the  foreign  seliooners  which  resorted  there  to  pursue 
the  same  iiMhing  had  barely  covered  the  cost  of  outfit  Aocording  to  general  opinion, 
mackevel  appeared  but  in  very  small  numbers  in  Pleasant  Bay.  However  had  this  fishery 
Lad  been,  hopes  were  entertained  of  the  results  of  the  8i!ninnei"  finhery.  There  w^^.s,  how- 
ever,  to  be  further  disappointment  in  this  instaace.  Mackerel,  it  is  true,  was  seen  on  liie 
shores  of  Magdalen  Islands,  GasptS,  and  Bay  Des  Chaieurs,  but  in  such  limited  numbers 
ihat,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  caught  for  bait,  a  very  limited  quantity  was  taken  at  ihe 
Li'ands  and  at  Gaspi^  Bay  and  Basin.  The  maokerel  would  not  take  bait  at  the  surfaco  of 
tha  water ;  and,  after  trying  every  means  for  several  weeks  to  induce  the  fish  to  come  to  tho 
Biirface  by  means  of  bait,  the  American  schontiers  left  thn  islands  and  shores  of  Gaspe 
with  imly  a  few  barrels  taken.  I  have  since  ascertaine.l  tint,  at  the  end  of  August  or  be- 
giniiiiig  of  September,  mackerel  bad  been  abundant  on  the  shores  of  Prince  Edward's 
island,  and  that  the  schooners  which  ha'l  resorted  there  had  done  well.  It  i.s  to  bo  hoped 
that  this  report  wa.s  true,  as  otherwise  the  loss  incurred  by  our  own  and  foreign  schooners 
must  have  been  very  large,  if  this  fishing  had  been  a  failure  everywhere.  The  cost  of  outtit 
is  heavy,  and  to  compensate  for  expenses  nece-ssarily  incurred  by  most  oi  the  veosels  it  was 
necbSBary  that  there  should  be  at  least  a  middling  success.  The  scarcity  of  mackerel  was, 
therefore,  the  reason  why  I  met  so  very  few  American  schooners  near  our  shores,  In  June, 
Jtily,  September,  and  October,  however,  when  tho  results  of  this  fishing  wore  stij'.  uncertain, 
several  schooners  were  seen  in  Bay  Des  Chaleurs,  Paspebiac,  Port  Daniel,  and  Perce.  From 
what  I  cnuld  tiscertaiu,  about  one-third  had  licenses,  out  the  rest,  dreading  a  bad  seasou, 
preferred  fishing  only  on  the  Banks,  at  Magdalen  Islands,  or  outside  the  Uraitr,  rather  thau 
to  pay  for  a  licm^^^.  Moreover,  from  information  obtained,  I  have  reason  to  believe  that  few 
were  seen  fishing  insideof  tho  thrett-mile  limits;  andeven  those  may  have  been  provided  vsrith 
licenses.  During  the  whole  of  my  cruise  iu  August,  I  saw  none  of  them  acting  in  con- 
traveution  of  the  law ;  and  the  owners  of  schooners  whom  I  met  without  a  license  had 
left  without  infringing  the  act,  ailer  being  notified.  The  fact  of  tho  matter  is,  that,  havinji; 
fine  and  costly  vessels,  of  wliich  they  are  for  the  most  part  owners,  they  can  ill  afford 
the  risk  of  losing  tiiem,  especially  this  year,  by  fishing  within  the  three-mile  limits.  (Re- 
port  of  Theophile  Tetu,  esq.,  on  the  Fisheries  of  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawreuc*;  Annual 
Report  of  tho  Canadian  Department  of  Marine  and  Fisheries,  18()8,  p.  54.) 

The  same  deterioration  of  inshore  mackerel  fishing  has  steadily  con- 
tinued down  to  the  present  time : 

Is  It  not  an  exfraordinary  thing  [says  the  report  of  the  same  department  for  1870],  that 
halibut  and  mackerel,  which  have  only  a  compaiatively  inferior  value  in  our  markets,  are 
always  quoted  at  a  high  price  with  our  neighbors  f  They  are  difficult  fish  to  cure,  and  this  may 
explain  the  diiTerence  in  price  between  both  markets;  aixi,  as  thi.s  fishery  is  very  uncevlaiu, 
our  people  dare  not  enter  in  it,  on  account  of  the  {(ossibility  ot  heavy  losses  in  time  and 
Dioiiey.  With  tho  exception  of  fhe  inhabitants  of  Magdalen  Islands  and  some  three  or 
four  Hshermeu  from  Gaep6,  nobody  in  the  whole  division  placed  under  my  charge,  takes 
any  interest  in  either  of  these  fisheries.  The  importance  of  this  tishery,  even  as  carried  oti 
by  .strangers,  has  greatly  diminished.  Out  of  fite  or  six  hunilred  8cliuoiifr><  vhkh  /orinerli/ 
fre(ium(ed  Bay  flfs  Chaleurt,  Magdalen  hlunds,  ttf.,  in  fiurch  of  marlifrd,  hmdly  one  hun- 
dred are  now  countttt.  One  schooner  only,  the  W.  Merchant,  of  Gloucester,  was  thin  year 
eng«jvi>d  in  halibut  fishing;  and,  when  I  visited  h((r  at  Ksijuiituuix  Point,  she  had  caught 
nntliiiig,  not  even  one  barrel  of  herring.  The  restrictions  to  which  forsigiiers  fishing  iu  our 
waters  were  subjected  during  past  yenrs,  and  the  seizures  cf  vessels  which  were  the  couse- 
(jiit'iice  of  violations  of  Canadian  rtsliery  laws,  must  undoubtedly  have  contiiimti'd  a  grent 
(It'al  to  deter  Americans  frou)  the  waters  of  the  Gulf,  and  compelled  thein  to  take  another 
•lirection,  where  they  vcrv  likely  find  more  remnneative  results.  In  the  course  of  a  con- 
ver^tinn  with  the  l^niteJ  Slates  consul  at  Gaspo,  ho  handed  me  a  newspaper  from  Glou- 
cester, Mass.,  which  explains  in  a  few  words  this  decrease  of  American  schooners  in  our 
waters.  "Our  large  firms,"  said  that  paper,  "  far  from  curtailing  their  fishing  outfits,  have 
increased  t'  em.  Most  of  them  have  addijd  another  vessel  to  the  number  i  Iready  pos.sessed. 
The  attention  of  outfitters  seems  now  to  be  solely  tient  upon  cod-fishing.  In  former  times 
tlifir  whole  reliance  was  placed  upon  mackerel  fishing,  which  was  pra<  ticed  on  short  on 
George's  Bank,  or  iu  tlie  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence;  but  very  little  notice  ii  taken  of  i'  n  -w 


V>i^  »• 

>  >  '■> 

"y^'    V  ■. 

\nV 

tr. 

V"    V 

w 

V\^ 

Iv: 

A 

\'K^^ 

■ '  ■  ,\^ 

>\\  ' ' 

^K'^  n 


126 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


so  much  DO  that  the  total  catch  of  mackerel  bj  onr  Tessels  is  now  reduced  to  one-tenth  of 
what  it  used  to  be.  Several  causes  have  been  adduced  to  explain  this  cfaangpe ;  but  the 
first  is  undoubtodlj  the  use  of  seines.  It  is  almost  an  impossible  thing  now  to  catch  mai-k- 
erel,  as  formerly,  with  hook  and  line,  and  seining  is  so  uncertain  that  most  of  the  masters 
were  compelled  to  abandon  this  fishery.  Mackerel  fishing  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence 
formerly  constituted  the  occupation  of  the  whole  Gloucester  fleet  during  the  fall  season; 
but  now  hardly  fifty  or  sixty  schooners  are  met  within  its  waters."  The  abovo  statements 
agree  perfectly'  with  the  observations  I  have  made  during  the  past  season.  A  few  years 
ago,  no  more  than  half  a  dozen  Gloucester  schooners  were  engaged  cod-fishing  on  the 
banks ;  now  there  are  two  hundred.  No  attention  whatever  was  then  given  to  cod-fishiiifr, 
but  now  it  has  attracted  the  notice  of  the  trade  of  Gloucester.  Halibut  fishing  is  another 
pursuit  which  is  daily  growing  more  and  more  important  for  Gloucester  fishermen;  but 
the  latter  appear  to  have  abandoned  the  Gulf,  or  rather  the  grounds  which  these  iisii 
formerly  frequented.  Several  of  the  finest  and  swiftest  sailers  of  that  fleet  were  employed 
during  the  whole  year,  and  fitted  so  as  to  be  able  to  carry  these  fish,  fresh  or  salted.  The 
above  will  explain  the  cause  of  the  disappearance  of  American  schooners  from  our  waters. 

It  is  also  to  be  observed  tbat  the  American  mackerel  uniformly  coiii- 
maud  a  higher  price  tbaii  the  colonial  catch,  the  difference  varying  from 
four  to  six  dollars  per  barrel.  The  average  excess  in  price  in  favor  of 
the  catch  off  the  coasts  of  the  United  States  is  at  I<'iist  f"  "  dollars  per 
barrel. 

The  evidence  to  belaid  before  the  Commissiotv  vviil  fiilly  establish  tlie 
position  taken  by  the  American  Comiiiissioiiers  who  framed  the  Treaty 
of  Washington,  that  the  value  of  tho  iushore  fisheries  has  be«^n  jrreat'y 
exaggerated,  and  that  the  United  States  have  desired  :»>  skui*  'he 
privilege  of  using  them,  not  for  their  commercial  ur  iutiiusic  value,  '  i' 
for  the  purpo.se  of  removing  a  source  of  irritation. 

The  simple  truth  is,  that  all  American  fishermen  would,  at  the  date  of 
the  treaty,  and  ever  since,  have  gladly  abandoned  all  fif"'»iMjr  in  the 
territorial  waters  of  Canada,  rather  than  have  been  subjecu  i  [<  cotu- 
petition  on  equal  terms  with  the  Canadian  fishermen. 

(5).  As  for  th&  herring  fishery  by  Americans  in  British  waters,  it 
amounts  to  nothing.  Hardly  any  trace  of  its  existence  can  be  found. 
Herring  are  purchased  but  not  fished  for  by  United  States  fishermeu  iu 
British  territorial  waters. 

The  United  States  call  upon  the  British  Agent  to  produce,  and  upon 
the  Commissioners  to  require  at  his  hands,  tangible  evidence  of  tiie 
actual  practical  value  of  the  privilege  of  fishing  by  Americans  in  Brit- 
ish territorial  waters  as  it  has  existed  under  the  treaty  for  four  years 
pnst,  as  it  exists  today,  and  as,  judging  of  the  future  by  the  past,  it 
may  reasonably  be  expected  to  continue  during  the  ensuing  eight  years 
embraced  in  the  treaty.  It  is  insisted  that  the  Commissioners  have  uo 
right  to  proceed  upon  vague  and  general  claims  and  assertions  as  nn- 
substantial  as  the  fog- banks  along  the  coast,  and  therefore  as  difflcult 
to  refute,  as  it  would  be  to  dissipate  a  fog.  Especially  are  they  bound 
not  to  suffer  themselves  to  be  misled  by  the  untenable  and  expldded 
theory  that  the  portion  of  the  high  seas  which  is  adjacent  to  the  Brit- 
ish provinces  constitutes  a  part  of  their  dominions. 

IV. 

It  is  next  proposed  to  consider  the  advantages  derived  by  British 
subjects  from  the  provisions  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

In  the  first  place,  the  admission  of  American  fishermen  into  Britisli 
waters  is  no  detriment,  but  a  positive  advantage,  to  colonial  fishermen; 
they  catch  more  fish,  make  more  money,  and  are  improved  in  all  their 
material  circumstances,  by  the  presence  of  foreign  fishermen.  Tbe 
large  quantities  of  the  best  bait  thrown  over  from  American  vessels 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


127 


attract  myriads  of  fish,  so  that  Canadians  prefer  to  fish  side  by  side  with 
them;  and,  wbeu  doing  so,  make  a  larger  catch  than  they  otherwise 
conld.  The  returns  of  the  product  of  the  British  fisheries  conclusively 
show  that  the  presence  of  foreign  fishermen  cannot  possibly  have  done 
tbem  any  injury. 

Secondly.  Ilie  incidental  benefits  arising  from  trafiic  with  American 
fishermen  are  of  vital  importance  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  British  mari- 
time provinces.  When,  after  the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty, 
the  Canadian  authorities  saw  fit  to  prohibit  such  commercial  intercourse, 
the  disastrous  consequences  wiiich  ensued  are  thus  depicted  by  the  Hon. 
Stewart  Campbell,  M.  P.,  in  his  letter  to  the  department  of  murine  an«l 
fisheries,  in  1809 : 

Tbe  principal  source  of  inconvenience  and  grievance  on  the  part  of  the  British  traders  and 
8u))ji-cts,  generally,  in  the  nmritime  provinces,  vfho  are  connected  with  the  fisheriex,  is  to  be 
found  in  the  grcat'change  of  circumstances  brought  about  by  the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty.  During  the  existence  of  that  treaty,  the  entire  freedom  with  which  that  branch  of 
industry  represented  by  the  fisheries  was  pursued,  on  the  part  of  the  subjects  of  the  I'uited 
States  uf  America,  on  the  coants  of  the  liritish  provinces,  naturally  brought  these  foreigners 
into  most  intimate  business  relations  with  niercliauts,  traders,  and  others,  in  many  localities 
of  the  maritime  portion  of  the  Dominion,  and  especially  at  and  in  the  vicinity  of  the  Straits 
of  Can80.  The  great  body  of  the  large  tl  et  of  American  fishermen,  numbering  several 
Luudred  vessels,  which  annually  passed  through  that  strait  to  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence,  in 
tlie  proHecutiiiu  of  the  fisheries,  and  especially  the  mackerel  fishery,  was  invariably  in  the 
haliit  (if  procuring  much  of  the  requisite  supplies  for  the  voyage  at  the  several  ports  in  that 
strait.  The  business  thus  created  largely  benefited  not  only  those  directly  engaged  in 
commercial  pursuits,  but  was  also  of  immeuse  advantage  to  other  classes  of  the  inhabitants 
of  several  of  the  adjacent  counties  of  Nova  Scotia.  The  constant  demand  for,  and  ready 
(liiM  ■stl  a'  remunerative  prices  to  the  American  fishing  vessels  of,  a  large  (juautity  of  farm 
lirndiice,  a  'd  other  products  of  industry  in  the  shape  of  barrels,  hoops,  lumber,  wcod,  Ac, 
was  ai  r^nce  the  character  and  result  of  the  intercourse  which  subsisted  during  the  existence 
of  the  Keciprocity  Treaty. 

And  here  I  may  otfer  some  observations  as  to  what,  in  my  judgment,  would  be  the  prob- 
able etfects  of  liealiug  with  the  Ani>  rican  fishermen  in  the  more  liberal  spirit  of  cheap 
licenses.  In  a  lormer  part  of  this  coiinnunication,  I  have  referred  to  the  active  and  advan- 
ta|rcons  l)nsinesH  relations  subsisting  between  them  and  the  merchants,  traders,  and  others. 
Id  the  eastern  counties  of  Nova  Scotia,  and  particularly  at  the  Strait  of  Canso,  during  the 
existence  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  and  pointed  out  the  very  prosperous  condition  of  our 
own  people  during  that  period.  Much  depression  has  prevailed  since  its  abrogation,  caused 
principally  by  the  exaction  of  a  high  rate  of  tonnage  dues,  which  has  induced  the  Americans 
to  transfer  their  former  business  relations  to  Prince  Edward  Islaad,  where  the  terms  of  the 
Convention  of  1818  are  practically  permitted  to  be  unrecognized. 

Tlie  value  of  this  trade  during  the  period  of  that  treaty  is  thus  stated 
by  Sir  John  A.  Macdonald  in  tbe  debiite  in  the  Dominion  Parliament, 
May  3,  1872 : 

The  p  jople  of  Nova  Scotia  and  the  other  provinces  found  that  the  treaty,  while  it  yielded 
a  nominal  right,  confern-d  many  and  solid  advantages.  A  great  trade,  which  they  had  never 
anticipated,  sprung  up  in  consequence  of  the  admission  of  American  fishermen;  and,  in- 
stead ot  the  ruin  tlie)  feared,  they  gained  so  much  in  every  respect  that  they  desired  a  con- 
tiuuiince  of  the  treaty  and  lamented  its  repeal.  It  was  found,  too,  that  the  people  of  Prince 
Edward  Island  also  experienced  a  great  advantage  from  the  treaty,  in  respect  to  trade  in 
coarse  grains  with  the  IJnited  States,  which  was  largely  increased  by  the  permission  grented 
to  Americans  to  frei^uent  their  coasts  for  fishing  purposes.  In  that  colony,  too,  there  had 
been  apprehensions— and  he  doubted  not  they  were  sincei  — t'>at  the  treaty  would  not  be 
really  beneficial  to  the  people ;  but  when  the  privileges  giv/-  ^  citizens  of  the  United  States 
wern  freely  enjoyed  by  them,  they  in  return,  brought  so  m. .  y  lonefits  that  we  beard  ^o  com- 
plaints from  the  colony.  No  injury  was  done  to  the  fishermen  of  the  island ;  on  tie  con- 
trnry,  the  trade  which  grew  up  was  found  to  be  profitable  in  many  different  ways.  More 
goods  were  imported  than  ever  before;  commerce  was  brisk  :  stores  were  opened,  and  profits 
nm\v  which  never  would  have  been  realized  but  for  the  existence  of  the  treaty. 

In  tbe  same  debate,  Mr.  Power,  of  Halifax,  who  was  described  by 
anotber  speaker  as  *'a  man  who  had  devoted  his  whole  life  to  enterprises 
coiiueoted  with  the  fisheries  of  the  maritime  provinces,  who  had  given 


ll 


•M*       1 


128 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


them  the  most  carefal  study  and  attention,  and  had  become  possessed 
of  every  iuformatioa  concerning  tbem,"  declared  that. — 

The  h^'bors  on  the  entire  line  of  coast  were  visited  by  United  States  vessels,  for  tlie  pur- 
pose of  obtaining  supplies  of  bait,  ice,  &c.,  for  the  deep-sea  and  other  fisheries  ;  and,  if  we 
wished  to  have  the  protection  eflfectnai,  we  would  prevent  this.  He  mit/ht,  however,  say  that 
he  had  always  been  opposed  to  United  States  vessels  being  preoenied  from  obtaining  these  sup- 
plies from  our  people.  It  looked  loo  much  like  the  cutting  off  the  nose  to  be  revenged  on  the 
face.  The  value  of  articles  supplied  in  this  way  was  very  large,  and  the  revenue,  as  well  as  tht 
itthabiiants,  was  benefittd  by  it ;  while  the  only  injury  thttt  would  be  done  to  the  Americans 
by  prohibiting  the  trade  was  to  oblige  them  to  bring  the  supplies  with  them  from  borne,  or 
drive  them  to  Prince  Edward's  Island,  where  ever^  facility  was  readily  given  them,  lie 
bad  understood  that,  until  the  treaty  was  finally  ratified,  it  was  the  intention  of  the  govern- 
ment to  prevent  American  vessels  from  landing  their  catch  in  ports  of  the  Dominiun.  Me 
much  doubted  the  wisdom  of  this  restriction.  It  might  be  all  well  enout;h  if  they  were  noi 
permitted  to  do  so  in  Prince  Edward's  Island.  That  island  lay  almost  in  the  center  of  the 
fishing-grounds  ;  and  there  they  were  allowed  to  take  all  supplies  they  might  require,  aud 
land  their  fish,  which  was  reshipped  in  American  steamers  that  plisd  weekly  between  Char- 
lottetown  and  Boston.  Such  action  on  the  part  of  the  government  would  hardly  form  any 
restriction  to  the  Americans  while  they  had  Prince  Edward's  Island  open  to  them,  and  would 
only  deprive  our  people  of  the  Strait  of  Canso  of  the  advantage  of  storage  and  harbor  atteud- 
ant  on  the  landing  of  cargoes,  and  our  vessels  of  the  benefit  of  the  freighting  of  them  to  the 
United  States. 

The  condition  of  things  in  1870  appears  from  the  reports  of  Vice-Ad- 
miral  Fansliawe,  and  the  other  officers  in  command  of  the  war  vessels 
cruising  off  the  Canadian  coast,  for  the  protection  of  the  fisheries.  (Ca- 
nadian Report  of  the  Department  of  Marine  and  Fisheries,  1870,  pp.  324, 
338, 339, 341,  and  349.)    Admiral  Fanshawe  says: 

The  strong  interest  that  both  the  resident  British  traders  and  the  United  States  fishermen 
have  in  maintaining  the  trade,  would,  in  my  opinion,  render  its  suppression  extremely  diffi- 
cult, even  were  it  thought  judicious  to  continue  the  attempt ;  while  the  combination  between 
these  two  bodies  to  evade  British  law,  and  the  sympathies  arising  therefrom,  must  be  very 
undesirable. 

The  commander  of  Her  Majesty's  gunboat  Britomart,  in  his  report  ou 
the  fisheries  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  says : 

The  inhabitants  on  the  Nova  Scotia  coast,  from  St.  Mary's  Bay  to  Cape  Sable,  I  believe, 
prefer  the  Americans  coming  in ;  as  they  are  in  the  habit  of  selling  them  stores,  bait,  and 
ice,  and  give  them  every  intormation  as  to  my  movements. 

Wherever  I  went,  I  K>und  the  people  most  anxious  whether  the  Americans  were  still  going 
to  be  allowed  to  come  and  purchase  the  frozen  herrings ;  if  they  were  not,  they  had  no  other 
market  for  tbem,  and  the  duty  was  so  heavy  they  coitld  not  afford  to  take  them  into  Ameri- 
can ports  themselvtis.  At  the  same  time,  they  wished  to  have  the  Americans  prevented 
from  fishing  on  their  coasts. 

The  commander  of  Her  Majesty's  ship  Plover,  in  his  report  from 
Prince  Edward's  Island,  in  the  same  year,  says : 

Every  facility  is  ^iven  in  the  ports  of  this  island  to  foreigners  for  obtaining  and  replen- 
ishing their  stock  ot  stores  and  necessaries  for  fishing.  This,  if  the  treaty  is  iutfiided  lo  be 
strictly  enforced,  should  nut  be  allowed  ;  as,  it  it  is  wished  to  drive  the  United  States  tishir- 
men  from  these  waters,  they  will  then  be  obliged  to  return  home  for  supplies. 

H.  £.  Betts,  commander  government  schooner  Ella  G.  McLean,  snys : 

I  anchored  off  port  Mulgrave  and  procured  wood  and  water.  Hens  the  feeiinij  is  very 
much  against  the  law  that  prevents  the  American  fishermen  procuring  suppiie!),  siieh  a.s  l)Hii, 
barrels,  provisions,  &c.  One  house,  whose  receipts  in  li^  and  Ir^^M  were  Hbout  §si.O(i(i 
each  year,  this  year  was  reduced  to  $10, 000,  the  principal  part  of  which  wan  '•sti'lcn." 
They  advocate  the  return  to  the  license  system,  doing  away  with  the  twenty-four  iiours' 
notice  there  used  to  be,  and  having  these  schooners  to  rigidly  enforce  :hp  law,  and  to  in- 
stantly seize  any  vessel  fishing  inside  tha  limits  without  a  license  They  suggest  that  the 
proceeds  of  the  licenses  might  be  used  ax  a  sel-otT  iigaiiist  the  American  duty  uf^'J  n  barrel, 
ity  dividing  it  at  so  much  per  barrel  amongst  our  tishernieii,  a.s  a  bounty  ;  »hiis  putimt;  uur 
fishermen  on  nearly  equal  terms  with  the  Americans  a.t  reirwnhi  a  market  t'irr  their  fish. 

The  anticipations  that  the  Treaty  of  Washington  would  so  operate  as 
to  remove  the  distress  existing  in  the  maritime   provinces   at    tin 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


120 


(late  of  its  negotiation  have  been  fully  realized,  as  will  appear  by  the 
testimony  to  be  laid  before  the  Commission.  It  also  appears  that  sev- 
eral thousands  of  British  flrshernieu  lind  lucrative  employment  on 
board  American  fishing-vessels. 

The  benefits  thus  far  alluded  to  are  only  indirectly  and  remotely 
within  the  scope  and  cognizance  of  this  Commission.  They  are  brought 
to  its  attention  chiefly  to  refute  the  claim,  that  it  is  an  advantage  to  the 
United  States  to  be  able  to  enter  the  harbors  of  the  provinces  and 
traffic  with  the  Inhabitants.  No  doubt  all  such  advantages  are  mutual 
and  reciprocal.  They  only  show  that,  in  this  instance  as  in  so  many 
others,  a  system  of  freedom,  rather  than  one  of  repression,  proves  the 
best  for  all  mankind. 

V. 

It  is  necessary  now  to  consider  the  specific  benefits  which  the  treaty 
directs  tbe  Commission  to  regard  in  its  comparison  and  adjustment  of 
equivalents. 

First.  What  do  ^iitish  subjects  gain  by  admission  to  the  fishing- 
grounds  of  the  Ui  ited  States  down  to  the  thirty-ninth  parallel  of  north 
latitude  ? 

All  descriptions  of  fish  found  in  British  waters  also  abound  along  this 
portion  of  the  coast  of  the  United  States.  They  are  nearly  as  extensive 
territorially  and  equally  valuable.  If  the  provincial  fishermen  in- 
vested the  same  amount  of  capital  in  the  business,  and  exerted  equal 
enterprise,  industry,  and  skill,  they  would  find  the  American  waters 
fully  as  valuable  to  them  as  theirs  now  are  to  the  fishermen  of  the 
United  States. 

Ort"  the  American  coast  is  fouiul  exclusively  the  menhaden  or  porgies, 
by  far  the  best  bait  for  mackerel.  This  is  well  stated  by  Sir  John  Mac- 
(lunald,  who  sayri : 

It  is  also  true  that  in  American  waters  the  favorite  bait  to  catch  the  mackerel  is  found,  and  it 
is  so  much  the  favorite  bait  that  one  lishing-vessel  havitii;  this  hait  on  board  would  draw  a 
wholu  school  of  mackerel  in  the  very  face  of  vessels  having  an  inferior  bait.  Now,  the  value 
of  the  privileg^e  of  entering  American  waters  for  ''itching  that  bait  is  very  great.  If  Cana- 
dian Hsliermen  were  excluded  from  American  waters  by  any  combination  amon^  American 
fishermen,  or  by  any  act  of  Congress,  they  would  be  deprived  of  getting  a  single  ounce  of 
the  bait.  American  fishermen  might  combine  for  that  object,  or  a  law  might  be  passed  by 
''uiigress  forbidding  the  exportation  of  menhaden  ;  but  by  the  provision  made  in  the  treaty 
t'aimdian  Kshermen  are  allowed  to  enter  into  American  waters  to  procure  the  bait,  and  the 
ciinseriuence  of  that  is  that  no  such  combination  can  exist,  and  Canadians  can  purchase  the 
biiit  and  bo  able  to  fish  on  eijiial  terms  with  the  Americans,  (Speech  of  Sir  John  A.  Mae- 
(Joimld,  May  :{,  1^72.) 

Tlu'se  statements  were  based  upon  the  Canadian  official  reports  pre- 
viously published,  which  say  : 

I'lir  iiiiK'kerel  fishing,  tlii^  Aiiierii'ans  use  "  porgies  "  and  cliiiiis,  clioiipcd  tine,  as  bait. 
I'lic  "  porgies  "  are  found  only  on  the  const  of  the  United  States,  and,  wl\eu  inipurted  into 
till'  Idiiiiinion.  cost  about  six  dulliirs  per  barrel. 

'I'lie  bait  witli  which  the  Americans  are  supplied  is  fur  superior  to  any  which  can  be  pro- 
iiin-il  in  this  country,  to  which  may  be  attributed  in  a  j^reat  measure  tliu  success  of  the 
Aiiierlcans  previously  to  the  recent  restrictions,  altlu.uph  even  now  tlie  lueal  liislicrnieu  com- 
lliiiii  iliat  they  have  no  chance  while  an  American  sliooner  is  lisliing  near  them.  (Annual 
K'piirt  of  the  Department  of  Marine  and  Fisheries  for  the  year  ending  .luiic,  1?70,  pp.  3I'2, 
■I 4V,. ) 

Tho  menhaden  fis.'iery  lias  within  ten  years  grown  into  an  immense 
hitsiiicss.  Formerly,  they  were  taken  only  lor  bait,  and  were  either 
i-'roiiiid  in  iiand-mills  for  mackerel,  or  used  in  what  is  called  "  slivers" 
ior  codfish  bait.  There  is  now  a  large  fieet  of  steamers  and  sailiug-ves- 
s.'ls  (M.gaged  in  this  fishery.  Large  factories  have  been  erected  on  shore 
9  F 


>i- 


M 


'"!H 


¥ 


130 


AWAKD   OF   THE    FISIIEKY   COMMISSION 


for  extracting  the  oil.  As  these  fish  are  not  valuable  until  they  are  fiit, 
which  is  in  August  and  September,  they  are  not  much  taken  in  their 
spawning  time ;  and  they  will  not  therefore  be  exterminated.  They  are 
caught  solely  with  seines,  near  the  shore,  their  food  being  a  kind  of 
marine  seed  which  floats  upon  the  waters;  consequently,  they  will  not 
take  the  hook.  This  fishery  is  one  of  the  most  profitable  of  all  the  fish- 
eries, the  oil  being  used  for  tanning  and  currying  extensively  at  home 
and  being  exported  in  large  quantities.  The  refuse  of  the  fish,  after  be- 
ing pressed,  is  used  for  uianufiicturing  guano  or  fish  phosphate,  and  is 
very  valuable  as  a  fertilizer.  This  fishery  is  purely  an  American  fisli- 
Ci'y,  no  menhaden  ever  being  found  north  of  the  coast  of  Maine.  It  is 
entirely  an  inshore  fishery,  the  fish  being  taken  within  two  miles  from 
the  shore. 

The  United  States  inshore  fisheries  for  mackerel,  in  quality,  quantity, 
and  value,  are  unsurpassed  by  any  in  the  world.  They  are  within  four 
hours'  sail  of  the  American  market,  and  many  of  the  mackerel  are  sold 
fresh  at  a  larger  price  than  when  salted  and  packed.  The  vessels  fitted 
with  mackerel  seines  can  use  the  same  means  and  facilities  for  taking 
menhaden,  so  that  both  fisheries  can  be  pursued  together.  And  they 
combine  advantages,  compared  with  which  the  Dominion  fisheries  are 
uncertain,  poor  in  quality,  and  vastly  less  in  quantity.  The  Canadian 
fisheries  are  a  long  voyage  from  any  market  whatever,  and  involve  far 
more  exposure  to  loss  of  vessels  and  life.  These  fisheries  aloi^'?  the 
shores  of  the  United  States  are  now  open  to  the  competition  ot  the 
cheap  bnilt  vessels,  cheap-fed  cre'^v,  and  poorly  paid  labor  of  the  Do- 
minion fishermen,  who  pay  trifling  taxes,  and  live,  both  on  board  their 
vessels  and  at  home,  at  less  than  half  the  expense  of  American  fisher- 
men. It  is  only  from  lack  of  enterprise,  capital,  and  ability,  that  the 
Dominion  fishermen  have  failed  to  use  them.  But  recently  hundreds 
of  Dominion  fishermen  have  learned  their  business  at  Gloucester  and 
other  American  fishing  towns,  and  by  shipping  in  American  vessels. 
They  have  in  United  States  waters  to-day  over  thirty  vessels,  equipped 
for  seining,  which,  in  company  with  the  American  fleet,  are  sweeping 
the  shores  of  New  England. 

Second.  The  enormous  pecuniary  value  of  the  right  to  import  fish 
and  fish-oil,  free  of  duty,  into  the  markets  of  the  United  States,  mast 
be  admitted  by  every  candid  mind.  Testimony  from  all  quarters  can 
be  adduced,  of  the  most  convincing  character,  on  this  subject. 

In  June  24, 1851,  long  before  the  adoption  of  the  Keciprocity  Treaty, 
the  British  minister  at  VVashiugton,  Lord  Elgin,  wrote  to  Mr.  Webster, 
that  if  the  United  States  would  admit  ''all  fish,  either  cured  or  fresb, 
imported  from  the  British  North  American  possessions,  in  vessels  of 
any  nation  or  description,  free  of  duty,  and  upon  terms  in  all  respects 
of  equality  with  fish  Imported  by  citizens  of  the  United  States,"  Uer 
Majesty's  Government  were  prepared  "  to  throw  open  to  the  fishermen 
of  the  United  States  the  fisheries  in  the  waters  of  the  British  North 
American  colonies,  with  permission  to  those  fishermen  to  land  on  the 
coasts  of  those  colonies  for  the  purpose  of  drying  their  nets  and  curing 
fish ;  provided  that,  in  so  doing,  they  do  not  interfere  with  the  owners 
of  private  property,  or  with  the  operations  of  British  fishermen."— 
Docume?it8  accompanying  President's  Message,  December,  1851,  parti, 
pp.  89,  90. 

And  after  the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  in  18G7,  a  com- 
mittee of  the  Nova  Scotia  legislature  earnestly  recommended  "  that, 
instead  of  levying  a  pecuniary  license  fee,  steps  be  taken  to  arrange,  it 
practicable,  with  the  American  Governujent,  for  the  admission  of  the 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


131 


products  of  colonial  fislicrmeii  into  tho  American  market  free,  or  under 
a  more  reduced  tarill  than  that  now  imposed." — Report  of  Committee  of 
Legislature  of  Nova  Scotia,  18G7,  quoted  in  Knif^bt's  Keport  on  the 
Fisheries  of  Nova  Scotia,  p.  14. 

"  Under  the  Keciprocity  Treaty,"  said  Mr.  Stewart  Campbell,  in  tho 
meniorandum  alrea«ly  quoted  from,  "</<e  total  crem  jit  ion  from  tluty  of  all 
ti'<li  exported  from  the  maritime  proviitces  to  the  markets  of  the  United 
'stntcsj  was  also  a  boon  of  inestimable  value  to  the  very  large  chtss  of  Brit- 
ish subjects  directly  and  indirectly  connected  icith  our  fisheries  and  its  re- 
smiting  trade.  This  state  of  tiiijijjs,  wliich  was  beneficial  also  in  no  small 
(lejxree  to  the  subjects  of  the  United  States,  undoubtedly  created  a  con- 
dition of  jreneral  i)rosperity  and  contentment  amonfj  the  classes  of  Jirit- 
ish  subjects  referred  to,  such  as  had  never  previously  existed." 

On  tiiis  subject  Sir  John  A.  Macdonald,  in  the  Parliament  of  the 
Doaiinion,  thus  expressed  himself: 

I  iniiy  be  liable  to  tbo  cliarge  of  injurhip  our  own  cu.so  in  discussiiifj  the  atlvHutnires  of 
the  Hniingeiiieiits,  becHUsu  t'very  word  usuil  by  me  nmy  bo  ((noted  iiiid  used  hs  evidcnoo 
u<raiiisi  us  hcreiiftcr.  The  Htiituiiioiit  has  been  so  thrown  broadctist  that  tin*  nrran^eiueut  ih 
A  bud  uue  fur  Canada,  that,  in  order  to  show  to  this  House  and  the  country  that  it  i8  one 
timt  can  be  accepted,  one  is  obli)|;ed  to  run  tliu  lisk  of  iiis  lan|;;ua(!;c  lieiufj;'  used  before  the 
Commissioners  to  settle  the  amount  of  compensation,  an  an  evidence  of  the  value  of  the  treaty 
to  us.  It  seems  to  me  that,  in  lookiuf^  at  tlie  treaty  in  a  commercial  point  uf  view,  and  look- 
iiiR  at  the  question  whether  it  is  ripht  to  accept  the  articles,  we  have  to  consider  mainly  that 
interest  which  is  most  peculiarly  atiecled.  Now,  unless  I  am  (rreatly  misinfurmed,  the  fish- 
ing interests  in  Nova  Scotia,  with  one  or  two  exceptions  for  local  reasons,  are  altogether  in 
fuvoruf  the  treaty.  They  are  so  anxious  to  g^et  free  admission  for  their  fish  into  the  Amori- 
ciui  market,  that  they  would  view  with  groat  sorrow  any  action  of  this  House  which  would 
•■X('lude  them  from  that  market;  that  they  look  forward  with  increasing  confidence  to  a  largo 
development  of  their  trade,  and  of  that  ^reat  industry;  and  I  say,  that  that  being  the  case, 
if  it  be  to  the  interest  of  the  fishermen,  and  for  the  advantage  of  that  branch  of  national  indus- 
try, setting  aside  all  other  considerations,  we  ought  not  wilfully  to  injure  that  interest.  Why, 
sir,  wh.it  is  the  fact  of  the  case  as  it  stands  ?  Tlie  only  market  for  the  Canadian  No.  1  mackerel 
m  the  world  is  tlic  United  Statrs.  Thai  is  our  only  market,  and  tee  are  practically  crclitded  from  it 
Inj  ihr  iircsent  duty.  The  consequence  uf  that  duty  is  that  our  fishermen  are  at  the  mercy  of  the 
Amtr^can  fishermen.  They  are  made  tlie  hewfrs  of  wood  and  the  drairrrs  of  water  for  tlie 
Americans.  They  are  obliged  to  ndl  their  fish  at  the  Americans'  own  price.  The  American 
Jishermen  purchase  their fisli  at  a  nominal  value,  and  control  the  American  market.  The  great 
prolits  of  the  trade  are  handed  over  to  tho  American  tishermen,  or  tho  American  merchants 
engaged  in  the  trade,  and  they  profit  to  the  loss  of  our  own  industry  and  our  own  people. 
Let  any  one  go  down  the  St.  Lawrence  on  a  summer  trip,  as  many  of  us  do,  and  call  from 
the  deck  of  the  steamer  to  a  fisherman  in  his  boat,  and  see  tor  what  a  nomiiuil  price  you  can 
secure  the  whole  of  his  catch  ;  and  that  is  from  the  absence  of  a  market,  and  from  the  fact  of 
the  Canadian  fisherman  being  completely  under  the  control  of  tho  foreigner.  With  the  duty 
otT  Canadian  fish,  tho  Canadian  fisherman  may  send  his  fish  at  the  right  time,  when  ho  can 
obtain  the  best  price,  to  the  American  market,  and  thus  be  the  moans  of  opening  a  profita- 
ble trade  with  the  United  States  in  exchange.  If,  therefore,  it  is  for  the  advantage  of  the 
maritime  pr'^vinces,  including  that  portion  of  Quebec  which  is  also  largely  interested  in  the 
fisheries,  that  this  treaty  should  be  ratified,  and  that  this  great  market  should  bo  op.  aed  to 
them,  on  what  ground  should  we  deprive  them  of  this  right  i  Is  it  not  a  selfish  argument 
that  the  fisheries  can  be  used  as  a  lever  in  order  to  gain  reciprocity  in  Hour,  wheat,  aud  other 
cereals  'I  Are  you  to  shut  our  fishermen  out  of  this  great  market  in  order  that  you  may 
coerce  the  United  States  into  giving  you  an  extension  of  tho  reciprocal  principle  ? 

I  Lave  heard  the  fear  expressed  that,  with  this  treaty,  the  Americans  would  come  dowa 
into  our  waters  and  take  the  fish  away  from  our  people.  This  was  a  groundless  fear.  Why 
had  not  this  occurred  under  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  under  which  the  Americans  enjoyed 
luUy  equal  privileges  to  those  they  would  have  under  the  Treaty  of  Washington  i  Did  we 
liud  thorn  interfering  with  our  fishermen  t  We  did  not ;  and  with  the  United  States  mar- 
kets open  tons  ou  the  same  terms  as  to  its  own  fi-ihernien,  could  any  intelligent  man  sup- 
|)08c  that  they  could  come  down  four  or  five  hundred  miles  iu  vessels  costing  more  to  build, 
ffjuip,  and  sail  than  our  vessels,  aud  compete  with  our  people,  who  took  the  fish  almost  at 
their  own  doors  If  In  Mr.  Knight's  report  on  the  working  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  drawn 
up  iu  the  year  1807,  was  found  the  following  extract  of  a  letter  from  a  gentleman  in  LJuys- 
hurougjh  :  "  The  fishermen  iu  this  locality  have,  siiu-e  ti.e  commemrement  of  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty,  say  for  the  past  ten  years,  made  nuire  money  than  during  any  ten  years  pre- 
vious, from  the  fact  that  they  had  a  free  market  in  tho  United  States,  which  is  the  only 
>n'nk'A  tchtrc  a  lar<je  proportion  of  uur  fish  will  sell  to  advantage;  and,  althougli  lish  have 


t 


132 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


M 


m 


not  been  so  abundnnt,  the  extra  price  has  more  tlinii  compensated  for  the  deficiency  in  the 
catch.  If  II  heavy  duty  were  put  upon  our  maciterel  and  herrings  in  the  United  States,  tlie 
fishery  would  not  be  remunerative  ;  and,"  he  added,  "  tlie  American  cod  and  maci<erel  fisii- 
crmen  have  not  interfered  with  us  nor  injured  our  fisheries  durinf^  the  past  ten  years,  aiu] 
our  fishermen  caught  more  mackerel  in  l!H()4  than  in  any  previous  year."  It  would  be  set-ii 
that  we  need  have  no  fears  that  the  Americans  would  do  us  anv  greater  injury  under  this 
treaty.  He  also  found  in  Mr.  Knight's  report  that  the  value  of  hsh  exported  from  the  rmv- 
ince  of  Nova  Scotia  from  IH.').')  to  IHG.'i,  during  the  existence  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  hiiil 
increased  from  $1,940,127  to  $:),47(),4(>l,  and  was  it  not  (air  to  assume  that  a  proportiouate 
increase  would  take  place  under  the  Washington  Treaty  ? 

Those  opposed  to  the  treaty  seemed  to  set  great  value  upon  what  we  were  asked  by  it  to  siir* 
render.  "  O,"  said  they,  "  why  should  we  give  up  our  valuable  tisheries,  such  important  priv- 
ileges, and  for  so  small  a  consideration  t  "  Had  those  who  talked  in  this  way  studied  the 
case  1  I  believe  they  had  not,  else  they  would  form  a  different  opinion.  That  our  tisheries 
were  valuable,  I  urn  well  aware.  Their  value  under  favorable  conditions  could  not  be  over- 
estimated ;  but  that  value  would  be  great  or  small  just  in  proportion  to  the  markets  we  pes- 
sessed.  By  this  treaty  we  surrendered  very  little,  and  gained  in  many  ways ;  for,  in  addition 
to  our  own  fishing  grounds,  which  we  still  retained,  we  had  the  privilege,  if  we  chose  to 
avail  ourselves  of  it,  of  going  into  United  States  waters  to  fish,  and  would  gain  a  free 
market,  which  would  have  the  efffct  of  increasing  the  value  of  our  own  fisheries  to  a  most 
important  extent.  Newfoundland  and  Prince  Edward's  Island  had  given  strong  indica- 
tions that  they  would  ratify  this  treaty ;  and  Americans  having  free  access  to  the  fishiiifr- 
grounds  of  the  former,  they  would  be  (|uite  independent  of  us  in  the  herring  and  cod  fisher- 
ies. Prince  Edward's  Island's  ratifying  it  would  give  them  access  to 'he  mackerel  fishery  of 
that  island;  and,  with  the  right  whicn  they  now  possessed,  under  the  treaty  of  Itjlr^,  to 
take  all  kinds  of  fish  when  and  where  they  pleased  at  the  Magdalen  Islands — and  the  islands 
comprise,  both  for  herring  and  mackerel,  about  the  best  fishing-ground  of  the  Dominion— 
the  Americans  need  care  very  little  for  any  privileges  that  we  might  have  the  power  to  with- 
]iold  from  them,  which  would  amount  to  but  a  few  miles  of  an  inshore  mackerel  fishery  ;  in 
return  for  which  the  markets  of  the  entire  United  States  were  thrown  open  to  us  free  for  all 
the  fish  and  products  of  the  fisheries  of  the  whole  Dominion. 

lu  tbe  saQio  debate  of  May  13, 1872,  Mr.  Power,  of  Halifax,  said : 

He  was  in  favor  of  accepting  the  treaty  even  as  it  was,  and  the  following  were  some 
of  his  reasons;  they  >vere  not  merely  theoretical,  but  the  result  of  years  of  practical  expe- 
rience and  careful  observation.  In  the  spring  of  each  year,  some  forty  or  fifty  vessels  re- 
sorted to  the  Magdalen  Islands  for  herring,  and  he  had  known  the  number  to  be  greater. 
These  vessels  carried  an  average  of  *.)0U  barrels  each.  So  that  the  quantity  taken  was  gen- 
erally in  the  neighborhood  of  .')0,OUU  barrels.  During  the  existence  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty, 
no  United  States  vessels  went  after  these  fish.  All  the  vessels  engaged  in  that  fishery  be- 
longed to  some  one  of  the  provinces  now  forming  this  Dominion.  Since  the  abrogation  of 
the  treaty  and  the  imposition  of  the  duty  of  a  dollar  per  barrel  by  the  United  States,  the  cti.se 
liad  become  entirely  changed.  Vessels  still  went  there ;  but  tiiey  were  nearly  all  Americuu. 
Now,  under  this  treaty  we  would  get  that  important  branch  of  trade  back  again.  The  lower 
provinces.  Nova  Scotia  in  particular,  had  a  large  herring  trade  with  Newfoundland.  Ves- 
sels went  there  with  salt  and  other  supplies,  and  brought  back  cargoes  of  herring  in  bulk. 
Employment  was  thus  given  to  the  cooper  and  laborer  in  preparing  the^^e  fish  for  export: 
and,  as  the  business  was  prosecuted  mostly  in  the  winter  months,  when  other  eniploynieut 
was  difficult  to  obtain,  it  always  proved  a  great  boon  to  the  induHlrious.  Wo  lo.st  this  trade 
also  when  we  lost  the  Reciprocity  Treaty ;  but  it  would  retinn  to  us  under  the  treaty  now 
offered  for  our  acceptance.  A  littlo  more  than  two  years  ago,  two  vessels  beluuging  to  the 
Province  of  Quebec  arrivtal  in  Halifax,  from  Labrador.  They  had  between  them  3,400  hm- 
rels  of  herring.  Not  finding  sale  for  them  in  Halifax,  they  proceeded  to  New  York,  where 
they  sold.  'I'he  duty  on  the.se  two  cargoes  amounte-i  to  $  1,400  in  gold.  Under  a  treaty  of 
this  kind,  this  f;$,400  would  go  into  the  pockets  of  the  owners  and  crews  of  the  vrssel.s,  in- 
stead of  into  the  United  States  Trea.siiry  ;  and  cases  of  this  kind  occurred  almost  every  day. 
The  same  reason  applied  to  the  mackerel  fishery;  but  with  siill  greater  force,  the  duty  bciuj? 
two  dollars  per  barrel.  There  w  as  another  feature  connected  with  this  fishery,  which  ought  to 
liave  a  good  deal  of  weight  with  this  House,  in  favor  of  the  treaty.  American  vessels  following 
the  cod  uiul  mackerel  fisheries  were  manne'J  in  great  part  by  natives  of  somepart  of  this  Do- 
minion. Tliechiefcausoof  this  was,  thiit,  as  the  hands  iislied  on  shares,  viz,  one-half  of  wliiit 
ihey  caught,  those  employed  on  board  ol  United  States  vessels  got  tlieirs  in  free  of  duty  ;  while 
the  men  employed  in  the  vessels  o.  the  Dominion  had  to  pay  the  duty  on  theirs.  A  hand 
catching  twenty-five  barrels  of  mackerel  to  his  share,  on  board  of  a  United  States  vessel, 
would  receive  $50  more  than  he  would  receive  lor  the  same  ijuantity  taken  in  one  of  our  owu 
vessels.  A  consequence  of  this  was  that  the  best  men  went  on  board  the  American  vessels, 
and  our  vessels  had  to  put  up  with  the  less  capable.  Indeed,  should  the  present  state  uf 
things  continue  much  longer,  our  people  would  be  compelled  to  give  up  the  hook-and-liue 
fishing  altogetlier  ;  for  it  was  impossible  that  they  could  continue  to  compete  against  the 
duty  and  their  other  disadvantages.     During  the  existeu  c  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  tbe 


AWARD   OP   THE   PISllKKY   COMMISSION. 


1^3 


number  of  vessels  followinjy  the  hook-and-line  inaekeri'l-fishery  had  increased  to  about  sixty 
in  the  connty  of  Luiienbur|!^  alone.  Since  the  termination  of  the  treaty,  the  number  had 
been  gradually  fi<'lin|;  oiT,  until,  dnrinp:  last  session,  no  more  than  half  a  dozen  vessels  en- 
frik|;ed  in  that  business  ;  and  he  believed  that,  should  this  treaty  not  be  ratified,  there  would 
not  be  a  single  vessel  fitted  out  in  that  county  for  the  nuickerel-fishery  the  approachin(;  sea- 
son. He  had  been  assured  by  vessel-owners  in  Mavre  an  Bouche — an  enterprising  settle- 
ment at  the  eastern  end  of  the  county  of  Antigouish — and  also  by  those  on  the  western  side 
of  the  iStrait  of  Canso,  in  the  county  of  Ouysboro  (from  both  of  which  places  the  mackerel 
and  herring  fisheries  had  been  extensively  prosecuted),  that  the  business  will  not  more  than 
pay  expenses  ;  and  that,  unless  something  was  done  to  relieve  those  fish  from  the  preeent 
duty,  tiiey  would  be  obliged  to  abandon  the  business  altogether.  This  need  create  no  eur- 
priMO,  when  it  is  considered  that,  at  the  present  value  of  mackerel  and  herrings,  the  du*y  is 
fully  e(iual  to  fifty  per  cent.  Owing  to  the  advantages  oflTi-red  by  the  American  vessels  over 
our  provincial  vessels  engaged  in  fishing,  nut  only  were  our  best  men  induced  to  give  their 
skill  to  the  Americans  in  fishing,  but  in  many  cases  they  remained  away,  and  their  industry 
was  lost  to  the  provinces.  They  went  to  the  States  in  the  vessel  the  last  trip,  in  order  to  get 
settled  up  for  the  season's  work,  and  generally  remained  there  to  man  the  nshing  and  other 
vessels  of  tlie  Republic.  Why,  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  inhabitants  of  Gloucester  and 
other  fishing  towns  of  Massachusetts  and  Maine  were  natives  of  some  of  the  provinces  of 
this  Dominion.  Now,  with  this  treaty  the  inducements  to  give  a  preference  to  American 
vessels  would  be  removed,  and  our  own  vessels  would  be  able  to  select  good  hands,  who 
would  remn'.ii  at  home :  the  temptation  to  emigrate,  as  he  bad  justexplained,  being  removed. 
He  has  heard  it  said  that  the  ctmsumer  pnid  the  duty.  A'oio,  whilst  this  mii(ht  be  the  case 
tritit  some  arlicles,  it  was  not  so  with  ''if  article  of  ourjish.  In  our  case  in  this  business,  our 
fiihrrme.n  fished  side  by  side  tcith  their  American  rivnis,  both  carrying  the  proceeds  of 
their  catch  to  the  snme  market,  where  oiir  men  had  to  contend  ai(ainst  the  free  fish 
of  the  Ameriean  fishermen.  Let  him  illustrate  this.  An  American  and  a  provincial  vessel 
tonii  7*>ii  harrtls  of  mackerel  each;  both  vessels  were  confined  to  the  same  market,  where  they 
sold  at  the  same  price.  One  had  to  pay  a  duly  of  $1,(100,  while  the  other  had  not  to  do  so. 
lyito  then  paid  the  $1,000  f  Most  certainly  not  the  purchaser  or  consumer,  but  the  poor,  hard- 
worked  fisherman  of  this  Dominion;  for  this  $1,000  was  deducted  from  his  account  of  sates. 
Those  who  contended  that  in  this  case  the  consumer  paid  the  duty,  ought  to  bo  able  to 
show  that,  if  the  duty  were  taken  ofi'in  the  United  States,  the  selling  price  there  would  be 
reduced  by  the  amount  of  the  duty.  There  was  nothing  in  the  nature  or  existing  circum- 
stances of  the  trade  to  cause  any  person  who  understands  to  believe  that  this  would  bo  the 
cose  ;  and  therefore  it  would  be  seen  that  at  present  our  fishermen  labored  under  disadvantages, 
tehich  made  it  almost  impossible  for  them  to  compete  with  their  rivals  in  the  United  States ;  and 
that  the  removal  of  the  duty,  as  proposed  by  this  treaty,  would  he  a  great  boon,  and  enable  them 
to  di  a  good  business  witere  they  now  were  but  struggling,  or  doing  a  losing  trade. 

lu  the  same  debate  Dr.  Tapper,  of  FJalifax,  said: 

While  in  18r>4  American  fishermen  were  able  to  compote  with  Canadians,  because  they 
had  no  high  taxes  to  pay,  and  the  cost  of  outfit  was  much  less  than  at  present,  the  war  and 
the  burdens  it  had  left  behind  had  so  changed  their  position  in  relation  to  this  question, 
that  every  Canadian  fisherman,  who  had  the  fish  in  the  sea  at  his  own  door,  with  alt  the  ad- 
vantages of  cheap  vessels  and  cheap  equipment,  if  he  belonged  (as  no  one  doubted)  to  the 
same  courageous  and  adventurous  class  as  the  Americans,  would  enter  into  the  competition 
with  an  advantage  of  40  or  50  per  cent,  in  his  favor.  *  *  **  Who  would  say  that  tho 
Canadian  fisherman  was  deserving  of  any  consideration,  if  he  was  not  able,  with  that  pre- 
mium in  his  favor,  to  meet  the  competition,  not  only  of  the  United  States,  but  of  the  world  f 
Why,  then,  instead  of  the  treaty  surroudoring  our  fishermen  and  fisheries  to  the  destructive 
competition  of  the  foreigner,  tho  result  would  be — and  mark  his  words,  the  facts  would  soon 
show  it — that  tho  American  fishermen  who  euiployeJ  their  industry  in  the  waters  of  Canada 
would  become  like  tho  American  lumbermen  who  engaged  in  that  trade  in  the  valley  of  the 
Ottawa;  they  would  settle  upon  Canadiau  soil, bringing  with  them  their  character  for  enter- 
prise and  energy;  and  would  become  e(iually  good  subjects  of  Her  Majesty,  would  give  this 
country  the  benefit  of  their  talents  and  the  ir  enterprise  and  their  capital.  Has  there  anybody  who 
could  doubt  as  to  the  effect  of  remoeing  the  duty  which  was  now  leviid  of  two  dollars  per  barrel 
upun  inackcrkl  and  one  dollar  upon  herrings,  of  talcing  off  this  enormous  bounty  in  fa  nor  of  the 
Ami  rican  fishermen,  and  leaving  our  finhermen  free  and  unrestricted  access  to  the  best  markit 
for  them  in  the  world  f  Was  there  anyone  who  could  doubt  that  tho  practical  result  would 
be  to  leave  the  Canadians,  in  a  very  short  time,  almost  without  any  competition  at  all  f 
Tho  opposition  for  a  long  time  held  out  the  idea  that  Parliament  and  tho  government  must 
protect  the  poor  struggling  and  industrious  fishermen  of  Nova  Scotia  and  the  other  prov- 
inces against  the  operation  of  this  treaty,  which,  it  was  held,  would  be  ruinous  to  them  in 
every  way.  (Jradually,  however,  light  began  to  break  in  upon  them,  until  at  last  thoy  dis- 
covered this  extraordinary  fact,  tliat  while  the  clauses  of  this  treaty  which  related  to  Canada 
were  held  by  every  intelligent  fisherman  to  bo  a  great  boon,  as  something  which  would  take 
the  taxes  otf  them,  and  relieve  them  from  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars  tribute  that  they 


1, 


134 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


were  now  comndled  to  pay  to  a  foreign  nation,  the  fiHhermen  of  the  United  States  woro,  on 
the  other  hand,  juftt  as  much  avorHe  to  the  treaty  as  our  own  people  woro  anxiouH  that  il 
should  b6  carried  into  ciVect.  How  ditTerent  would  the  future  bo  under  thix  treaty  fniin 
what  it  would  certainly  be  if  the  preRunt  state  of  att'airs  were  to  continue  !  What  was  Dm 
result  now  1  Why,  many  of  our  tishermen  were  compelled  to  go  to  the  United  Btatos, 
abandoning  their  homes  in  Canada,  in  order  to  place  themselves  upon  an  equal  footing  with 
the  Ameriians.  The  member  for  West  Durham  stated  that,  if  Canada  had  continued  tlin 
policy  of  exclusion,  the  American  fisheries  would  very  soon  have  utterly  failed,  and  tlii-y 
would  have  been  at  our  mercy.  This  was  n  groat  uiistHke.  Last  summer  he  went  down  in 
a  steamer  from  Dalhousie  to  Pictou,  and  fell  iu  with  a  fleet  of  thirty  American  fishing-vcs- 
Hcls,  whicli  had  averaged  three  hundred  barrels  of  mackerel  in  three  weeks,  and  had  nev«r 
been  within  ten  miles  of  the  shore. 

The  Hon.  S.  Campbell,  of  Nova  Scotia,  said : 

Under  the  operation  of  the  system  that  had  prevailed  since  the  repeal  of  the  treaty  of  ld')4, 
the  fishermen  of  Nova  Scotia  had,  to  a  large  extent,  become  the  fishermen  of  the  United 
Slates.  They  had  been  forced  to  abandon  their  vessels  and  homes  in  Nova  Scotia,  and  siiip 
to  American  ports,  there  to  become  engaged  in  aiding  the  commercial  enterprises  of  that  coun- 
try. It  was  a  melancholy  feature  to  see  thousands  of  young  and  hardy  fishermen  conipelli'd 
to  leave  their  native  land  to  embark  in  the  pursuits  of  a  foreign  country,  and  drain  their  own 
land  of  that  aid  and  strength  which  their  presence  would  have  secured.  There  was  another 
evil  in  connection  with  this  matter,  that  not  only  were  they  forced  to  aid  in  promoting  the  wel- 
fare of  another{country,  but  they  were,  by  being  so,  gradually  alienated  from  the  laud  of  their 
birth,  and  led  to  make  unfortunate  contrasts  and  comparisons,  to  the  detriment  of  the  country 
to  which  they  belonged ;  beciiuse,  in  the  country  to  which  they  departed,  they  derived 
benefits  that  were  unattainable  in  their  own.  Another  evil  of  the  present  state  of  things 
was  the  impediment  thrown  in  tlio  way  of  ship-building  by  the  depression  caused  in  tlie 
business  of  the  country.  While  Nova  Scotia  had  mechanics  who  were  able  to  build  vessels 
that  would  compete  in  every  important  respect  with  those  built  by  our  American  neighburs, 
the  commercial  imppdiuients  thrown  in  the  way  of  Americans  fishing  in  Canadian  waters 
had  an  injurious  etiect  upon  the  ship-buildnig  interest.  It  had  been  said  that  the  concus- 
sions obtained  by  the  Dominion  were  not  e<|nivalent  to  the  concessions  which  were  granteil 
to  the  United  States.  Upon  that  point  he  regarded  what  had  been  said  by  the  Minister 
of  Justice  about  the  privileges  of  Canadians  resorting  to  Aniurican  waters  for  the  purpose 
of  procuring  bait  as  being  of  great  importance.  He  believed  that  to  be  a  very  valuable  and 
of  important  concession.  He  did  not  regard  the  American  inshore  fisheries  as  of  such  littlo 
value  as  had  been  represented,  for  he  knew  that  frequently  American  fishermen  left  our 
coast  and  resortet  to  their  own  waters,  where  they  received  a  valuable  recompense  lor 
changing  their  venue  and  base  of  operations.  Hy  the  treaty  of  1818  American  fishing;- 
vessels  were  not  permitted  to  enter  our  harbors,  except  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  wood, 
water,  and  shelter.  This  limitation  had  produced  a  great  deal  of  dissatisfaction,  and  did 
injustice  to  our  shore  population.  During  the  reciprocity,  those  vessels  were  constiintiy 
in  our  wafers,  engaged  in  a  mutually  advantageous  business  with  the  merchants  wliu 
lived  on  shore.  liotu  parties  desired  a  renewal  of  that  relation,  which  would  decidedly 
be  to  the  advantsge  ot  Nova  Scotia.  It  was  because  ho  desired  to  restore  to  the  people 
of  Nova  Scotia  the  advantages  of  that  reciprocal  trade  that  he  was  ardently  anxious  fur 
the  ratification  of  this  treaty.  To  use  a  phrase  that  had  been  employed  on  both  sides  of 
the  House,  his  constituents  had  "sot  their  hearts  upon  it";  and,  as  far  as  his  voice  and 
vote  went,  they  would  surely  have  it. 

Mr.  MacdonaUl,  of  Nova  Scotia,  reiuarkeU : 

The  honorable  member  for  Halifax,  who  addressed  the  House  a  few  days  ago  (Mr. 
Power)  has  told  what  olTcct  the  high  duty  on  mackerel  in  the  States  has  had  on  tliis 
hook-and-lino  fishing.  The  number  of  vessels  fitted  out  for  it  Ironi  Lunenburg  County 
has  d(  creased  from  sixty  to  seventy  tinder  the  Reciprocity  Treaty.  Until  last  year,  not  iiiort^ 
than  half  a  dozen  venttired  to  engage  in  it,  tiriding  the  high  duties  niado  it  unprditiible.  La.st 
year  nearly  all  that  fine  fleet  of  vessels,  alter  returning  from  Labrador,  instead  of  goiiiff 
out  again  tor  mackerel,  were  compelled  to  lay  for  the  remainder  of  the  season  idly  swingiii); 
at  their  anchors,  in  the  harbors  and  loves  around  the  coast;  while  the  young  men  who 
should  have  foriind  their  fishing  crews  were  either  compelled  to  remain  at  home  or  seek 
other  employment  elsewhere;  some  of  them,  perhaps,  on  board  American  vessels,  where  the 
fish  tlity  caught  were  worth  more  than  if  taken  on  board  their  own  vessels,  because  they 
would  be  free  of  duty  under  the  American  flag.  It  was  thus  of  vital  inii)ortance  to  the  ti  sit- 
ing people  of  that  county  that  the  fishery  articles  of  the  treaty  should  bo  ratified  ;  becnti.so 
they  believed,  and  ho  judged  they  rightly  believed,  they  would  then  be  placed  on  a  much 
better  footing  than  they  occupied  at  the  pre.sent  time.  Not  only  were  his  constituents  deeply 
interested,  but  the  whole  people  of  Nova  Scotia  were  immediately  concerned.  He  read  iVorn 
statistics  to  show  the  magnitude  and  importance  of  the  fishing  interest,  the  number  of  men 
it  employed,  and  tlio  value  of  the  products.  In  IH;'i:?,  the  year  before  the  cnmmencement  of 
the  Reciprocity  Truvty,  the  total  value  of  the  products  of  the  fisheries  in  Nova  Scotia  wn* 


AWAUD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


135 


somelliipfy  less  than  two  millions  of  ilnllars,  of  which  only  about  'M  per  cent.,  or  lean  than 
,«i.')iS'<>,i);iH  worth,  foiinil  a  market  in  the  United  Statefi.  In  18(ir>,  the  total  vleld  of  the  tish- 
erica  had  rixen,  with  various  fluctuations,  to  an  a(r|;rcfrate  of  nearly  three  and  a  half  millions  ; 
and  it  was  found  that  the  exports  to  the  States  had  not  only  kept  pace  with  that  af^f^regate 
increase,  but  had  lar|;oly  exceeded  it,  the  exports  to  the  States  lu  that  year  being  about  43  per 
cent,  of  the  aggregate  catch,  or  near  a  million  and  a  )ialf  of  dollars.  Thus  it  would  be  seen 
that,  under  the  old  Reciprocity  Treaty,  our  fishermen  lost  nothing  by  allowing  their  Amer- 
lean  neifjlibors  to  fish  in  our  waters.  On  the  contrary,  they  had  gained  in  every  way.  The 
intluence  of  a  free  market  had  acted  as  a  stimulant  on  their  energies ;  so  that,  although  their 
lisliing-grounds  were  shared  by  American  fishermen,  their  total  catch  had  increased  50  per 
rent.;  and  so  beneficial  was  that  free  market  found  to  be,  that  the  exports  to  the  States  had 
inrri-ased  over  \nO  per  cent,  in  tlie  twelve  years.  Nothing  could  more  clearly  establish  the 
two  important  facts,  that  our  fishermen  have  nothing  to  fear  from  fair  competition  with  Amer- 
ican fislicrmen  in  our  own  waters,  and  that  the  free  access  to  the  markets  of  that  country  is 
uf  the  greatest  possible  importance  to  us.  A  comparison  of  the  last  three  years  of  the  Reci- 
procity Treaty  with  three  years  since  its  abrogation,  shows  that  the  exports  of  fish  to  the 
States  have  fallen  oflf  7  per  cent,  since  the  treaty  was  abrogated — another  proof  of  the  value 
of  that  treaty  to  our  fishermen.  Give  us  this  treaty,  and  what  happened  before  will  happen 
again.  Give  us  a  tree  market  in  the  States,  and  the  energies  of  our  fishermen  will  bo  stim- 
ulated anew  into  life  and  activity,  and  an  increased  aggregate  yield,  together  with  a  largely 
increased  export  to  the  States,  would  show  that  our  people  were  fully  equal  to  competing  ou 
fair  terms  in  our  own  waters  with  their  American  neighbors. 

There  was  one  important  consideration,  which  hacl  been  overlooked  in  weighing  the  ad- 
vantages and  disadvantages  of  the  treaty ;  and  that  was  that  the  admission  of  British  vessels 
to  tinli  in  American  waters  would  enable  Americans  to  purchase  vessels  in  provincial  ports, 
where  the  cost  of  construction  was  much  less  than  in  the  United  States.  It  was  true  they 
would  be  unable  to  obtain  American  registers,  but  they  could  take  out  liritish  registers. 

The  privilege  given  by  tlie  new  treaty  to  vessels  carrying  the  British  flag  to  fish  in  the 
United  States  waters,  it  would  be  found,  was  no  barren  privilege,  as  has  been  as.sertcd : 
for  besides  the  privilege  of  finhing  there,  which  our  people  might  avail  themselves  of  if  they 
choose,  we  should  now  build  fishing-vessels  for  our  neighbors.  The  fishing- masters  of 
Maine  and  Massachusetts,  when  they  find  that  they  can  get  as  good  a  vessel  built  in  Lunen- 
burg, or  Shelbourne,  or  Yarmouth,  for  §.'>,00()  as  they  can  in  Gloucester  for  6"*,fOO,  will  not 
be  slow  to  avail  Iheinselvos  of  the  advantage  thus  placed  within  their  reach  ;  they  will  not 
tlirow  away  the  extra  cost  of  the  vessel  on  any  mere  sentiment  about  the  flag,  when  the  less 
costly  vessel  will  suit  their  purpose  as  well,  and  the  flag  of  their  own  nation  does  not  secure 
to  them  any  special  advantages.  He  considered  this  a  very  material  point,  and  he  believed 
that  Americans  would  largely  avail  themselves  of  the  opportunity  which  would  thus  be 
otfered  of  obtaining  vessels  at  much  less  cost  than  they  now  paid. 

The  honorable  ginthman  A/ioirs  that  for  the  hesl  brands  of  mackerel,  Xo.  1  and  Xo.  2,  ice 
had  literally  no  market,  except  the  United  States ;  while  for  the  inferior  fi;di.  No.  W,  we  had 
also  a  market  there,  as  well  as  farther  south. 

Kemove  the  duty,  as  is  proposed  by  the  Washington  treaty,  and  our  fishermen  will  have 
these  valuable  fields  of  industry  restored  to  them.  He  justified  the  statement  made  by  the 
president  of  the  council  to  the  effect  that  the  duty  on  piukled  fish  in  the  United  Stales  was 
equal  to  a  tax  of  $(J0U,0UO  last  year  on  the  fishing  industry  of  Nova  Scotia.  The  member 
tor  Halifax  (Mr.  Jones)  had  denied  this,  and  stated  that  the  duty  on  mackerel  and  herring 
shipped  to  the  States  in  1871  was  only  about  $UU,UUO.  That  was  another  of  that  gentleman's 
facts  that  was  made  to  do  duty  for  a  misstatement.  It  was  quite  true  that  the  duty  on  our 
ti.sli  exported  to  that  market  last  year  would  only  have  amounted  to  about  $!)0,(I(IO;  but  that 
only  proved  that  th^  duty  was  so  nearly  prohibitory  as  to  prevent  the  export  of  larger  quan- 
tities. He  read  from  a  return  to  show  that  the  value  of  the  fish  caught  in  Nova  Scotia  last 
year  amounted  to  over  $."),0()0,(HIO.  Of  this  quantity  there  were  'i-iti,\Wi  barrels  mackerel 
and  '2(il, ()()()  barrels  herring,  the  duty  on  which,  if  shipped  to  the  .States,  would  be  over 
!{iii5(i,(H)(( ;  so  that  the  statement  inadis  by  the  president  of  the  privy  council  was  more  than 
justitied  by  tlie  facts.  If  there  was  so  small  a  proportii)!!  of  this  total  sold  in  the  States,  it 
was  because  the  duty  was  almost  prohibitory.  Ki'uiovo  the  duty  and  the  fu>t  mi-liouso 
returns  offish  .shipped  to  that  market  will  show  a  iiuu'li  larger  result. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  foregoing  extracts  relate  in  part  to  other 
points  thati  the  value  of  the  right  which  the  Canadiaii-s  have  aiMpiired, 
of  free  acce.ss  to  the  market.s  of  the  United  State.s.  Miit  it  .seems  most 
coiiveiiient  to  present  them  together. 

Evidence  will  be  laid  before  the  Coinjnission  conclusively  showing 
that  the  remission  of  duties  to  the  Canadian  flshermeu  during  the  four 
years  which  have  already  elapsed  under  the  operation  of  the  tro.ity, 
has  amounted  to  about  $400,000  annually'.  But  this  subject,  by  the 
Briti.sh  case,  is  disposed  of  summarily  in  two  or  three  pa.ssing  sen- 


I 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


f:  ■-  III M 


11 


2.0 


U    IIIIII.6 


V] 


<^ 


■^. 


<$>. 


*;; 


'/ 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


'<^\^ 


^9) 


V 


:0^ 


\\ 


«^ 


'ii.^ 


6^ 


,<"  c^ 


tf 


6^ 


iS 


136 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


* 


tences,  under  the  head  of  the  convenience  of  reciprocal  free  markets ; 
in  which  it  seems  to  be  tacitly  assumed,  rather  than  expressly  asserted, 
that  the  removal  of  the  duty  has  inured  to  the  benefit  of  the  Americau 
fish  consumers,  and  not  the  Canadian  fishu'  men.  Such  a  claim  caa  be 
fully  refuted  in  various  ways.  In  point  of  fact,  as  will  appear  by  proof, 
prices  were  not  cheapened  in  the  markets  of  the  United  States  wlieu 
ihe  fishery  clauses  of  the  treaty  took  effect.  And  there  has  been  no 
subsequent  gain  thus  produced  to  the  consumer.  The  reasons  are  ob- 
vious :  the  American  catch  has  always  fixed  the  price  in  the  United 
States  markets.  It  is  four  times  as  large  as  the  importations  from  the 
British  provinces,  and  the  business  is  almost  exclusively  in  Americau 
hands.  Consequently,  after  the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty, 
the  duties  levied  on  fish  and  fish-oils  at  the  custom-houses  of  the  United 
States  were  a  direct  tax  on  Canadian  fishermen,  who  could  not  add  any 
part  of  the  duties  paid  by  them  to  the  price  of  their  sbij)ment8. 

When  a  tax  or  duty  is  imposed  upon  only  a  small  portion  of  the  pro- 
ducers or  any  commodity  from  which  the  great  body  of  its  producers 
are  exempt,  such  tax  or  duty  necessarily  remains  a  burden  upon  the 
producers  of  the  smaller  quantity,  diminishing  their  profits,  and  cannot 
be  added  to  the  price  and  so  distributed  among  the  purchasers  and  con- 
sumers. 

Statesmen  of  every  age  and  nation  have  striven  to  secure  to  their 
people,  by  treaties,  free  access  to  largo  foreign  markets.  The  British 
Government,  Canadian  statesmen,  and  the  inhabitants  of  the  maritime 
provinces,  all  regarded  this  right,  under  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  as 
"  an  inestimable  boon." 

The  last  four  years  have  been  a  period  of  commercial  depression  all 
over  the  world.  Nevertheless  the  benefits  already  reaped  by  the  British 
provinces  from  the  Treaty  of  Washington  have  been  immense;  and 
they  are  destined  to  increase  during  the  next  eight  years  in  a  rapid 
ratio  of  progression. 

In  recapitulation,  the  United  States  maintain  : 

First.  That  tlio  province  of  this  Commission  is  limited  solely  to  estimating  the  value,  to 
the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States,  of  new  rights  accorded  by  the  Treaty  of  Washingtou 
to  the  tisheries  within  the  territorial  WRters  of  the  British  North  American  provinces  on  the 
Atlantic  coast ;  which  comprise  only  that  portion  of  the  sea  lying  within  a  marine  league 
of  the  coast,  and  also  the  interior  of  such  bays  and  inlets  as  are  less  than  six  miles  wide 
between  their  headlands  ;  while  all  larger  bodies  of  water  are  parts  of  the  free  and  open 
ocean,  and  the  territorial  line  within  them  is  to  be  measured  along  the  contour  of  the  shore, 
according  to  its  sinuosities,  and  within  these  limits  no  rights  existing  under  the  conventlou 
of  1818  can  be  made  the  subject  of  compensation. 

Second.  That  within  these  limits  there  are  no  fisheries,  except  for  mackerel,  which  United 
States  fishermen  do  or  advantageously  can  pursue ;  and  that,  of  the  mackerel  catch,  only  a 
small  fractional  part  is  taken  in  BiitNh  territorial  waters. 

Third.  That  the  various  incidental  and  reciprocal  advantages  of  the  treaty,  such  as  the 
privileges  of  traffic,  purchasing  bait,  and  other  supplies,  are  not  the  subject  of  compensa- 
tion ;  because  the  Treaty  of  Washington  confers  no  such  rights  on  the  inhabitants  of  the 
United  States,  who  now  enjoy  them  merely  by  sufferance,  and  who  can  at  any  time  be  de- 
prived of  them  by  the  enforcement  of  existing  laws,  or  the  re-enactment  of  former  oppress- 
ive statutes.  Moreover,  the  treaty  does  not  provide  for  any  possible  compensation  for  sucli 
privileges;  and  they  are  far  more  important  and  valuable  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Majesty 
than  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States. 

Fourth.  That  the  inshore  fisheries  along  the  coast  of  the  United  States  north  of  the 
thirty-ninth  parallel  of  north  latitude  are  intrinsically  fully  as  valuable  as  those  adjacent  to 
the  British  provinces  :  and  that  British  fishermen  can,  and  probably  will,  reap  from  their 
use  as  great  advantages  as  the  Americans  have  enjoyed,  or  are  likely  to  enjoy,  from  the 
right  to  fish  in  British  waters. 

Fifth.  That  the  right  of  importing  fish  and  fish-oil  into  the  markets  of  the  United  States 
U  to  British  subjects  a  boon  Huionnting  to  far  more  than  an  equivalent  for  any  and  all  the 
benefits  which  tlie  treaty  has  conferred  upon  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States. 

Sixth.  In  respect  to  Newfoundland,  the  United  States,  under  the  Convention  of  1818,  en- 


AWARD   OF   THE   USHERY   COMMISSION. 


137 


joyed  extensive  privileges.  But  there  are  no  fisheries  in  the  territorial  waters  of  that  island 
of  which  the  Americans  make  any  use.  There,  as  everywhere  else,  the  cod-fishery  is  fol- 
lowed in  the  open  sea,  beyond  the  territorial  waters  of  Great  Britain.  No  herring,  mackerel, 
or  other  fishery  is  there  pursued  by  Americans  within  the  jurisdictional  limits.  The  only 
practical  connection  of  Newfoundland  with  the  Treaty  of  Washington  is  the  enjoyment,  by 
its  inhabitants,  of  the  privilege  of  free  importation  of  fish  and  fish>oil  into  the  United  States 
markets.  The  advantages  of  thb  treaty  are  all  on  one  side — that  of  the  islanders,  who  are 
immensely  benefited  by  the  opening  of  a  valuable  traffic,  and  by  acquiring  free  access  to  a 
market  of  forty  millions  of  people. 

For  the  foregoing  reasons,  and  others  to  be  more  fully  developed  in 
evidence  and  argument,  the  TJnited  States  deny  that  this  Commission 
ought  to  award  any  sum  to  i^e  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty ; 
and  assert  that  the  advantages  conferred  on  her  subjects  are  vastly 
greater  than  any  that  have  been  or  will  be  realized  by  the  citizens  of 
the  United  States  under  the  fishery  clauses  of  the  Treaty  of  Washing- 
ton. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER, 
Agent  of  the  United  States  Government. 


II 


BRIEF  I 
TUB  E 
AND  '. 
OF  BK 

The  art 


It  is  agrei 
to  the  Uuite 
Britain,  sign 
ing  tish,  ou  < 
inbabitants 
tannic  Majes 
treaty,  to  ta' 
the  baj's,  ha 
wick,  and  th 
adjacent,  wi 
land  npon  th 
for  the  purpc 
they  do  not  i 
the  poaceabl 
pose. 

It  is  nnden 
and  that  the 
of  rivers,  are 


It  is  agreed 
common  witt 
tioned  in  Ar 
ou  tlie  easter 
parallel  of  nc 
aud  in  the  ba 
States,  and  of 
with  permissi 
aforesaid,  for 
so  doing,  th;'.i 
men  of  the  IJ 
occupancy  foi 

It  is  nndcn 
and  tliiit  sal 
livers,  are  he 


It  is  agreed 
tirst  iirticle  ol 
Wasljiiijrton  ( 
iiiiQidiiN  and  1 
under  that  tn 
"f  li.shing  nn( 
the  governnit 
ri(,'lit  of  lishii 


A^T^I'ENDIX    C. 


BRIEF  FOR  THE  UNITED  STATES  UPON  TOE  QUESTION  OF 
THE  EXTENT  AND  LIMITS  OF  THE  INSHORE  FISHERIES 
AND  TERRITORIAL  WATERS  ON  THE  ATLANTIC  COAST 
OF  BRITISH  NORTH  AMERICA. 

The  articles  relating  to  the  fisheries  in  this  treaty  are  the  following  : 

Article  XVIII. 

It  is  agreed  by  the  High  Contracting  Parties,  that,  in  addition  to  the  liberty  secured 
to  the  United  States  fishermen  by  the  convention  between  the  United  States  and  Great 
Britain,  signed  at  London  on  the  20th  day  of  October,  1818,  of  taking,  curing,  and  dry- 
ing tish,  on  certain  coasts  of  the  British  North  American  Colonies  therein  dtsfined,  the 
inhabitants  of  the  United  States  shall  have,  in  common  with  the  subjects  of  Iler  Bri- 
tannic Majesty,  the  liberty,  for  the  term  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII  of  this 
treaty,  to  take  fish  of  every  kind,  except  shell-fish,  on  the  sea-coasts  and  shore.),  and  in 
the  buys,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  the  Provinces  of  Quebec,  Nova  Scotia,  and  New  Bruns- 
wick, and  the  Coloiiy  of  Prince  Edward's  Island,  and  of  the  several  islands  thereunto 
adjacent,  without  being  restricted  to  any  distance  from  the  shore,  with  permission  to 
land  upon  the  said  coasts  and  shores  and  islands,  and  also  upon  the  Magdalen  Islands, 
for  the  purpose  of  drying  their  nets  and  curing  their  fish  ;  provided,  that,  in  so  doing, 
tliey  do  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  private  property,  or  with  British  fishermen,  in 
the  peaceable  use  of  any  part  of  the  said  coasts  in  their  occupancy  for  the  same  pur- 
pose. 

It  is  understood  that  the  above-mentioned  liberty  applies  solely  to  the  sea-fishery  ; 
niul  that  the  salmon  and  shad  fisheries,  and  all  other  fisheries  in  rivers  and  the  mouths 
of  rivers,  are  reserved  exclusively  for  British  fishermen. 

AllTICLE   XIX. 

It  is  agreed  by  the  High  Contracting  Parties  that  British  subjects  shall  have,  in 
common  with  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  the  liberty,  for  the  term  of  years  men- 
tioned in  Article  XXXIII  of  this  treaty,  to  take  fish  of  every  kind,  except  shell-fish, 
oil  tlie  eastern  sea-coasts  and  shores  of  the  United  States  north  of  the  thirty-ninth 
parallel  of  north  latitude,  and  on  the  shores  of  the  several  islands  thereunto  adjacent, 
aud  in  the  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  the  said  sea-cuasts  and  shores  of  the  United 
States,  aud  of  the  said  islands,  without  being  restricted  to  any  distance  from  the  shore, 
with  permission  to  land  upon  the  said  coivsts  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  islands 
aforesaid,  for  the  purpose  of  drying  their  nets  and  curing  their  fish ;  provided  that,  in 
so  doing,  thi-y  do  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  private  projierty,  or  with  the  fisher- 
men of  the  United  States,  in  the  peaceable  use  of  any  part  of  the  said  coasts  in  their 
ui'ciipancy  for  the  same  purpose. 

It  is  understood  that  the  above-mentioned  liberty  ai)plios  solely  to  flio  sea-lisliery ; 
mill  that  sulmcui  and  shad  fisheries,  and  all  otlier  li>lieri('s  in  rivers  aiul  iiiuiitlis  of 
livLis,  arc  hereby  reserved  exclusively  for  fishermen  of  the  United  States. 

AifTicr.E  XX. 

It  is  agreed  that  the  places  designated  by  the  Conimissioners,  aitpointed  under  tlio 
tirnt  iirticle  of  the  t>eaty  lietwecii  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  conchiiled  at 
Wiisiiiiigton  on  the  .'>tli  of  June,  IS.'il,  upon  the  coasts  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  do- 
minions and  the  United  States,  as  places  reserved  from  the  common  right  of  lisliing 
iiiiiler  that  treaty,  shall  be  regarded  as  in  like  manner  reserved  from  the  cominon  riglit 
"f  tisliing  under  the  preceding  articles.  In  cnse  any  (piestion  should  arise  between 
llie  governments  of  tlie  United  States  and  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  ns  to  the  common 
ri^'ht  of  fishing  in  places  not  thus  designated  as  reserved,  it  is  agreed  that  a  Coinmis- 


I! 


140 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


sion  sball  be  appointed  to  designate  snch  places,  and  shall  be  constituted  in  the  same 
manner,  and  have  the  same  powers,  duties,  and  authority,  as  the  Commission  appointed 
under  the  said  first  article  of  the  treaty  of  the  5th  of  June,  1854. 

Article  XXI. 

It  is  agreed  that,  for  the  term  of  years  mentioned  in  Article  XXXIII  of  thin  treaty, 
iish-oil  and  fish  of  all  kinds  (except  fish  of  the  inland  lakes  and  of  the  rivers  falling 
into  them,  and  except  fish  preserved  in  oil),  being  the  produce  of  the  fisheries  of  tiie 
United  States,  or  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  or  of  Prince  Edward's  Island,  shall  be 
admitted  into  each  country,  respectively,  free  of  duty. 

Akticlk  XXII. 

Inasmuch  as  it  is  asserted  by  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  that  the 
privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Article  XVIII  of  tliis 
treaty  are  of  greater  value  than  those  accorded  by  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  of  tliig 
treaty  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  and  this  assertion  is  not  admitted 
by  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  it  is  further  agreed  that  Commissioners  sliall 
be  appointed  to  determine,  having  regard  to  the  privileges  accorded  by  the  United 
States  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  as  stated  in  Articles  XIX  and  XXI  of 
this  treaty,  the  amount  of  any  compensation  which,  in  their  opinion,  ought  to  be  paid 
by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty 
in  return  for  the  privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Arti- 
cle XVIII  of  this  treaty ;  and  that  any  sum  of  money  which  the  said  Commissioners 
may  so  award  sball  be  paid  by  the  United  States  Government  in  a  gross  sum  withia 
twelve  months  after  such  award  shall  have  been  given. 

Apticle  XXIII. 

The  Commissioners  referred  to  in  the  preceding  article  sball  be  appointed  in  the  follow- 
ing manner ;  that  is  to  say,  one  Commissioner  sball  be  named  by  the  President  of  tbe 
United  States,  one  by  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  and  a  third  by  the  President  of  tlie 
United  States  and  Her  Britannic  Majesty  conjointly  ;  and  in  case  the  third  Commis- 
sioner shall  not  have  been  so  named  within  a  period  of  three  months  from  the  date 
when  this  article  shall  take  effect,  then  the  third  Commissioner  sball  be  named  by  the 
representative  at  London  of  His  Majesty  tbe  Emperor  of  Austria  and  King  of  Hungary. 
In  case  of  the  death,  absence,  or  incapacity  of  any  Commissioner,  or  in  the  eveut  of 
any  Commissioner  omitting  or  ceasing  to  act,  the  vacancy  sball  be  filled  in  the  manner 
hereinbefore  provided  for  making  the  original  appointment,  the  period  of  three  months 
in  case  of  such  substitution  being  calculated  from  the  date  of  the  happening  of  the 
vacancy. 

The  Commissioners  so  named  shall  meet  in  the  city  of  Halifax,  in  the  Province  of 
Nova  Scotia,  at  the  earliest  convenient  period  after  they  have  been  respectively '  \med ; 
and  shall,  before  proceeding  to  any  business,  make  and  subscribe  a  solemn  declaration 
that  they  will  impartially  and  carefully  examine  and  decide  the  matters  referred  to  them 
to  the  best  of  their  judgment,  and  according  to  justice  and  equity ;  and  such  declara- 
tion shall  be  entered  on  the  record  «f  their  proceedings. 

Each  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  shall  also  name  one  person  to  attend  the  Com- 
mission as  its  Agent,  to  represent  it  generally  in  all  matters  connected  with  the  Com- 
mission. 

Article  XXIV. 

The  proceedings  shall  be  conc'r.ri.cd  in  such  order  as  tbe  Commissioners  appointed 
under  Articles  XXII  and  XXIII  of  this  treaty  shall  determine.  They  sball  be  bouml 
to  receive  such  oral  or  written  testimony  as  either  government  may  present.  If  either 
party  shall  ofi'er  oral  testimony,  the  other  party  shall  have  the  right  of  cross-examina- 
tion, under  such  rules  as  the  Commissioners  shall  prescribe. 

If  in  the  case  submitted  to  the  Commissioners  either  party  shall  have  specified  or 
alluded  to  any  report  or  document  in  its  own  exclusive  possession,  without  annexing 
a  copy,  such  party  sball  be  bound,  if  the  other  party  thinks  proper  to  apply  for  it,  to 
furnish  that  party  with  a  copy  thereof ;  and  either  party  may  call  upon  the  other, 
through  the  Commissioners,  to  produce  the  originals  or  certified  copies  of  any  papers 
adduced  as  evidence,  giving  in  each  instance  such  reasonable  notice  as  the  Commis- 
sioners may  require. 

The  case  on  either  side  shall  be  closed  within  a  period  of  six  months  from  the  date 
of  the  organization  of  the  Commission  ;  and  the  Commissioners  shall  be  requested  to 
give  their  award  as  soon  as  possible  thereafter.    The  aforesaid  period  of  six  months 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Ul 


«', 


may  be  extended  for  three  mouths,  in  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  among  the  Com- 
missioners under  the  circumstancos  contemplated  in  Article  XXIII  of  this  treaty. 

Aktici.k  XXV. 

The  Commissioners  shall  keep  an  accurate  record  and  correct  minutes  or  notes  of  all 
their  proceedings,  with  the  dates  thereof,  and  may  appoint  and  employ  a  secretary, 
and  any  other  necessary  officer  or  officers,  to  assist  them  in  the  transaction  of  thebusi- 
neHB  which  may  come  before  them. 

Each  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  shall  pay  its  own  Commissioner  and  Agent  or 
cooDsel ;  all  other  expenses  shall  be  defrayed  by  the  two  governments  iu  equal  moieties. 

Article  XXXII. 

It  is  further  agreed  that  the  provisions  and  stipulations  of  Articles  XVIII  to  XXV 
of  this  treaty,  inclusive,  shall  extend  to  the  Colony  of  Newfoundland,  so  far  as  they 
are  applicable.  Bat  if  the  Imperial  Parliauient,  the  Legislature  of  Newfoundland,  or 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  shall  not  embrace  the  Colony  of  Newfoundland  in 
their  laws  enacted  for  carrying  the  foregoing  articles  into  effect,  then  this  article  shall 
be  of  no  effect ;  but  the  omission  to  make  provision  by  law  to  give  it  effect,  by  either 
of  the  legislative  bodies  aforesaid,  shall  not  in  any  way  impair  any  other  articles  of 
this  treaty. 

Akticle  XXXIII. 

The  foregoing  Articles  XVIII  to  XXV,  inclusive,  and  Article  XXX  of  this  treaty, 
shall  take  effect  as  soon  a»  the  laws  required  to  carry  them  into  operation  shall  have 
been  passed  by  the  Imperial  Parliamentof  Great  Britain,  by  the  Parliament  of  Canada, 
and  by  the  legislature  of  Prince  Edward's  Island,  on  the  one  hand,  and  by  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States,  on  the  other.  Such  assent  having  beeu  given,  the  said 
articles  shall  remain  in  force  for  the  period  of  ten  years  from  the  date  at  which  they 
may  come  into  operation ;  and,  further,  until  the  expiration  of  two  years  after  either 
of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  shall  have  given  notice  to  the  other  of  its  wish  to  ter- 
minate the  same;  each  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  being  at  liberty  to  give  such 
notice  to  the  other,  at  the  end  of  the  said  period  of  ten  years  or  at  any  time  afterward. 

By  the  Treaty  of  Paris  (February  10,  17G3)  France  yielded  up  to 
Great  Britain  all  the  possessions  formerly  held  by  her  in  North  America, 
with  the  exception  of  some  small  islands;  and  Great  Britain  th as  ac- 
quired the  fisheries  along  the  shores  of  the  North  American  Provinces. 

From  that  time  until  the  Eevolution,  the  citizens  of  the  United  States, 
being  under  the  Government  of  Great  Britain,  enjoyed  the  fisheries 
equally  with  the  other  inhabitants  of  the  British  Empire. 

By  the  treaty  of  1783,  in  which  the  independence  of  the  United 
States  was  recognized  by  Great  Britain,  the  American  fishermen  were 
permitted  to  fish  in  the  waters  of  the  North  American  Provinces,  and 
to  use  certain  parts  of  their  coast  for  drying  and  curing  fish. 

Article  III  of  the  treaty  is  as  follows,  viz : 

It  is  agreed  that  the  people  of  the  United  States  shall  continue  to  enjoy,  unmolested, 
the  right  to  take  fish  of  every  kind  on  the  Grand  Bank  and  ou  all  other  banks  of  New- 
foundland ;  also  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence,  and  at  all  other  places  in  the  sea 
where  the  inhabitants  of  both  countries  used  at  any  time  heretofore  to  fish  ;  and  also 
that  inhabitants  of  the  United  States  shall  have  liberty  to  take  fish  of  every  kind  on 
such  part  of  the  coasts  of  Newfoundland  as  British  fishermen  shall  use,  bat  not  to  dry 
or  cine  the  samo  on  that  island;  and  also  ou  the  coasts,  bays,  and  creeks  of  nil  His 
Britannic  Majesty's  dominions  in  America;  and  that  the  American  fibhermen  shall  have 
liberty  to  dry  and  cure  fish  in  any  of  the  unsettled  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  N4>va 
'Scotia,  Magdalen  Islands,  and  Labrador,  as  long  as  the  same  sh.ill  remain  unsettled. 
Uiit  us  soon  as  the  same,  or  either  of  them,  shall  be  settled,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for 
said  fishermen  to  dry  or  cure  fish  at  such  settlement,  without  a  previous  agreement  for 
that  purpose  with  the  inhabitants,  proxtrietors,  or  possessors  of  the  ground. 

The  fisheries  were  among  the  questions  discussed  by  the  Commission- 
ers who  framed  the  treaty  of  peace  at  the  close  of  the  war  of  1812.    The 


itii 


142 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


United  States  Coramissiouers  claimed  tliat  the  treaty  of  1783  conferred 
no  new  rights  upon  the  United  States ;  that  it  was  merely  an  agreement 
as  to  a  division  of  property,  which  took  place  on  the  division  of  the  Brit- 
ish Empire  after  the  success  of  the  American  Kevolution,  and  was  iu  uo 
respect  abrogated  by  the  war.  The  British  Commissioners,  on  the  other 
hand,  held,  that  while  the  treaty  of  1873  recognized  the  right  of  the 
United  States  to  the  deep-sea  fisheries,  it  conferred  privileges  as  to  the 
inshore  fisheries,  and  the  use  r»f  the  shores  which  were  lost  by  declara- 
tion of  war.  The  Commissioners  were  unable  to  come  to  an  agreement, 
and  the  Treaty  of  Ghent,  December  24, 1814,  did  not  allude  to  the  ques- 
tion of  the  fisheries,  which  remained  unsettled , 

Until  the  year  1818,  the  American  fishermen  carried  on  the  fisheries 
as  before  the  war  of  1812,  but  were  harassed  and  troubled  by  the  British 
cruisers;  and  several  were  captured  and  carried  into  Halifax,  for  alleged 
infringement  of  the  fishing  laws,  although  the  American  government 
still  claimed,  under  the  treaty  of  1783,  the  right  to  fish  anywhere  on 
the  coasts  of  the  British  provinces.  In  a  long  correspondence  with 
Lord  Bathurst,  Mr.  John  Quincy  Adams  maintains  the  claims  of  the 
United  States.  American  State  Papers,  Foreign  Relations,  vol.  Hi,  page 
732  et  seq.  In  1818,  Mr.  Albert  Gallatin,  the  minister  to  France,  and 
Mr.  Bichard  Hush,  the  minister  to  Great  Britain,  were  empowered  by 
the  President  to  treat  and  negotiate  with  Great  Britain  concerning  the 
fisheries,  and  other  matters  of  dispute  between  the  two  governments. 
Mr.  Frederick  John  liobinson  and  Mr.  Henry  Goulburn  were  the  British 
Commissioners ;  and,  after  a  long  conference,  the  Convention  of  October 
20, 1818,  was  agreed  upon,  the  article  of  which  concerning  the  fisheries 
and  the  subject  of  the  present  discussion  is  as  follows,  viz : 

Article  I. 


Whereas  differences  have  arisen  respecting  the  liberty  claimed  by  the  United 
States  for  the  inhabitants  thereof  to  take,  dry,  and  cure  fish  on  certain  coasts,  bayH, 
harbors,  and  creeks  of  His  Britannic  Majesty's  dominions  in  America,  it  ia  agreed 
between  the  High  Contracting  Parties,  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  said  United  States 
shall  have  for  ever,  in  common  with  the  subjects  of  His  Britannic  Majesty,  the  liberty 
to  take  fish  of  any  kind,  on  that  part  of  the  southern  coast  of  Newtbundlaud  which 
extends  from  Cape  Ray  to  the  Rameau  Islands,  oq  the  western  and  northern  coasts  of 
Newfoundland  from  the  said  Cape  Ray  to  the  Quirpoa  Islands,  on  the  shores  of  the 
Magdalen  Islands ;  and  also  on  the  coasts,  bays,  harbors,  nnd  creeks,  from  Mount  Joly 
on  the  southern  coast  of  Labrador,  to  and  through  the  straits  of  Belle  Isle,  and  thence 
northwardly,  indefinitely  along  the  coast;  and  that  the  American  fishermen  shall  also 
have  the  liberty  for  ever  to  dry  and  cure  fish  in  any  of  the  unsettled  bays,  harbors,  and 
creeks  of  the  southern  part  of  the  coaat  of  Newfoundland,  hereinbefore  described,  and 
of  the  coast  of  Labrador.  But  as  soon  as  the  same,  or  any  portion  thereof,  shall  bo 
settled,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  said  fishermen  to  dry  or  cure  fish  at  such  portion  so 
settled,  without  previous  agreement  for  such  purpose  with  the  inabitauts,  proprietors, 
or  possessors  of  the  ground.  And  the  United  States  hereby  renounces  for  ever  any 
liberty  heretofore  enjoyed  or  claimed  by  the  inhabitants  thereof  to  take,  dry,  or  cure 
fish,  on  or  within  three  marine  miles  of  any  of  the  coasts,  bays,  creeks,  or  harbors  of 
His  Britannic  Majesty's  dominions  in  America,  not  included  within  the  above-men- 
tioned limits :  Provided,  however,  That  the  American  fishermen  shall  be  admitted  to 
enter  such  bays  or  harbors  for  the  purpose  of  shelter,  of  repairing  damages  therein, 
of  pnrbbasing  wood,  and  of  obtaining  water,  and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever.  Bat 
they  shall  be  under  such  restrictions  as  shall  be  necessary  to  prevent  their  taking,  dry- 
ing, or  curing  fish  therein,  or  in  any  other  manner  whatever  abusing  the  privileges 
hereby  secured  to  them. 

The  construction  placed  upon  this  article  by  the  Government  of  the 
Dominion  has  been  formerly  :  First,  that  American  fishermen  are  thereby 
excluded  from,  and  have  given  up  all  rights  to,  the  fisheries  in  the  large 
bays ;  such  as  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  and  the  Bay  of 
Miramichi.    Second,  that  a  straight  line  should  be  drawn  from  head- 


I 


AWARD   OF   THE   FINERY   COMMISSION. 


143 


laud  to  beadlaDd,  across  the  mouths  of  all  bays,  gulfs,  or  indentations 
of  the  shore,  and  from  this  line  the  three  marine  miles  mentioned  in  the 
convention  should  be  measured ;  and  that  this  was  the  limit  within 
which  the  Americans  were  forbidden  to  prosecute  the  fisheries.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  American  Government  has  always  insisted  that  the 
three-mile  limit  should  follow  the  coast  parallel  to  its  sinuosities,  and 
should  be  measured  across  the  mouths  of  bays  only  when  the  distance 
from  headland  to  headland  did  not  exceed  six  miles. 

After  1818  there  appears  to  have  been  no  correspondence  between  the 
two  governments  until  1824,  and  during  these  six  years  American  tish- 
ermeu  used  the  fisheries  in  the  Bay  of  Fuudy,  and  more  than  three  miles 
beyond  the  line  of  low-water  mark  along  the  shores,  without  molestation 
or  interference. 

lu  September,  1824,  Mr.  Brent  writes  to  Mr.  Addiugton,  charge 
iVAffaires  from  Great  Britain  : 

I  have  the  honor  to  transmit  to  you  three  memorials,  from  snntlry  citizens  of  the 
United  States  belonging  to  the  State  of  Maine,  accompanied  by  seven  protests  and  affi- 
davits, wliiob  exhibit  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  facts  referred  to  by  the  memorialists, 
complaining  of  the  interruption  which  they  have  experienced,  during  the  present 
seaHon,  in  their  accustomed  and  lawful  employment  of  taking  and  curing  fish  in  the 
Bay  of  Fundy  and  upon  the  Grand  Banks  by  the  British  armed  brig  Dotterel,  com- 
manded by  Captain  Hoare,  and  another  vessel,  a  provincial  cutter  of  New  Brunswick, 
acting  under  the  orders  of  that  officer  j  and  earnestly  soliciting  the  interposition  of  this 
government  to  procure  them  suitable  redress. 

This  complaint  of  the  American  Government  was  caused  by  the 
seizure  of  two  vessels,  the  Eeindeer  and  the  Euby,  on  July  26, 1824,  at 
Two-Island  Harbor,  Grand  Menan.  The  correspondence  does  not  show 
what  the  precise  cause  of  the  seizure  was.  The  report  of  Captain  Hoare 
merely  says  "infringing  the  treaty."  These  two  vessels  were  afterward 
rescued  by  the  fishermen  and  carried  into  the  harbor  of  Eastport. 

Afterward,  in  answer  to  this,  February  19, 1825,  Mr.  Addington  writes 
to  Mr.  Adams,  Secretary  of  State : 

It  will,  I  trust,  sir,  most  conclusively  appear  to  you  that  the  complainants  have  no 
just  ground  of  accusation  against  the  officers  of  the  Doterel,  nor  are  entitled  to  repa- 
ration for  the  loss  they  have  sustained;  that,  on  the  contrary,  they  rendered  them- 
selves, by  the  irregularity  of  their  own  conduct,  justly  obnoxious  to  the  severity  exer- 
cised against  them,  having  been  taken,  some  flagrante  delicto,  and  others  in  such  a  posi- 
tion and  under  such  circumstances  as  rendered  it  absolutely  impossible  that  they  could 
have  had  any  other  intention  than  that  of  pursuing  their  avocations  as  fishermen, 
within  the  lines  laid  down  by  treaty  as  forming  boundaries  within  which  such  pursuit 
was  interdicted  to  them. 

The  evidence  regarding  the  seizure  of  these  and  various  other  Ameri- 
can vessels  is  appended  to  this  letter,  and  will  be  found  in  full,  with  the 
affidavits  of  the  American  seamen,  in  Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  100,  32d  Con- 
gress, 1st  session. 

The  next  correspondence  was  January,  1836,  when  Mr.  Charles  Bank- 
head,  chargi  d'affaires,  writes  to  Mr.  Forsyth  concerning  the  encroach- 
ments "  on  the  limits  of  the  British  fisheries  carried  on  in  the  river  and 
Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence." 

At  this  time  a  circular  was  issued  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
to  the  American  fishermen,  enjoining  them  to  ob.serve  the  limits  of  the 
treaty,  but  without  saying  what  these  limits  were.  The  claim  of  the 
provincial  authorities  to  exclude  American  fishermen  from  the  great 
bays,  such  as  Fundy  and  Cbaleurs,  and  also  from  a  distance  of  three 
miles,  determined  by  a  line  drawn  from  headland  to  headland  across 
their  mouths,  was  not  attempted  to  be  enforced  until  the  years  1838 
and  1839,  when  several  of  the  American  fishing  vessels  were  seized  by 
the  British  cruisers  for  fishing  in  the  large  bays.    On  July  10, 1839,  Mr. 


i 


144 


AVVAKD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Vaii,  the  actiug  Secretary  of  State,  writes  to  Mr.  H.  S.  Fox,  complaining 
of  seizures  iu  the  Bay  of  Fundy  by  the  Britisli  Governtneut  vessel,  tlie 
Victory. 

A  letter  from  Lieutenant-Gommancler  Paine  to  Mr.  Forsy tb.  Secretary 
of  State, dated  December  29, 1839,  sums  up  the  matters  in  dispute  thus: 

Tbe  authorities  of  Nova  Sootia  seem  to  claim  a  rieht  to  exclude  Americans  from  all 
bays,  iuclnding  such  large  seas  as  the  Bay  of  Fundy  and  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs ;  and 
also  to  draw  a  line  from  headland  to  headland,  the  Americans  not  to  approach  witliiu 
three  miles  of  this  line.  The  fishermen,  on  the  contrary,  believe  they  have  a  right  to 
work  anywhere,  if  not  nearer  than  three  miles  from  the  land. 

With  the  exception  of  the  vessels  seized  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  re- 
ferred to  in  the  letter  from  Mr.  Vail,  this  construction  of  the  clause  in 
the  treaty  was  not  rigidly  enforced.  Indeed,  the  orders  of  Admiral  Sir 
Thomas  Hardy,  as  stated  by  himself,  were  only  to  prevent  American 
\e8sels  fishing  nearer  than  three  miles  from  shore. 

In  February,  1841,  Mr.  Forsyth  writes  to  Mr.  Stevenson,  the  Ameri- 
can minister  at  St.  James,  desiring  him  to  present  formally  to  the  Brit- 
ish Government  tbe  demand  of  the  United  States  in  regard  to  the  right 
of  fishing  oii'  the  Canadian  coast. 

Mr.  Fortyth  to  Mr.  Stevenson,  Fthruary  20,  1841. 

The  first  article  of  the  Convention  of  1818  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Brit- 
ain, which  contains  the  treaty  stipulations  relating  to  the  subject,  is  so  explicit  in  its 
terms  that  there  would  seem  to  be  little  room  for  misapprehending  them ;  and,  indeed, 
it  does  not  appear  that  any  conflicting  questions  of  right  between  the  two  governments 
have  arisen  out  of  differences  of  opinion  between  them  regarding  the  intent  and  mean- 
ing of  this  article.  Yet  in  the  actual  application  of  the  provisions  of  the  treaty,  com- 
mitted, on  tbe  part  of  Great  Britain,  to  the  hands  of  subordinate  agents,  subject  to  and 
controlled  by  local  legislation,  difficulties  growing  out  of  individual  acts  have  sprung 
up  from  time  to  time ;  and,  of  these,  perhaps  thn  most  grave  iu  their  character  are  tlie 
recent  seizures  of  American  vessels  made,  it  is  believed,  under  color  of  a  provincial  law 
entitled  William  IV,  chap.  8,  1836,  enacted,  doubtless,  with  a  view  rigorously  to  res- 
trict, if  not  intended  to  directly  aim  a  fatal  blow  at,  eur  fisheries  on  the  coast  of  Nova 
Scotia.  From  information  in  the  possession  of  the  department,  it  appears  that  the 
provincial  authorities  assume  a  right  to  exclude  American  vessels  from  all  their  bays, 
even  including  those  of  Fundy  and  Chaleurs,  and  to  prohibit  their  approach  within 
three  miles  of  a  line  drawn  from  headland  to  headland. 

Our  fishermen  believe — and  they  are  obviously  right  in  their  opinion,  if  uniform 
practice  is  any  evidence  of  correct  construction — that  they  can  with  propriety  talte 
fish  anywhere  on  the  coasts  of  the  British  x)roviuces,  if  not  nearer  than  three  miles  to 
land,  and  resort  to  their  ports  for  shelter,  wood,  water,  «&c. ;  nor  has  this  claim  ever 
been  seriously  disputed,  based  as  it  is  on  the  plain  and  obvious  terms  of  the  conven- 
tion, while  the  construction  attempted  to  be  put  upon  that  instrument  by  tbe  author- 
ities of  Nova  Scotia  is  directly  in  conflict  with  its  provisions,  and  entirely  subversive 
of  the  rights  and  interests  of  our  citizens.  It  is  one  which  would  lead  to  the  abandon- 
ment, to  a  great  extent,  of  a  highly  important  branch  of  American  industry,  and  can- 
not for  one  moment  be  admitted  by  this  government. 

Mr.  Stevenson,  in  his  official  note  to  Lord  Palmerston,  states  tbe 
matter  in  dispute  and  the  claims  of  the  United  States  very  strongly: 

It  also  appears,  from  information  recently  received  by  the  government  of  the  United 
States,  that  the  provincial  authorities  assume  a  right  to  exclude  the  vessels  of  the 
United  States  from  all  bays,  even  including  those  of  Fundy  and  Chaleurs ;  and  like- 
wise to  prohibit  their  approach  within  three  miles  of  a  line  drawn  from  headland  to 
headland,  instead  of  from  the  indents  of  the  shores  of  the  provinces.  They  also  assert  the 
right  of  excluding  them  from  British  ports,  except  in  actual  distress ;  warning  them 
to  depart,  or  get  under  weigh  and  leave  harbor,  whenever  the  provincial  custom-house 
or  British  naval  officer  shall  suppose  that  they  have  remained  a  reasonable  time,  and 
this  without  a  full  examination  of  the  circumstances  under  which  they  may  have 
entered  the  port.  Now,  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States  believe — and  it  would  seem 
that  they  are  right  in  their  opinion,  if  uniform  practice  is  any  evidence  of  correct  con- 
struction— that  they  can  with  propriety  take  fish  anywhere  on  the  coasts  of  the  British 
provinces,  if  not  nearer  than  three  marine  miles  from  land,  and  have  the  right  to  resort 
to  their  ports  for  shelter,  wood,  and  water ;  nor  has  this  claim,  it  is  believed,  ever  been 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


145 


serionsly  dispnted,  based  as  it  is  on  the  plain  and  obvions  terms  of  the  convention, 
ludeed,  the  main  object  of  the  treai  was  not  only  to  secure  to  American  flshermen,  in 
tbe  pursuit  of  their  employment,  tlie  right  of  fishing,  but  likewise  to  insure  them  us 
lur^^e  a  proportion  of  the  conveniences  afforded  by  the  neighboring  coasts  of  British 
settlements  as  might  be  reconcilable  with  the  just  rights  and  interests  of  British  sub- 
jects and  the  due  administration  of  Her  Majesty's  dominions.  The  construction,  there- 
fore, which  has  been  attempted  to  be  pnt  upon  the  stipulations  of  the  treaty  by  the 
authorities  of  Nova  Scotia  is  directly  m  cuntlict  with  their  object,  and  entirely  suli- 
versive  of  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  citizens  of  the  United  Statxs.  It  is  one, 
moreover,  which  would  load  to  the  abandoniueut,  to  a  great  extent,  of  a  highly  im- 
portant branch  of  American  industry,  which  couhl  not  for  a  moment  be  admitted  by 
the  Government  of  the  United  States. 

Lord  Prtlmerston  acknowledfccs  the  receipt  of  this  note,  and  states 
that  lie  has  referred  the  matter  to  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Culonial 
Department.  Here  the  matter  rested,  no  definite  understanding  seem- 
ing to  have  arisen  between  the  two  governments. 

On  May  10, 1843,  the  American  schooner  Washington,  belonging  to 
Newburyport,  Mass.,  was  seized  in  the  Bay  of  Fnndy  by  an  officer  of 
tbe  provincial  customs,  and  carried  into  Yarmoutii,  Nova  Scotia,  on 
account  of  aliegetl  violation  ot  the  provisions  of  the  treaty.  The  Wash- 
ington was,  at  the  time  of  her  seizure,  within  the  Bay  of  Ftiiidy,  but 
distant  ten  miles  from  the  shore,  as  appears  from  tbe  deitositiou  of  Will- 
iam Bragg,  one  of  her  crew : 

I  further  depose  and  say  that  at  no  time  while  I  was  on  board  said  schooner  did  we, 
or  any  uf  us,  take  or  attempt  to  take  fish  within  ten  miles  of  the  coast  of  Nova  Seotia, 
New  JiriinHWick,  or  of  the  Mauds  belonging  tn  etthr  of  those  provinces;  that  the  place 
where  said  schooner  was  taken  possepsion  of  as  aforesaid  whs  oppusite  to  a  place  on 
tbe  coast-*  of  Nova  Scotia  called  Gulliver's  Hole,  and  is  tlistant  from  Atinapolis  Out 
about  tiftcen  miles,  the  said  Gulliver's  Hole  being  to  the  south  westward  of  said  Annap- 
olis Gut. 

This  seizure  of  the  Washington  was  the  cause  of  a  special  message  of 
President  Tyler  to  the  United  States  Seiate,  February  28,  1845. 

The  correspondence  between  Mr.  Everett,  the  American  minister,  and 
Lord  Aberdeen  shows  the  positions  taken  by  the  two  governments. 

Mr.  Everett  to  Lord  Aberdeen,  August  10,  1843. 


t'! 


le,  and 
have 
dseem 
ct  con- 
British 
resort 
rbeen 


The  undersigned,  envoy  extraordinary  and  minister  plenipotentiary  of  the  United 
States  of  America,  has  the  honor  to  transmit  to  the  Earl  of  Aberdeen,  Her  Majesty's 
Priucipal  Secretary  of  Si  ate  for  Foreign  AS'airs,  ttie  accompanying  papers  relating  lo  the 
seizure,  on  the  lUth  of  May  last,  on  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia,  by  an  officer  of  the  pro- 
vincial customs,  of  the  American  fishing-scboouer  Washington,  of  Newburyport,  in  the 
State  of  Massachusetts,  for  an  alleged  infraction  of  the  stipulations  of  the  Convention 
of  the  20th  of  October,  1818,  betwe«n  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain. 

It  appears  from  the  deposition  of  William  Bragg,  a  seaman  on  board  the  Washing- 
ton, that  at  the  time  of  her  seizure  she  was  not  within  ten  miles  of  tfe  coast  of  Nova 
Scotia.  By  the  first  article  of  the  convention  alluded  to,  the  United  States  rencmuce 
any  liberty  heretofore  enjoyed  or  claimed  by  their  inhabitants  to  take,  dry,  or  cure  fish 
ou  or  within  three  marine  miles  of  any  cousi  of  Her  Majesty's  dominions  in  America  tor 
which  express  provision  is  not  made  in  the  said  ai'ticle.  This  renunciation  is  the  only 
limitation  existing  on  the  right  of  Hshiug  upou  the  coas(;s  of  Her  M  jesty's  dominu)ns 
in  America  secured  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  by  the  third  article  of  the  treaty 
of  1783. 

The  right,  therefore,  of  fishing  on  any  part  of  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia,  at  a  greater 
distauce  than  three  miles,  is  so  plain,  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  conceive  on  what 
grouDd  it  could  he  drawn  in  question,  had  not  atrempts  l)een  already  made  by  tbe 
provincial  authorities  of  Her  Majesty's  colonies  to  interfere  with  its  exercise.  These 
attempts  have  formed  the  subject  of  repeated  complaints  ou  the  part  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  as  will  appear  from  several  notes  addressed  by  the  prede~ 
cesser  of  the  undersigned  to  Loni  Palmerston. 

From  the  construction  attempted  to  be  placed,  on  former  occasions,  upon  the  first 
article  of  the  treaty  of  18L8,  by  tbe  colonial  authorities,  the  undersigned  supposes  that 
the  Washington  was  seized  because  she  was  found  fishing  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy,.  and 
OD  the  ground  that  tbe  lines  within  which  American  vessels  are  forbidden  to  Am  are 

10  p 


146 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   C0MMIS8I0N. 


to  ran  from  heaillnnd  to  headland,  and  not  to  follow  the  shore.  It  is  plain,  however, 
that  neither  llie  wordn  nor  the  spirit  of  the  convention  admits  of  any  such  ronstriic- 
tion  ;  nor,  it  is  lieiieved,  whh  it  set  np  by  the  provincial  authorities  for  several  years 
aft«-r  I  lie  neftolliition  of  that  instrument.  A  glance  at  the  map  will  show  Lord  Aber- 
deen Mint  there  is,  perhupN,  no  part  of  the  great  extent  of  the  sea-coasts  of  Her  Maj- 
esty's poHses^-ions  in  America  in  which  the  right  of  an  American  vessel  to  tish  can  be 
suj'ect  to  lesfi  donlit  tlian  that  in  which  tlie  Washington  was  seized. 

For  a  full  statement  of  the  nature  of  the  complaints  which  have,  from  time  to  time, 
be  n  made  by  tlie  Oovernnient  of  the  United  States  against  the  proceedings  of  the 
colonial  authorities  of  Grear.  Britain,  the  under'-igned  invites  the  attention  of  Lord 
Abenteen  to  n  not"  of  Mr.  Stevenson,  addressed  to  Lord  Palmerston  on  the 27th  Marcli, 
1841.  The  receipt  of  this  note  was  acknowledged  by  Lord  Palmerston  on  (be  '2d  of 
A|»ril;  and  Mr.  Stevenson  was  informed  that  the  suliject  was  referred  by  bis  lordship 
to  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonial  Department. 

On  the  28th  of  the  sanin  month,  Mr.  Stevenson  was  further  informed  by  Lord  Palmer- 
ston tliat  he  hati  received  a  letter  from  the  Colonial  Department,  acquainting  his  lord- 
ship that  Mr.  Stevenson's  communication  would  be  forwarded  to  Lord  Falkland,  with 
instructions  to  inquire  into  the  allegations  contained  therein,  and  to  furnish  a  detailed 
report  npon  the  subject.  The  undersigned  does  not  find  on  the  tiles  of  this  legatiuu 
any  furtlier  comniunication  from  Lord  Palmerston  in  reply  to  Mr.  Stevenson's  letter 
of  the  27th  March,  1H41 ;  and  he  believes  that  Utter  still  remains  unanswered. 

In  reference  to  the  case  of  the  Washington,  and  those  of  a  similar  nature  which 
have  formerly  occurred,  the  undersigned  cannot  but  remark  upon  the  impropriety  of 
the  conduct  of  the  colonial  authorities  in  undertaking,  without  directions  from  Her 
Majesty's  Ooveinnient,  to  set  up  a  new  construction  of  a  treaty  between  the  United 
StatCN  and  England,  and  in  proceeding  to  act  upon  it  by  the  forcible  seizure  of  Aniericaa 
vesfels. 

Sucli  a  summary  procedure  could  only  be  justi6ed  by  a  case  of  extreme  necessity, 
and  where  some  grave  and  impending  mischief  required  to  be  averted  without  delay. 
To  pioceed  to  the  capture  of  vessels  of  a  friendly  power  for  taking  a  few  fish  within 
limits  alleged  to  be  forbidden,  althongh  allowed  by  the  express  terms  of  the  treaty, 
must  be  regarded  as  a  very  objectionable  stretch  of  provincial  authority.  The  case  is 
obviously  one  for  the  consideration  of  the  two  governments,  and  in  which  no  disturb- 
ance of  a  right,  exercised  without  question  for  fifty  years  from  the  treaty  of  1783, 
ought  to  be  attempted  by  any  subordinate  authority.  Even  Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment, the  undersigned  is  convinced,  would  not  proceed  in  such  a  case  to  violent 
measures  of  suppression  without  some  understanding  with  the  Government  of  tbe 
United  State>>,  or,  in  the  failure  of  an  attempt  to  come  to  an  understanding,  withoat 
due  notice  given  of  the  course  intended  to  be  pursued. 

The  undersigned  need  not  urge  upon  Lord  Aberdeen  the  desirableness  of  an  author- 
itative intervention  on  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  to  put  an  end  to  the 
proceedings  complained  of.  The  President  of  the  United  States  entertains  a  confident 
expectation  of  an  early  and  equitable  adjustment  of  the  difilculties  whioh  have  been 
now  for  so  long  a  time  under  the  consideration  of  Her  Majesty's  Government.  This 
expectation  is  the  result  of  the  President's  reliance  upon  the  sense  of  justice  of  Her 
Majesty's  Government,  and  the  fact  that,  from  the  year  1818,  the  date  of  the  conven- 
tion, until  some  years  after  the  attempts  of  the  provincial  authorities  to  restrict  tbe 
rights  of  American  vessels  by  cohiuial  legislation,  a  jpractiual  construction  was  given  to 
the  flist  article  of  the  convention  in  accordance  with  the  obvious  purport  of  its 
terms,  and  settling  its  meaning  as  understood  by  the  United  States. 

The  nnderf  igned  avails  himself  of  this  opportunity  to  tender  to  Lord  Aberdeen  the 
assurance  of  his  distinguished  consideration. 

Lord  Aberdeen  to  Mr.  Everett,  April  15, 1844. 

Mr.  Everett,  in  submitting  this  case,  does  not  cite  the  words  of  the  treaty,  bnt 
states  in  general  terms  that,  by  the  first  article  of  said  treaty,  the  United  States  re- 
nounce any  liberty  heretofore  enjoyed  or  claimed  by  their  inhabitants  to  take,  dry,  or 
cure  fish  on  or  within  three  miles  of  any  of  the  coasts  of  Her  Majesty's  domin  ons  in 
America.  Upon  reference,  however,  to  the  words  of  the  treaty,  it  will  be  seen  that 
American  vessels  1  ave  no  right  to  fi>h,  and,  indeed,  are  exprersly  debarred  from  fish- 
ing, in  any  bay  on  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia. 

The  words  of  the  treaty  of  October,  1818,  Artfcle  1,  run  thus:  "And  the  United 
States  hereby  renounce  forever  any  liberty  heretofore  enjoyed  or  claimed  by  the  in- 
habitants thereof  to  take,  dry,  or  cure  fish  on  or  within  three  marine  miles  of  any  coasts, 
hays,  creeks,  or  harbors  of  His  Britannic  Majesty's  dominions  in  America,  not  included 
within  the  iabove-mentioned  limits ;  that  is,  Newfoundland,  Labrador,  and  other  parts 
separate  from  Nova  Scotia:  Provided,  hotcever,  That  the  American  fishermen  shall  be 
admitted  to  enter  such  bays  or  harbors  for  the  purpose  of  shelter,"  &c. 


"J 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


147 


It  is  thufl  cipsriy  provided  that  American  flsliermen  shall  not  take  Hsh  within  three 
ninrine  miles  of  any  bay  of  Novu  Scotia,  &.c.  If  the  treaty  was  intendwl  to  stipulate 
giuiply  that  American  tisheniiun  should  not  take  flsh  within  three  miles  of  the  coast 
of  Nova  Scotia,  &o.,  there  was  no  occasion  for  using  the  word  "  bay"  at  all.  But  the 
proviHo  at  the  end  of  the  article  shows  that  the  word  "  bay"  wiis  use<l  d-^signedly; 
for  it  is  expressly  stated  in  the  proviso  that,  under  certain  circumstances,  the  Ameri- 
can tishermen  may  enter  baj/a;  by  which  it  is  evidently  meant  that  they  may,  under 
those  uirciunstances,  pass  the  sea-liue  which  forms  the  entrance  of  the  bay.  The  under- 
signed  apprehends  that  this  construction  will  be  admitted  by  Mr.  Everett. 

Mr.  Everett  to  Mr.  Aherdeen,  May  25, 1H44. 

The  nndersigned  had  remarked,  in  hia  note  of  the  10th  of  August  last,  on  the  im- 
propriety of  the  conduct  of  the  colonial  authorities  in  proceeding,  in  reference  to  Ot 
question  of  construction  of  a  treaty  pending  between  the  two  ccmiitries,  to  decide  the 
question  in  their  own  favor,  and,  in  virtue  of  that  decision,  to  order  the  capture  of 
the  ve^suls  of  a  friendly  State.  A  summary  exercise  of  power  of  this  kind,  the  under- 
Hignt-'d  is  sure,  would  never  be  resorted  to  by  Her  Majesty's  Government,  except  in  an 
extreme  case,  while  a  negotiation  was  in  train  on  the  point  at  issue.  Such  a  proced- 
ure on  the  part  of  a  local  colonial  authority  is,  of  course,  highly  objectionable;  and 
the  undersigned  cannot  but  again  invite  the  attention  of  Lord  Aberdeen  to  this  view 
of  the  8ul>ject. 

With  respect  to  the  main  question,  of  the  right  of  American  vessels  to  fish  within 
the  acknowledged  limits  of  the  Hay  of  Fundy,  it  is  necessary,  for  a  clear  understand- 
ing of  the  case,  to  go  back  to  the  treaty  of  1783. 

By  this  treaty  it  was  provided  that  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  should  be  allowed 
"  to  take  fish  of  every  kind  on  such  part  ot  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  as  British  fisher- 
men shall  use,  but  nor  to  dry  or  cure  the  same  on  that  island  ;  and  also  on  the  coasts, 
bays,  and  creeks  of  all  other  of  His  Britannic  Majesty's  dominions  in  America;  and 
tliiit  the  American  fishermen  shall  have  liberty  to  dry  and  cure  fish  in  any  of  the 
uuNettled  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  Nova  Scotia,  Magdalen  Islands,  and  Labrador, 
BO  long  as  the  same  shall  remain  unsettled ;  but  so  soon  as  the  same,  or  either  of  tliem, 
shall  be  settled,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  the  said  fishermen  to  dry  or  cure  fish  at  such 
Bettiement,  without  a  previous  agreement  for  that  purpose  with  the  inhabitants,  pro- 
prietors, or  possessors  of  that  ground." 

These  privileges  and  conditions  were,  in  reference  to  a  country  of  which  a  consider- 
able portion  was  then  unsettled,  likely  to  be  attended  with  ditferencds  of  opinion  as  to 
what  should,  in  the  progress  of  time,  be  accounted  a  settlein.mt  from  which  American 
fisbornieu  might  be  excluded.  Tbes^  differences  in  fact  arose;  and,  by  the  year  1818, 
the  state  of  things  was  so  far  changed  that  Her  Majesty's  Qovernment  thought  it  neces- 
sary, in  negotiating  the  oonveition  of  that  year,  entirely  to  except  the  P  ovince  of 
Nova  Scotia  from  the  number  of  the  places  which  might  be  frequeated  by  Americans, 
as  being  in  part  unsettled,  and  to  provide  that  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States 
Bhonid  not  pursue  iheir  occupation  within  tliree  miles  of  the  shores,  bays,  creeks,  and 
harbors  of  that  and  other  parts  of  Her  Majesty's  possessions  similarly  situated.  The 
privilege  reserved  to  American  fishermen  by  the  Treaty  of  1783,  of  taking  fish  in  all 
waters,  and  drying  them  on  all  the  unsettled  portions  of  the  coast  of  these  possessions, 
was  accordingly,  by  the  convention  of  1818,  restricted  as  follows : 

"The  United  States  hereby  renounce  forever  any  liberty  heretofore  enjoyed  or  claimed 
by  the  inhabitants  thereof  to  take,  dry,  or  curt  fish  on  or  within  three  marine  miles 
of  any  of  the  coasts,  bays,  creeks,  or  harbors  of  His  Britannic  Majesty's  dominions  in 
America,  not  included  within  the  above-mentioned  liiuirs :  Provided,  however,  That  the 
American  fishermen  shall  be  admitted  to  enter  such  bays  or  harbors  for  tbe  purpose  of 
shtiltering  and  repairing  damages  therein,  of  purchasing  wood,  and  of  obtaining  water, 
and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever." 

The  existing  doubt  as  to  the  construction  of  the  provision  arises  from  the  fact  that 
a  broad  arm  of  tke  sea  runs  np  to  the  northeast,  between  the  provinces  of  New  Bruns- 
wick and  Nova  Scotia.  This  arm  of  the  sea,  being  commonly  called  the  Bay  of  Fundy, 
though  not  in  reality  possessing  all  the  characters  usually  implied  by  the  term  "  bay," 
has  of  late  years  been  claimed  by  tbe  provincial  authorities  of  Nova  Scotia  to  be  in- 
cluded among  "  tbe  coasts,  bays,  creeks,  and  harbors  "  forbidden  to  American  fishermen. 

An  examination  of  the  map  is  sufficient  to  show  the  doubtful  nature  of  this  construc- 
tion. It  was  notoriously  the  object  of  the  article  of  the  treaty  in  question  to  put  an 
end  to  the  difficulties  which  hod  grown  oat  of  the  operations  of  tbe  fishermen  from  tbe 
United  States,  along  the  coasts  and  upon  the  shores  of  the  settled  portions  of  tbe  coun- 
try; and,  for  that  purpose,  to  remove  their  vessels  to  a  distance  not  exceeding  three 
miles  from  the  same.  In  estimating  this  distance,  the  undersigned  admits  it  to  be  the 
intent  of  the  treaty,  as  it  is  itself  reasonable,  to  have  regard  to  the  general  line  of  the 
coast ;  and  to  consider  its  bavs,  creeks,  and  harbors — that  is,  the  indentations  usually 
Bo  accounted— as  included  within  that  line.    Bat  the  undersigned  oanaot  admit  it  to 


148 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


R!*, 


be  reasonable,  instead  of  tbns  following;  the  general  directions  of  the  coast,  to  draw  a 
line  from  the  soutbwesternmost  point  of  Nova  Scotia  to  the  termination  of  the  north' 
eastern  boundary  between  the  United  States  and  New  Brunswick  ;  and  to  consider  the 
arms  of  the  sea  which  will  tbas  be  cut  off,  and  which  cannot  on  that  line  be  less  thaa 
sixty  miles  wide,  as  one  of  the  bays  on  the  co.ist  from  which  Aniericiin  vessels  are  ex- 
cluded. By  this  interpretation,  the  tishermeu  of  the  United  States  would  be  shut  out 
from  the  waters  distant,  nor.  three,  but  thirty  miles  from  any  piirt  of  the  colonial  coast. 
The  undersigned  cannot  perceive  that  any  assignable  object  of  the  restriction  imposed 
Ity  the  Convention  of  1S18  on  the  fish  ng  privilege  accorded  to  tlie  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  by  the  Treaty  of  178;?,  rc<inires  such  a  latitude  of  construction. 

It  Is  obvious  that,  l)y  the  t  rms  of  the  treaty,  the  fartliest  distance  to  which  (ishinir- 
vessels  of  the  United  States  are  obliged  t'>  hold  them.'-elves  from  the  colonial  i^oasts  and 
bays  is  three  miles.  But,  owing  to  tlie  pe^^uliar  coiiiig  iration  of  these  coasts,  tht^re  is 
a  succession  of  bays  indenting  tho  shores  both  of  New  B'  unswick  and  Nova  Scotia, 
within  any  distance  not  less  than  threw  miles — a  privilege  fiom  the  enjoyment  of  wliich 
they  will  be  wholly  excluded— in  this  part  of  the  coast,  if  the  broad  arm  of  the  sea 
which  flows  up  between  New  Brunswick  and  Nova  Scotia  is  itself  to  be  considered  one 
of  the  forbidden  bays. 

Lastly — and  this  consideration  seems  to  put  the  matt-r  l)eyond  doubt — the  construc- 
tion set  up  by  Her  Maiesty's  colonial  authorities  would  altoget''er  nulllfv  another,  and 
that  a  most  important,  stipulation  of  the  treaty,  about  whicli  there  is  no  controversy, 
viz,  the  privileges  reserved  to  American  tishiiig-vessels  of  taking  shelter  and  repairing 
damages  in  the  bays  within  which  they  are  forbidden  to  fish.  There  Is,  of  course,  no 
shelter  nor  means  of  repairing  damages  for  a  vessel  entering  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  In  itself 
considered.  It  is  necessary,  before  relief  or  succor  of  any  kind  can  be  had,  to  traverse 
that  broad  arm  of  the  sea,  and  reach  the  bays  and  harbors  (properly  so  called)  which 
indent  the  coast,  and  wh  ch  are  no  doubt  the  bays  and  harliors  referred  to  In  the  Con- 
vention of  1818.  The  privilege  of  entering  the  latter  in  extremity  of  weather,  reserved 
by  the  treaty,  is  of  the  utmost  importance.  It  enables  the  fisherman,  whose  equipage 
is  always  very  slender — that  of  the  Washington  was  four  men  all  told — to  pursue  his 
laborious  occupation  with  comparative  safety,  in  the  assurance  that,  in  one  of  the  sud- 
den and  dangerous  changes  of  weather  so  frequent  and  so  terrible  on  this  iron-bound 
coast,  be  can  take  shelter  In  a  neighboring  and  friendly  port.  To  forbid  him  to  approach 
within  thirty  miles  of  that  port,  except  for  shelter  in  extremity  of  weathnr.  Is  to  forbid 
him  to  resort  there  for  that  purpose.  It  is  keeping  him  at  such  a  distance  at  sea  as 
wholly  to  destroy  the  value  of  the  privilege  expressly  reserved. 

In  fact,  it  would  follow,  if  the  construction  contended  for  by  the  British  colonial 
authorities  were  sustained,  that  two  entirely  different  limitations  would  exist  iu  refer- 
ence to  the  right  of  shelter  reserved  to  American  vessels  on  the  shores  of  Her  Majesty's 
colonial  possessions.  They  would  be  allowed  to  fish  within  three  miles  of  the  place  of 
shelter  along  the  greater  part  of  the  coast;  while,  In  reference  to  the  entire  extent  of 
shore  within  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  they  would  be  wholly  prohibited  from  fishing  along 
the  coast,  and  would  be  kept  at  a  distance  of  twenty  or  thirty  miles  from  any  place  of 
refuge  in  case  of  extremity.  There  are  certainly  no  obvious  principles  which  render 
such  a  construction  probable. 

In  August,  1844,  the  American  schooner  Argus  was  seized  while  fish- 
ing off  the  coast  of  Cajjc  Breton,  under  exactly  similar  circumstances 
with  the  seizure  of  the  Washington. 

Mr.  Everett,  at  the  request  of  the  United  States  Government,  called 
this  seizure  to  the  notice  of  the  Earl  of  Aberdeen,  and  reiterates  the 
arguments  previously  used  with  reference  to  the  Washington : 

Mr.  Everett  to  the  Earl  of  Aberdeen,  October  9, 1844. 

The  undersigned,  envoy  extraordinary  and  minister  plenipotentiary  of  the  United 
States  of  America,  has  the  honor  to  transmit  to  the  Earl  of  Aberdeen,  Her  Majesty's 
principal  secretary  of  state  for  foreign  affairs,  the  accompanying  papers  relating  to 
the  capture  of  an  American  fishing-vessel,  the  Argus,  by  a  government  cutter  from 
Halifax,  the  Sylph,  on  the  Gth  of  July  last. 

In  addition  to  the  seizure  of  the  vessel,  her  late  commander,  as  Lord  Aberdeen  will 
perceive  from  his  deposition,  complains  of  harsh  treatment  on  the  part  of  the  captore, 

The  grounds  assigned  for  the  capture  of  this  vessel  are  not  stated  with  great  dis- 
tinctness. They  appear  to  be  connected  partly  with  the  construction  set  up  by  Her 
Majesty's  provincial  authorities  in  America  that  the  line  within  which  vessels  of  the 
United  States  are  forbidden  to  fish  is  to  be  drawn  from  headland  to  headland,  and  not 
to  follow  the  indentations  of  the  coast,  and  partly  with  the  regulations  established 
by  those  authorities  in  consequence  of  the  annexation  of  Cape  Breton  to  Nova  Scotia. 

With  respect  tu  the  former  point,  the  undersigned  deems  it  unnecessary,  on  this 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


149 


leen  will 
captore. 
;reat  lUs- 
,.  by  Her 
)l8  of  the 
,  and  not 
tablished 
a  Scotia. 
on  this 


occasion,  to  add  anything  to  the  observation  contained  in  his  note  to  Lord  Aberdeen 
of  the  25th  of  May,  on  the  snbject  of  limitations  of  the  right  secured  to  American 
fishing-vessels  by  the  Treaty  of  1783  and  the  Convention  of  1818,  in  reply  to  the  note 
of  his  lordship  of  the  15th  of  April  on  the  same  subject.  As  far  as  the  capture  of  the 
Arf^ns  was  made  under  the  same  authority  of  ihe  act  annexing  Cape  Breiou  to  Nova 
Sootia,  the  undersigned  would  observe  that  he  is  under  tlie  impression  that  the  que.s- 
tinn  of  the  legality  of  that  measure  is  still  pending  before  the  judicial  committee  of 
Her  Majesty's  privy  council.  It,  would  be  very  doubtful  whether  rights  secured  to 
American  vessels  under  public  coiupauts  could,  under  any  circumstances,  be  impaired 
by  acts  of  subst-quent  domestic  legislation;  but  to  proceed  to  capture  American  ves- 
fiels  in  virtue  of  sucii  acts,  while  their  legality  is  drawa  in  question  by  the  home  gov- 
ernment, seems  to  be  a  measure  as  unjust  as  it  is  harsh. 

Without  enlarging  on  these  views  of  the  subject,  the  undersigned  would  invite  the 
ftttenti(Mi  of  the  Earl  of  Aberdeen  to  the  severity  and  injustice  which  in  other  resptcts 
characterize  the  laws  and  regulutioiis  adopt«<l  by  Her  Majeaty's  provincial  authorities 
ajruinst  the  flshing-vessels  of  the  Uni  ed  Statues.  Some  of  the  provisions  of  the  pro- 
vincial law  in  reference  to  the  seizures  which  ifc  authorizes  of  American  vessels,  were 
pronounced,  in  a  note  of  Mr.  Stevenson  to  Viscount  Palmerston,  of  the  '27th  of  March, 
1841,  to  be  "  violations  of  well-established  principles  of  the  common  law  of  England, 
and  of  the  principles  of  the  just  laws  of  well-civilized  nations";  and  this  strong  lan- 
gnage  was  used  by  Mr.  Stevenson  under  the  express  instructions  of  his  government. 

A  demand  of  security  lo  defend  the  suit  from  x)ersous  so  little  able  to  furnish  it  as  the 
captains  of  small  tlshing-schoouers,  and  so  lieavy  that,  in  the  language  of  the  consul 
at  Halifax,  "  it  is  generally  better  to  let  the  suit  go  by  default,"  must  be  regarded  as  a 
provision  of  this  description.  Others  still  more  oppressive  are  pointtd  out  in  Mr. 
Stevenson's  note  above  referred  to,  in  reference  to  which  the  undersigned  linds  him- 
self obligfd  to  repeat  the  remark  made  in  his  note  to  Lord  Aberdeen  of  the  10th  of 
Anj^ust,  184.3,  that  he  believes  it  still  remains  unanswered. 

It  is  stated  by  the  captain  of  the  Argus  that  the  commander  of  the  Nova  Scotia 
Bciiooiier  by  which  he  was  captured  said  that  he  was  within  three  miles  of  the  line 
beyond  which,  "  on  their  construction  of  the  treaty,  we  were  a  lawlnl  prize,  and  that 
he  seized  us  to  settle  the  question." 

The  undersigned  again  feels  it  his  duty,  on  behalf  of  his  government,  formally  to 
protest  against  an  act  of  this  description.  American  vessels  of  triding  size,  and  pur- 
sning  a  branch  of  industry  of  the  nu)st  harmless  (description,  which,  however  beuefi- 
ciiil  to  the.  iselves,  occasions  no  detriment  to  others,  instead  of  being  turned  off  the 
debatable  tishing-gronnd — a  remedy  fully  adequate  to  the  alleged  evil— are  proceeded 
aj^uinst  as  if  engaged  in  the  most  undoubted  infractions  of  municipal  law  or  the  law 
of  nations  ;  captured  and  sent  into  port,  their  crews  deprived  of  their  clothing  and 
perHoiial  etlects,  and  the  vessels  subjected  to  a  mode  of  procedure  in  the  courts  which 
amounts  in  many  cases  to  confiscation  ;  and  this  is  done  to  settle  the  construction  of 
a  treaty. 

A  course  so  violent  and  unnecessarily  harsh  would  be  regarded  by  any  government 
as  a  just  cause  of  complaint  against  any  other  with  whom  it  might  differ  in  the  con- 
Btrnution  of  a  nati<mal  compact.  But  when  it  is  considered  that  these  are  the  acts  of 
a  nrovincial  government,  with  whom  that  of  the  United  .States  has  and  can  have  no 
intercourse,  and  that  they  continue  and  are  repeated  while  the  United  States  and 
Great  Britain,  the  only  parties  to  the  treaty  the  purporn  of  whose  provisions  is  called 
in  question,  are  amicably  discussing  tlie  matter,  with  every  wiuh  on  both  sides  to  bring 
it  to  a  reasonable  settlement.  Lord  Aberdeen  will  perceive  that  it  becomes  a  subject  of 
complnint  of  the  most  serious  kind. 

An  such,  the  undersigned  is  instructed  again  to  bring  it  to  Lord  Aberdeen's  notice, 
and  to  express  the  contideut  hope  that  such  measures  of  redress  as  the  urgency  of  the 
case  requires  will,  at  the  instance  of  his  lordship,  be  promptly  resorted  to. 

Marcih  10,  1845,  Lord  Aberdeen  writes  to  Mr.  Everett,  iiiforaiing  hitn 
that,  although  the  British  Government  still  adhered  to  their  previous 
construction  of  the  treaty,  and  denied  any  right  of  Atneriean  fishermen 
to  tish  within  three  miles  of  a  line  drawn  from  headland  to  headland 
across  the  mouths  of  the  bays  on  the  Canadian  coast,  yet  the  rule  would 
be  relaxed  so  far  that  American  vessels  wouhl  be  permitted  to  fish  in 
the  Bay  of  Fundy  at  any  part  not  less  than  three  miles  from  shore,  and 
"  provided  they  do  not  approach,  except  in  the  cases  specified  in  the 
treaty  of  1818,  within  three  miles  of  the  entrance  of  any  bay  on  the 
coast  of  Nova  Scotia  or  New  Brunswick." 

Mr.  Everett,  March  25, 1845,  thanks  Lord  Aberdeen  for  "the  amicable 
disiiositiou  eviuued  by  Her  Majesty's  Goveruinent;"  but  be  still  maiu- 


■■4 

0 


150 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


h 


tains  tbe  American  construction  of  the  treaty ;  saying  that  be  does  this, 
not  *♦  for  the  sake  of  detracting  from  the  liberality  evinced  by  Her 
Majesty's  Government  in  relaxing  from  what  they  regard  as  their  right, 
but  it  would  be  placing  his  own  government  in  a  false  position  to  accept 
as  mere  favor  that  for  wbi.  i  they  have  so  longand  strenuously  contended 
as  due  to  them  from  the  Convention." 

In  the  case  of  tbe  Washington,  which  formed  the  subject  of  the  note  of  the  nnder- 
Bigued  of  the  25th  of  May,  1844,  to  which  tbe  present  communication  of  Lord  Aber- 
deen is  a  reply,  the  capture  complained  of  was  in  the  waters  of  tbe  Bay  of  Fandy.  The 
principal  portion  of  the  argnmeut  of  tbe  undersigned  was  addressed  to  that  part  of  the 
subject. 

In  tbe  case,  however,  of  the  Argns,  which  was  treated  in  the  note  of  the  undersigned 
of  the  9th  of  October,  tbe  capture  was  in  the  waters  wbich  wash  the  northeastern  coast 
of  Cape  Breton,  a  portion  of  tbe  Atlantic  Ocean  intercepted,  indeed,  between  a  straight 
lice  drawn  from  Cape  North  to  the  northern  bead  of  Cow  Bay,  but  possessing  none  of 
tbe  characters  of  a  bay  (far  less  so  than  tho  Bay  of  Fundy),  and  not  called  a  "bay" 
on  any  map  wbich  the  undersigned  has  seen.  Tbe  aforesaid  line  is  a  degree  of  latitude 
in  length  ;  and,  as  far  as  reliance  can  be  placed  on  tbe  only  maps  (English  ones)  in  the 
possession  of  tbe  undersigned  on  \7liicb  this  coast  is  distinctly  laid  down,  it  would  ex- 
clude vessels  from  fisbing-gronnds  wbich  might  be  thirty  miles  from  tbe  shore. 

But  if  Her  Majesty's  provincial  authorities  are  permitted  to  regard  as  a  "  bay  "  any 
portion  of  tbe  sea  wbich  can  be  cut  off  by  a  direct  line  connecting  two  points  of  the 
coast,  however  destitute  in  other  respects  of  the  character  usually  implied  by  that 
name,  not  only  will  tbe  waters  on  tbe  northeastern  coascof  Cape  Breton,  but  on  mauy 
other  parrs  of  the  shores  of  tbe  Anglo-American  dependencies  where  such  exclusion  has 
not  yet  been  thought  of,  be  prohibited  to  American  tishermeu.  In  fact,  the  waters 
which  wash  tbe  entire  sontbeaHtern  coast  of  Nova  Scotia,  frtmi  Cape  Siible  to  Cape 
Canso,  a  distance  on  a  straight  line  of  rather  less  than  three  hundred  miles,  would  iu 
this  way  constitute  a  bay,  from  wbich  United  States  fishernien  would  be  excluded. 

The  undersigned,  however,  forbears  to  dwell  on  this  subject,  being  far  from  certain, 
on  a  comparison  of  all  that  is  said  iu  tbe  two  notes  of  Lord  Aberdeen  of  the  10th  in- 
stant, as  to  tbe  relaxation  proposed  l>y  Her  Majesty's  Government,  that  it  is  not 
intended  to  embrace  the  waters  of  tbe  northeastern  coasts  of  Cape  Breton,  as  well  as 
the  Bay  of  Fundy. 

Tbe  British  colonial  fishermen  possess  considerable  advantages  over  those  of  the 
United  States.  The  remoter  fisheries  of  Newfoundland  and  Labrador  are  considerably 
more  accessible  to  tbe  colonial  than  to  tbe  United  States  fishermen.  Tbe  bsbiii;;- 
grounds  on  the  coasts  of  New  Brunswick  and  Nova  Scotia,  abounding  in  cod,  mack- 
erel, and  herring,  lie  at  tbe  doors  of  tbe  former.  He  is,  therefore,  able  to  pursue  bis 
avocation  in  a  smaller  class  of  vessels,  and  requires  a  smaller  outfit ;  be  is  able  to  use 
the  net  and  tbe  seine  to  great  advantage  in  the  small  bays  and  inlets  along  tbe  coast 
from  which  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States,  under  any  construction  of  the  treaty, 
are  excluded. 

All,  or  nearly  all,  the  niateiials  of  shipbnil'Mng — timber,  iron, cordage,  and  canvas—' 
are  cheaper  in  the  colonies  than  in  the  United  States;  as  are  salt,  books,  and  lines. 
There  is  also  a  great  advantage  enjoyed  by  tbe  former  in  reference  to  the  supply  of 
bai*<  and  curing  tbe  fish.  These  and  other  causes  have  enabled  tbe  colonial  fisbermeu 
to  drive  those  of  the  United  States  out  of  many  foreign  markets,  and  might  do  so  at 
home  but  for  tbe  protectiou  afforded  by  the  duties. 

It  may  be  added,  that  tbe  highest  duty  on  the  kinds  of  fish  that  would  be  sent  to 
American  market  is  less  than  a  half-penny  per  pound,  wbicb  cannot  do  more  thaa 
cuunterbalauce  tbe  numerous  advantages  possessed  by  the  colonial. 

Tbe  undersigned  supposes,  though  he  has  no  particular  information  to  that  effect, 
that  equal  or  nigher  duties  exist  in  the  colonies  on  the  importation  of  fish  from  the 
United  States. 

Tbe  undersigned  requests  the  Etirl  of  Aberdeen  to  accept  tbe  assurance  of  his  high 
consideration. 

On  the  same  date,  March  25,  1845,  Mr.  Everett  writes  to  Mr.  Cal- 
houn, reporting  the  coinmuuication  of  Lord  Aberdeen  granting  Amer- 
ican tishermen  permission  to  hsh  iu  the  Bay  of  Fundy : 

You  are  aware  that  the  constmction  of  the  first  article  of  the  Convention  between 
Great  Britain  and  the  United  States,  of  1818,  relative  to  tbe  right  of  fishing  in  the 
waters  of  the  Anglo-Anieri<  an  dependencies,  has  long  been  iu  discussion  between  the 
two  governments.  Instructions  on  this  subject  were  several  times  addressed  by  Mr. 
Fornyth  to  my  predecessor,  particularly  iu  ii  dispatch  of  the  'iOtb  of  February,  1H41, 
which  formed  the  basis  of  an  able  and  elaborate  note  from  Mr.  Steveusou  to  Lord 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


151 


Palmerston,  of  the  27th  of  the  following  month.  Mr.  Stevenson's  representations  were 
acknowledged,  and  referred  by  the  Colonial  Office  to  the  provincittl  governmeut  of 
Nova  Scotia;  but  no  other  ar.swer  was  returned  to  them. 

The  exclusion  of  American  fishermen  from  the  waters  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy  was  the 
most  prominent  of  the  grievances  complained  of  on  behalf  of  the  United  States.  Hav- 
ing received  instructions  from  the  department  in  reference  to  the  seizure  of  the  Wash- 
ington, of  Newbnryport,  for  fishing  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  I  represented  the  case  to  Lord 
Aberdeen  in  a  note  of  the  10th  of  August,  184.3.  An  answer  was  received  to  this  note 
on  the  15th  of  April  following;  in  which  Lord  Aberdeen  confined  himself  to  stating 
tbat,  by  the  terms  of  the  convention,  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  were  not  allowed 
to  tish  within  three  miles  of  any  bay  upon  the  coast  of  the  British  American  colonies, 
and  could  not,  therefore,  be  permitted  to  pursue  their  avocation  within  the  Bay  of 
Fundy.  I  replied  to  this  note  on  the  25th  of  May  folloiwing,  aud  endeavored  to 
show  that  it  was  the  spirit  and  design  of  the  first  article  of  the  Convention  of  181ri  to 
reserve  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  the  right  of  fishing  within  tbree  miles  of  the 
coast.  Some  remarks  on  the  state  of  the  controversy  at  that  time  will  be  found  in  my 
dispatch  No.  130,  of  the  26th  of  May  last. 

On  the  9th  of  October  last,  in  obedience  to  your  instrnctions,  No.  105,  I  addressed  a 
note  to  Lord  Aberdeen  in  reference  to  the  case  of  the  Argus  of  Portland,  which  was 
captured  while  fishing  on  St.  Anne's  Bank,  otf  the  northeastern  coast  of  Cape  Breton. 
The  papers  relative  to  this  case  left  the  precise  grouixls  of  the  seizure  of  the  Argus  in 
some  uncertainty.  It  was,  however,  sufficiently  apparent  tbat  they  were  to  some  ex- 
tent, at  least,  similar  to  those  for  which  the  Washington  had  been  captu  ed. 

I  received  a  few  days  since,  and  herewith  transmit,  a  note  from  Lord  Aberdeen,  con- 
taining the  satisfactory  intelligence,  that  after  a  reconsideration  of  the  subject,  al- 
though the  Queen's  Government  adhere  to  the  constructijii  of  the  convention  which 
they  have  a1  <vays  maintained,  they  have  still  come  to  the  rietermination  of  relaxing 
from  it,  so  far  as  to  allow  American  fishermen  to  pursue  their  avocations  in  the  Bay  of 
Fundy. 

I  thought  it  proper,  in  repl^ring  to  Lord  Aberdeen's  note,  to  recognize  in  ample  terms 
the  liberal  spirit  evinced  by  Her  Majesty's  Government,  in  relaxing  from  what  they 
consider  their  right.  At  the  same  time,  I  felt  myself  bound  to  say  that  the  United 
States  could  not  accept  as  a  mere  favor  what  they  had  alwa^  s  claimed  as  a  matter  of 
right,  secured  by  the  treaty. 


Mr.  Everett  to  Mr.  Buchanan,  April  23,  1845. 

With  my  dispatch  No.  278,  of  25th  March,  I  transmitted  the  note  of  Lord  Aberdeen 
of  the  10th  of  March,  communicating  the  important  information  that  this  government 
had  come  to  the  determination  to  concede  to  American  fishermen  the  right  of  pursuing 
their  occupation  within  the  Bay  of  Fundy.  It  was  left  somewhat  nncertain,  by  Lord 
Aberdeen's  note,  whether  this  concession  was  intended  to  be  confined  to  the  Bay  of 
Fundy,  or  to  extend  to  other  portions  of  the  coast  of  the  Anglo-American  possessions, 
to  which  the  principles  contended  for  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  equally 
apply,  aud  particularly  to  the  waters  on  the  northeastern  shores  of  Cape  Breton,  where 
the  Argus  was  captured.  In  my  notes  of  the  25th  ultimo  aud  2d  instant,  on  the  subject 
of  the  Washington  and  the  Argus,  I  was  careful  to  point  out  to  Lord  Aberdeen  that 
all  the  reasons  for  admitting  the  ri^ht  of  Americans  to  fish  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  apply 
to  those  waters,  and  with  superior  force,  inasmuch  as  they  are  less  landlocked  than 
the  Bay  of  Fundy ;  and  to  express  the  hope  that  the  concession  was  meant  to  extend 
to  them,  which  there  was  some  reason  to  think,  from  the  mode  in  which  Lord  Aber- 
deen expressed  himself,  was  the  case. 

I  received  last  evening  the  answer  of  his  lordship,  informing  me  that  my  two  notes 
had  been  referred  to  the  Colonial  Office,  and  that  a  final  reply  could  not  be  returned 
till  he  should  be  made  acquainted  with  the  result  of  that  refereuee ;  and  that,  in  the 
mean  time,  the  concession  must  be  understood  to  be  limited  to  the  Bay  of  Fundy. 

The  merits  of  the  question  are  so  clear,  that  I  cannot  but  anticipate  that  the  decision 
of  the  Colonial  Office  will  be  in  favoi  of  the  liberal  construction  of  the  convention.  In 
the  mean  time  I  beg  leave  to  suggest,  that,  in  any  public  notice  which  may  be  given 
that  the  Bay  of  Fundy  is  henceforth  open  t.o  American  fishermen,  it  should  be  carefully 
stated  that  the  extension  of  the  same  privilege  to  the  other  great  bays  on  the  coast  of 
the  Anglo-American  dependencies  is  a  matter  of  negotiation  between  the  two  govern- 
meuts. 

After  an  ineffectual  attempt  to  induce  the  United  States  to  conclude 
a  Reciprocity  Treaty  with  the  British  proviiice.s,  Mr.  Crauipton  gave 
notice  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Webster,  July  5,  1S52,  that  a  lorce 
of  war-steamers  and  sailing-vessels  was  coming  to  tlie  fishing  grounds 
to  prevent  encroachments  of  vessels  belonging  to  citizens  of  the  United 
States  on  the  flshiuggrouuds  reserved  to  Great  Britain. 


162 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


:l'j 


Angust  23, 1852,  the  Provincial  Secretary  issued  a  notice,  that  "no 
American  fishing- vessels  are  entitled  to  commercial  privileges  in  provin- 
cial ports,  hut  are  subject  to  forfeiture  if  found  engaged  in  traffic.  The 
colonial  collectors  have  no  authority  to  permit  freight  to  be  landed  from 
sucli  vessels,  which,  under  the  convention,  can  only  enter  our  ports  for 
the  purposes  specified  therein,  and  for  no  other." 

Under  the  clauses  of  the  Convention  of  February  8, 1853,  the  case  of 
the  "Washington"  came  before  the  Joint  Commission  for  settlement  of 
claims,  in  London,  and,  on  the  disagreement  of  the  Commissioners,  was 
decided  by  the  umpire,  Mr.  Joshua  Bates,  in  favor  of  the  United  States, 
on  the  ground  tiiat,  by  the  construction  of  the  treaty  of  1818,  the  United 
States  titshermen  had  the  right  to  fish  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  and  the 
other  bays  of  the  coast  of  British  North  American  Provinces,  as  long  as 
they  did  not  fish  within  three  miles  of  the  coast.  The  full  text  of  the 
decision  is  as  follows,  viz: 

Bates,  Umpire: 

The  Hchooner  Wastiington  was  seized  by  the  revenue  schooner  Julia,  Captain  Darby, 
while  fishing  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  ten  miles  from  the  shore,  on  the  10th  of  May,  1843, 
on  the  charge  of  violating  the  treaty  of  1818.  She  was  carried  to  Yarmouth,  Nova 
Scotia,  and  there  decreed  to  be  forfeited  to  the  crown  by  the  judge  of  the  vice-admiralty 
court,  and,  with  her  stores,  ordered  to  be  sold.  The  owners  of  the  Washington  claim 
for  the  value  of  the  vessel  and  appurtenances,  outfits,  and  damages,  $2,4S:i,  and  for 
eleven  years'  interest,  $1,6IJ8,  amounting  together  to  $4,121.  By  the  recent  reciprocity 
treaty,  happily  concluded  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  there  seems  no 
chance  for  any  further  dispute  in  regard  to  tbe  fisheries. 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that,  in  that  treaty,  provision  was  not  made  for  settling  a  few 
small  claims  of  no  importance  in  a  pecuniary  sense,  which  were  then  existing ;  but,  as 
they  have  not  been  settled,  they  are  now  brought  before  this  Commission. 

The  Waxhingtou  fishing-schooner  was  seized,  as  before  stated,  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy, 
tea  miles  from  the  shore,  off  Annapolis,  N  iva  Scotia. 

It  will  be  seen  by  the  treaty  of  1783  between  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States 
that  tlie  citizens  of  the  latter,  in  common  with  the  subjects  of  the  former,  enjoyed  the 
light  to  take  and  cure  fish  on  the  shores  of  all  parts  of  Her  Majesty's  dominions  in  Amer- 
ica used  by  British  fishermen  ;  but  not  to  dry  fish  on  the  island  of  Newfoundland,  whicli 
latter  privilege  was  confined  to  the  shores  of  Nova  Scotia,  in  the  following  words: 
"And  American  fishermen  shall  have  liberty  to  dry  and  cure  fish  on  any  of  the  unset- 
tled bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  Nova  Scotia ;  but,  as  soon  as  said  shores  shall  become 
settled,  It  shall  not  be  lawful  to  dry  or  cure  fish  at  such  settlement  without  a  previous 
agreement  for  ibat  purpose  with  the  inhabitants,  proprietors,  or  possessors  of  the 
ground." 

The  treaty  of  1818  contains  the  following  stipulations  in  relation  to  the  fishery: 

"  Whereas  differences  have  arisen  respecting  the  liberty  claimed  by  the  United  Slates 
to  take,  dry,  and  cure  fish  on  ceitain  coasts,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  His  Britannic  Majes- 
ty's dominions  in  America,  it  is  agreed  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States  shall 
have,  in  common  with  the  subjects  of  His  Britannic  Majesty,  the  right  to  fish  on  cer- 
tain portions  of  the  southern,  western,  and  northern  coast  of  Newfoundland  ;  and,  also, 
on  the  coasts,  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  from  Mount  Joly,  on  the  southern  coast  of 
Labrador,  to  and  through  the  Straits  of  Belle  Isle;  and  thence,  northwardly,  indefi- 
nitely along  the  coast;  and  that  American  fishermen  shall  have  liberty  to  dry  and  cure 
fish  in  any  of  the  unsettled  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  said  described  coasts  until  the 
same  become  settled,  and  the  United  States  renounce  the  liberty  heretofore  enjoyed  or 
claimed  by  the  inhabitants  thereof  to  take,  dry,  or  cure  fish  on  or  tvithin  three  marine 
mites  of  any  of  the  coasts,  bays,  creeks,  and  harbors  of  His  Britannic  Maiesty's  doniia- 
ions  in  America,  not  included  in  the  above-mentioned  limits:  Provided,  however,  That 
the  American  fishermen  shall  be  admitted  to  enter  such  bays  or  harbors  for  the  purpose 
of  shelter,  and  of  repairing  damages  therein,  of  purchasing  wood,  and  of  obtaiiiiDg 
water,  and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever.  But  they  shall  he  under  such  restrictious 
as  may  be  necessary  to  prevent  their  taking,  drying,  or  curing  fish  therein,  or  in  any 
other  manner  whatever  abusing  the  privileges  hereby  reserved  for  them." 

The  question  turns,  so  far  as  relates  to  the  treaty  stipulations,  on  the  meaning  given 
to  the  word  "  bays"  in  the  treaty  of  1783.  By  that  treaty  the  Americans  had  no  right 
to  dry  and  cure  fish  on  the  shores  and  bays  of  Newfoundland  ;  but  they  had  that  ri^bt 
on  the  shores,  coasts,  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks  of  Nova  Scotia ;  and,  as  they  must  land 
to  cure  fifih  on  the  shores,  bays,  and  creeks,  they  were  evidently  admitted  to  the  shores 
of  the  bays,  &c.  By  the  treaty  of  1818  the  same  right  is  granted  to  cure  fish  on  the 
coasts,  bays,  &c.,  of  Newfoundland ;  but  the  Americans  relinquished  that  right,  and 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


153 


the  right  to  fish  within  three  milts  of  the  coasts,  hays,  &,o,,  of  Nova  Scotia.  Taking  it  for 
granted  that  the  frainers  of  tlie  treaty  intended  that  the  word  "  bay  "  or  "  bays  "  ahonld 
bave  the  same  meaning  in  all  cases,  and  no  mention  being  made  of  headlands,  there 
appears  jo  doubt  that  the  Washington,  in  fishing  ten  miles  from  the  shore,  violated  no 
stipulations  of  the  treaty. 

It  was  urged,  on  behaU  of  the  British  Government,  that  by  "  coasts,"  "  bays,"  &o.,  is 
understood  an  imaginary  line  drawn  along  the  coast  from  headland  to  heaidland,  and 
that  the  jurisdiction  of  Her  Majesty  extends  three  marine  miles  outside  of  this  line; 
thus  closing  all  the  bays  on  the  coast  or  shore,  and  that  great  body  of  water  called  the 
Bay  of  Fnudy,  against  Americans  and  others,  making  the  latter  a  British  bay.  This 
doctrine  of  the  headlands  is  new,  and  has  received  a  proper  limit  in  the  convention  be- 
tween France  and  Great  Britain  of  2d  of  August,  1839;*  iu  which  "it  is  agreed  that 
the  distance  of  three  miles,  fixed  a«  the  general  limit  for  the  exclusive  right  of  fishery 
upon  the  coasts  of  the  two  countries,  shall,  with  respect  to  bays  the  mouths  of  which 
do  not  exceed  ten  miles  in  width,  be  measured  from  a  straight  line  drawn  from  head- 
aiid  to  headland." 

The  Bay  of  Fnndy  is  from  65  to  75  miles  wide  and  130  to  140  miles  long ;  it  has  sev- 
eral bays  on  its  coast ;  thus  the  word  "  bay,"  as  applied  to  this  great  body  of  water, 
has  the  same  meaning  as  that  applied  to  the  Bay  of  Biscay,  the  Bay  of  Bengal,  over 
which  no  nation  can  bave  the  right  to  assume  sovereignty.  One  of  the  headlands  of 
the  Bay  of  Fundy  is  in  the  United  States,  and  ships  bound  to  Passamaquoddy  must 
sail  through  a  large  space  of  it.  The  Islands  of  Grand  Menau  (British)  and  Little 
Meuan  (American)  are  situated  nearly  on  a  line  from  headland  to  headland.  These 
islands,  as  represented  in  all  geographies,  are  situated  in  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  The 
conclusion  is,  therefore,  in  my  mind,  irresistible  that  the  Bay  of  Fundy  is  not  a  Brit- 
ish bay,  nor  a  bay  within  the  meaning  of  the  word  as  used  in  the  treaties  of  1783  and 
1818. 

The  owners  of  the  Washington,  or  their  legal  representatives,  are,  therefore,  entitled 
to  compensation  ;  and  are  hereby  awarded,  not  the  amount  of  their  claim  (which  is 
excessive),  but  the  sum  of  $3,000,  due  on  the  15th  of  January,  1855. 

The  intention  of  the  framers  ot  the  Convention  of  1818  appears  from 
a  letter  of  Mr.  Biubard  Kiish,  one  of  its  negotiators,  to  the  Secretary 
of  State,  July  18, 1853,  referring  to  that  instrument :  "  In  signing  it, 
we  believed  that  we  retained  the  right  of  fishing  in  the  sea,  whether 
called  a  bay,  gulf,  or  by  whatever  term  designated,  that  washed  any 
part  of  the  coast  of  the  British  North  American  Piovinces,  with  the 
simple  exception  that  we  did  not  come  within  a  marine  league  of  the 
shore.  We  inserted  the  clause  of  renunciation.  The  British  plenipo- 
tentiaries did  not  desire  it." 

The  conclusion  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  June  6, 1854,  rendered  con- 
troversy of  no  importance,  and  disposed  of  all  the  other  questions,  for 
the  time  being.  During  the  time  when  this  treaty  was  in  force,  no  com- 
plaints of  any  kind  were  made  by  the  Canadians,  who  were  fully  satis- 
liecl  that  the  benefits  derived  from  the  treaty  were  far  more  valuable 
tbau  any  loss  they  received  from  the  usin^;  of  their  inshore  fisheries  by 
the  Americans.  The  United  States,  however,  perceiving  that  the  value 
of  the  fisheries  did  not  equal  the  loss  of  revenue  from  the  duties  oa 
(Jauadian  goods  imported  into  the  United  States ;  and  that  the  (Cana- 
dian fishermen,  by  their  nearness  to  the  fishing  grounds  and  the  cheap- 
ness of  labor  and  materials  for  building  boats  in  the  provinces,  rend- 
ered unprofitable  the  prosecution  of  the  fisheries  by  the  Americans, 
gave  notice,  March  17, 1865,  to  abrogate  the  treaty  iu  one  year  from 
the  time  of  the  notice. 

April  12,  1866,  the  following  instructions  for  the  guidance  of  the 
naval  officers  on  the  coast  of  the  North  American  Provinces  were  sent 


*  This  convention  between  France  and  Great  Britain  extended  the  headland  doctrine 
to  buys  ten  miles  wide ;  thus  going  beyond  the  general  rule  of  international  law,  ac- 
cordiug  to  which  no  bays  are  treated  as  within  the  territorial  jurisdiction  of  a  State 
which  are  more  than  six  miles  wide  oa  a  straight  line  measured  from  one  headland  to 

the  other. 


154 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


from  tbe  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Oolonies  to  the  Lords  of  the  Ad- 
miralty :  ' 

Even  before  the  oonolasions  of  the  Recip(*<)city  Treaty,  Her  Majesty's  Government 
had  consented  to  forego  the  exercise  of  its  strict  right  to  exclude  American  fishermen 
from  the  Bay  of  Fnndy ;  and  they  are  of  opinion  that,  dnring  the  present  season,  tliat 
right  should  not  be  exercised  in  the  body  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy ;  and  that  American 
fishermen  should  not  be  interfered  with,  either  by  notice  or  otherwise,  unless  they  are 
found  within  three  miles  of  the  shore,  or  within  three  miles  of  a  line  drawn  across  tbe 
mouth  of  a  bay  or  creek  which  is  loss  than  ten  geographical  miles  in  width,  in  coQ' 
formity  with  the  arrangement  made  with  France  in  1839. 

Her  Majesty's  Government  do  not  desire  that  the  prohibition  to  enter  British  bays 
should  be  generally  insisted  upon,  except  when  there  is  reason  to  apprehend  some 
■nbstantial  invasion  of  British  rights.  And,  in  particular,  they  do  not  desire  American 
vessels  to  be  prevented  from  navigating  the  Gut  of  Causo,  from  which  Her  Majesty's 
Governinent  are  advised  they  mny  lawfully  be  excluded,  unless  it  shall  appear  tliat 
this  permUsion  is  used  to  the  injury  of  the  colonial  fishermen  or  for  other  improper 
objects. 

The  Canadian  Government  then  resorted  to  the  system  of  issuing 
licenses  permitting  American  fishermen  to  fish  in  the  inshore  fisheries. 
Tbe  nnmber  of  licenses  taken  out  tbe  first  year,  1866,  was  354,  at  fifty 
cents  per  ton.  The  license  fee  for  the  next  year  was  one  dollar  per  ton ; 
and  tbe  number  of  licenses  diminished  to  281.  In  1868  the  license  fee 
was  raised  to  two  dollars  per  ton,  and  only  56  licenses  were  taken  out. 
In  1869,  only  25  licenses  were  taken  out. 

In  1870,  the  Canadian  Government  having  decided  to  issue  no  more 
licenses  to  foreign  fishermen,  tbe  following  correspondence  ensued  be 
tweeu  tbe  two  governments: 

Mr.  Fish  to  Mr.  Thornton,  April  1, 1870. 

Information  has  reached  this  department  to  the  effect  that  it  was  announced,  on  be- 
half of  the  Canadian  minister,  in  the  Parliamuut  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  on  the 
9th  ultimo,  that  it  was  the  intention  of  the  government  to  issue  no  more  icenses  to 
foreign  fishermen,  and  that  they  were  taking  every  step  possible  to  p'  tect  their 
fisheries. 

ilfr.  Thwnton  to  Mr.  Fish,  April  2, 1870. 

In  reply  to  your  note  of  yesterday's  date,  I  have  the  honor  to  inform  you  that, 
although  I  am  aware  of  the  announcement  recently  made  by  ilie  Canadian  Govern- 
ment of  their  intention  to  issue  no  more  licenses  to  foreign  fishermen,  I  have  received 
no  official  information  to  that  effect  from  the  governor-general  of  Canada. 

Mr.  Fish  to  Mr.  Thornton,  April  21, 1870. 

I  have  the  honor  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your  note  of  the  14th  instant.  I 
must  invite  your  attention,  and  that  of  Her  Majesty's  authorities,  to  the  first  para- 
graph of  the  order  in  council  of  the  8th  of  January  last,  as  quoted  in  the  memoran- 
dum of  the  prime  minister  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  accompanying  the  dispatch 
of  his  excellency  the  governor-general ;  which  paragraph  is  in  the  following  language, 
to  wit :  "  That  the  system  of  granting  fishing  license  to  foreign  vessels,  under  the  act 
31  Vict.,  c.  61,  be  discontinued,  and  that  henceforth  all  foreign  fishermen  be  prevented  from 
fishing  in  the  waters  of  Canada,"  Tbe  words  underscored  seem  to  contemplate  au  in- 
terference with  the  rights  granted  to  the  United  States  under  the  first  article  of  tbe 
treaty  of  1S18,  which  secures  to  American  fishermen  the  right  of  fishing  in  certain 
waters  which  are  understood  to  be  claimed  at  present  as  belonging  to  Canada. 

Mr.  Thornton  to  Mr.  Fish,  April  22, 1870. 

I  am  forwarding  a  copy  of  your  note  to  the  governor-general  of  Canada ;  buti  in  the 
mean  time,  I  be^  yon  will  allow  me  to  express  my  conviction  that  there  wivs  not  the 
slightest  intention  in  issuing  the  above-mentioned  order  to  abridge  citizens  of  the 
United  States  of  any  of  the  rights  to  which  they  are  entitled  by  the  treaty  of  Octo- 
ber 20,  1818,  and  which  are  tacitly  acknowledged  in  t  he  Canadian  law  of  May  32, 
1868,  a  copy  of  which  I  had  tbe  honor  to  forward  to  you  iu  my  note  of  tbe  14tb  iustaut. 


▲WARD   OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


155 


Mr.  Thornton  to  Mr.  lUh,  May  26,  1870. 

I  have  the  honor  to  iaclose,  for  the  information  of  the  Government  of  tbe  United 
8tateH,  copieH  of  letters  which  have  been  addressed  by  tbe  admiralty  to  Vice-Admiral 
Georjio  G.  VVellesley,  commanding  Her  Majesty's  uaval  forces  on  the  North  American 
aiul  West  Indies  station,  and  of  a  letter  from  the  colonial  department  to  the  foreign 
ofiict),  from  which  you  will  see  the  natnre  of  the  instrnctions  to  be  given  to  Her  Majes- 
ty'ri  and  the  Canadian  officers,  who  will  be  employed  in  maintaining  order  at  the  fish- 
eries in  the  neighborhood  of  the  coasts  of  Canada. 

Mr.  Bogera  to  the  secretary  of  the  admiralty,  April  30,  1870. 

In  Mr.  Secretary  Card  well's  letter  to  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  the  Admiralty,  of 
the  l'<2tli  of  April,  1866,  it  was  stated  that  American  vessels  should  not  be  seized  for 
violating  the  Canadian  dshing  laws,  "  except  after  willful  and  persevering  neglect  of 
the  warnings  which  they  may  have  received ;  and,  in  case  it  should  become  necessary 
to  proceed  to  forfeiture,  cases  shonld,  if  possible,  be  selected  for  that  extreme  step  in 
which  the  offense  has  been  committed  within  three  miles  of  the  land." 

The  Canadian  Government  has  recently  determined,  with  the  concurrence  of  Her 
Miijesty's  ministers,  to  increase  the  stringency  of  the  existing  practice  of  dispensing 
with  the  warnings  hitherto  given,  and  seizing  at  once  any  vessel  detected  in  violating 
the  law. 

In  view  of  this  change,  and  of  the  questions  to  which  it  may  j^ive  rise,  I  am  directed 
by  Lord  Granville  to  request  that  you  will  move  their  lordships  to  instruct  the  offl- 
cerH  of  Her  Majesty's  ships  employed  in  the  protection  of  the  tisheries,  that  they  are 
not  to  seize  any  vessel,  unless  it  is  evident  and  can  be  clearly  proved  that  the  orffense 
of  fishing  has  been  committed,  and  the  vessel  itself  captured  within  three  miles  of 
land. 

May  14, 1870,  the  following  instructions  as  to  tbe  jurisdiction  were 
given  by  Mr.  Peter  Mitcbell,  Minister  of  Marine  and  Fisberies,  to  the 
officer  in  command  of  the  government  vessels  engaged  in  tbe  protection 
of  the  fisheries: 

The  limits  within  which  you  will,  if  necessary,  exercise  the  power  to  exclude  United 
States  fishermen,  or  to  detain  American  fishing  vessels  or  boats,  are  for  the  present  to 
l)e  exceptional.  Difficulties  have  arisen  in  former  times  with  respect  to  the  question, 
whetlier  the  exclusive  limits  should  be  measured  on  lines  drawn  parallel  everywhere  to 
the  coast,  and  describing  its  sinuosities,  or  on  lines  produced  from  headland  to  head- 
land across  the  entrances  of  bays,  creeks,  or  harbors.  Her  Majesty's  Government  are 
clearly  of  opinion,  that,  by  the  Convention  of  1818,  the  United  States  have  renounced 
the  Tight  of  fishiug,  not  only  within  three  miles  of  the  colonial  shores,  but  within 
tbroe  uiiles  of  a  line  drawn  across  the  mouth  of  any  British  bay  or  creek.  It  is,  how- 
ever, the  wish  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  neither  to  concede,  nor  for  the  present  to 
enforce,  any  rights  in  this  respect  which  are  in  their  nature  open  to  any  serious  ques- 
tion. Until  further  instructed,  therefore,  you  will  not  interfere  with  any  American 
fishermen,  unless  found  within  three  miles  of  the  shore,  or  toUhin  three  miles  of  a  line 
drawn  acroiis  the  mouth  of  a  bay  or  creek  which  is  less  than  ten  geograghical  miles  in  width. 
In  the  case  of  any  other  bay —as  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  for  example — you  will  not  admit 
any  United  States  fishing  vessel  or  boat,  or  any  American  fishermen,  inside  of  a  line 
drawn  across  at  that  part  of  such  bay  where  its  ivuUh  does  not  exceed  ten  miles.  (Sessional 
Papers,  No.  12,  1871.) 

This  reassertion  of  tbe  headland  doctrine  did  not  seem  to  meet  the 
approval  of  tbe  home  government.  June  6,  1870,  Lord  Granville  tele- 
graphs to  the  governor-general,  "Her  Majesty's  Government  hopes 
that  tlie  United  States  fishermen  will  not  be  for  the  present  prevented 
from  fishing,  except  within  three  miles  of  land,  or  in  bays  which  are 
less  than  six  miles  broad  at  the  mouth.'' 

In  consequence  of  this  telegram,  on  June  27, 1870,  Mr.  Mitchell  gives 
to  the  commanders  of  the  government  vessels  new  instructions,  as  foU 
lows: 

The  limits  within  which  yon  will,  if  necessary,  exercise  the  power  to  exclude  United 
States  fishermen,  or  to  detain  American  fishing  vessels  or  boats,  are,  for  the  present,  to 
l)u  exceptional.  Difficulties  have  arisen  in  former  times  with  respect  to  the  question 
whether  the  exclusive  limits  should  be  measured  on  lines  drawn  parallel  everywhere 
to  the  coast  and  desoribiug  its  sinuosities,  or  ou  lines  produced  from  headland  to  head- 


m 


156 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHEST   COMMISSION. 


m 


land  across  the  entrances  of  bays,  creeks,  or  harbors.  Her  Majesty's  Government  are 
clearly  of  opinion  that,  by  the  Convention  of  1818,  the  United  States  have  renounced 
the  right  ot  fishing,  not  only  wirhin  three  miles  of  the  colonial  shores,  bnt  within  three 
miles  of  a  line  drawn  across  the  mouth  of  any  British  bay  or  creek.  It  is,  however, 
the  wish  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  neither  to  conceive,  nor  for  the  present  to  en- 
force, any  rights  in  this  respect  which  are  in  their  nature  open  to  any  seriout  question. 
Until  further  instructed,  therefore,  you  will  not  interfere  with  any  American  tislier- 
men,  unless  found  within  three  miles  of  the  shore,  or  within  three  miles  of  »  line  drawn 
across  the  month  of  a  bay  or  creek  which,  though  in  parts  more  than  six  miles  wide,  in  kst 
than  six  qeographical  miles  in  width  at  its  mouth.  In  the  case  of  any  other  bay — a8  Bay 
des  Chaieurs,  for  example — you  will  not  interfere  with  any  United  States  tishiiig-veHsel 
or  boat,  or  any  American  fishermen,  unless  they  are  found  within  three  miles  of  the  shore. 

The  true  doctriue  on  the  subject  is  laid  down  by  the  Government  of 
Great  Britain  iu  a  "Memorandum  from  the  foreign  office  respecting  a 
commission  to  settle  the  limits  of  the  right  of  exclusive  fishery  on  the 
coast  of  British  North  America."  (Sessional  Papers  7  to  19,  vol.  ii.,  No. 
4, 1871.) 

The  right  of  Great  Britain  to  exclude  American  fishermen  from  waters  within  tiiree 
miles  of  the  coast  is  unambiguous,  and,  it  is  believed,  uncontested.  But  there  appeared 
to  be  some  doubt  what  are  the  waters  described  as  within  three  miles  of  bays,  creeiis, 
and  barbora.  When  a  bay  is  less  than  six  miles  broad,  its  waters  are  within  the  three 
miles'  limit,  and  therefore  clearly  within  the  meaning  of  the  treaty;  but  when  it  is 
more  than  that  breadth,  the  question  arises  whether  it  is  a  bay  of  Her  Britannic  Maje^t^'s 
dominions.  This  is  a  question  which  has  to  be  considered  in  each  [tartiuular  caue  witii 
regard  to  international  laws  and  usage.  When  such  a  bay,  &c.,  is  not  a  bay  of  Her 
Majesty's  dominions,  the  American  fishermen  will  be  entitled  to  fish  in  it,  except  within 
three  miles  of  the  "  coast" ;  when  it  is  a  bay  of  Her  Majesty's  dominions,  they  will  not 
be  entitled  to  fish  within  three  milea  of  it,  that  is  to  say,  it  is  presumed,  within  three 
miles  of  a  line  drawn  from  headland  to  headland. 

The  foregoing  statement  is  accepted  as  an  accurate  and  satisfactory 
definition  of  the  rights  of  the  two  governments  under  the  provisions  of 
the  Convention  of  1818.  The  qtiestion  i«,  What  are  bays  of  Her  Majesty's 
dominions  f 

On  this  subject  we  will  examine  the  authorities. 

The  latest  and  most  authoritative  expositions  of  the  law  of  England 
as  to  what  are  territorial  waters,  and  as  to  the  extent  of  jurisdiction,  for 
any  purposes,  beyond  low-water  mark,  will  be  found  in  the  case  of  the 
Franconia,  decided  in  November,  1876,  before  all  the  judges  of  England. 
(Queen  v.  Keyn,  L.  R.,  2  Exch.  Div.,  63.) 

The  opinions  of  the  difterent  judges  are  a  repertory  of  nearly  all  the 
learning,  ancient  and  modern,  English,  American,  and  Continental, 
which  could  be  collected  from  treatises  and  reports.  The  immediate 
question  did  not  relate  to  headlands,  but  was  whether  the  criminal 
jurisdiction  of  England  extended  to  a  crime  committed  by  a  foreigner 
on  a  foreign  vessel  within  three  miles  of  the  English  coast. 

The  case  is  remarkable  for  the  unanimous  and  emphatic  repudiation, 
by  all  the  judges,  of  former  English  claims  of  jurisdiction  or  sovereignty 
over  portions  of  the  sea.  All  of  the  opinions  should  be  read  and  stud- 
ied by  whoever  desires  to  master  the  subject. 

A  few  citations  are  subjoined.    Sir  Bobert  Fhillimore  says : 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  claims  asserted  by  nations  in  times  past — and  perhaps 
no  nation  has  been  more  extravagant  than  England  in  this  matter — it  is  at  the  pres- 
ent time  an  unquestionable  proposition  of  international  jurisprudence,  that  the  bigli 
seas  are  of  right  navigable  by  the  ships  of  all  states.    •    *    * 

The  question  as  to  dominion  over  portions  of  the  seas  inclosed  within  headlands  or 
contignons  shores,  such  as  the  King's  Chambers,  is  not  now  under  consideration.  It 
is  enough  to  say  that  within  this  term  "territory"  are  certainly  comprised  the  ports 
and  harbors,  and  the  space  between  the  flux  and  reflux  of  tide,  or  the  land  up  to  the 
farthest  point  at  which  the  tide  recedes. 

With  respect  to  the  second  question,  the  distance  to  which  the  territorial  waters 
extend,  it  appears,  on  an  examination  of  the  authorities,  that  the  diataaoe  has  varied 


perhaps 
lie  pres- 
iie  liigU 

lauda  or 

Ion.    It 

(e  porta 

to  the 

waters 
I  varied 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


157 


(Betting  aside  even  more  extravagant  olnims)  from  one  bnndred  to  three  miles,  the 
present  limit.    •    •    • 

The  Hound  conclusions  wbioh  resnlt  from  the  investigations  of  the  aathorities  which 
have  lieen  referred  to  appear  to  me  to  be  these : 

The  consensHB  nf  civilized  independent  states  has  reoognize<l  a  maritime  extension  o< 
frontier  to  the  distance  of  three  miles  from  low-water  mark,  because  such  a  frontier  or 
belt  of  wat*'r  is  ni'cessary  for  the  defense  and  secnrity  of  the  adjacent  state. 

It  iH  fur  the  attainment  of  these  particular  objects  that  a  dominion  has  been  granted 
over  this  portion  of  tbe  high  seas. 

Lindiey,  J.,  expressed  himself  as  follows : 

The  controversy  between  Grotius,  in  his  "  Mare  Liberum,"  and  Selden,  in  his  "Mare 
Clnnsum,"  has  been  observed  upon  by  almost  every  writer  on  international  law  since 
their  diiy ;  and  the  result  has  been  that,  while  the  extravagant  propositions  contended 
for  by  each  of  these  celebrated  men  have  been  long  ago  exploded,  it  appears  to  me  to 
be  now  agreed,  by  the  most  esteemed  writers  on  international  law,  that,  subject  to  the 
ri<;ht  of  all  shiiw  freely  to  navigate  the  higli  seas,  every  sta<'e  has  full  power  to  enact 
and  enforce  what  laws  it  thinks  proper,  for  the  preservation  of  peace  and  the  protec- 
tion of  its  own  interests,  over  those  parts  of  the  high  seas  which  adjoin  its  own  coasts 
and  are  within  three  miles  thereof;  but  that  beyond  this  limit,  or,  at  all  events,  beyond 
the  rea  h  of  artillery  on  its  own  coasts,  no  state  has  any  power  to  legislate,  save  over 
sultjects  and  over  persons  on  board  ships  carrying  its  tlag. 

It  is  conceded  that  even  in  time  of  peace  the  territoriality  of  a  foreign  merchant  ship, 
within  three  miles  of  the  coast  of  any  state,  does  not  exempt  that  ship  or  its  crew 
from  the  oi>eratiou  of  those  laws  of  that  state  which  relate  to  its  revenue  or  fisheries. 

Grove,  J.: 

The  ])roposition  that  a  belt  or  zone  of  three  miles  of  sea  surrounding  or  washing 
the  shores  of  a  nation,  what  is  termed  "  territorial  water,"  is  the  property  of  that  nation, 
SH  a  river  flowing  through  its  land  would  be,  or,  if  not  property,  is  subject  to  its  juris- 
diction and  law,  is  not  in  its  terms  of  ancient  date;  but  this  deiii.ed  limit,  so  far, at 
least,  as  a  maritime  country  like  England  is  concerned,  is  rather  a  restriction  than  an 
enlargement  of  its  earlier  claims,  which  were  at  one  time  sought  to  be  extended  to  a 
general  dominion  on  the  sea,  aud  subsequently  over  the  channels  between  it  and  other 
countries,  or,  as  they  were  termed,  "  the  narrow  seas."  The  origin  of  the  three-mile 
zone  appears  undoubted.  It  was  an  assumed  limit  to  the  range  of  cannon,  an  assumed 
distance  at  which  a  nation  was  supposed  able  to  exercise  dominion  frooi  the  shore. 

The  principal  authorities  may  be  conveniently  arranged  as  follows: 

1.  Those  who  aflSrm  the  right,  in  what  are  generally  termed  "  territorial  waters,"  to 
extend  at  least  to  the  distance  at  which  it  can  be  commanded  from  the  shore,  or  as  far 
as  arms  can  protect  it. 

2.  Those  who,  ass'gning  the  same  origin  to  the  right,  recognized  it  as  being  fixed  at 
a  marine  league,  or  three  geographical  miles,  from  the  shore. 

3.  Those  who  afHrm  the  right  to  be  absolute  and  the  same  as  over  an  inland  lake,  or 
(allowing  for  the  dift'erence  of  the  subject-matter)  as  over  the  land  itself. 

4.  Those  who  regard  the  right  as  qnalitied. 

And  the  main,  if  not  only,  qualification  that  seems  to  me  fairly  dedncible  from  the 
anthorities  is,  that  there  is  a  right  of  transit  or  passage,  and,  as  incident  thereto,  pos- 
sibly a  right  of  anchorage,  when  safety  or  convenience  of  navigation  requires  it,  in  the 
territorial  waters,  for  foreign  s^^ips. 

Pnft'endorf,  Byukershoek,  Casaregis,  Mozer,  Aznni,  Kliiber,  Wheaton,  Hantefeuille, 
and  Kaltentorn,  though  not  all  placing  the  limit  of  territorial  jurisdiction  at  the  same 
distance  from  the  shore,  none  of  them  fix  it  at  a  smaller  distance  than  a  cannon-shot, 
or  as  far  off  as  arms  can  command  it.  They  also  give  no  qualification  to  the  jurisdic- 
tion, bnt  seem  to  regard  it  as  if  (having  regard  to  the  ditl'erence  of  land  and  water)  it 
were  an  absolute  territorial  possession.  Chancellor  Kent  seems  also  to  recognize  an 
exclusive  dominion.  Hautefeuille  speaks  of  the  power  of  a  nation  to  exclude  others 
from  the  parts  of  the  sea  which  wash  its  territory,  and  to  punish  them  for  infraction 
of  its  laws,  and  this  as  if  it  were  dealing  with  its  land  dominion. 

Wheaton,  Calvo,  Halleck,  Massey,  Bishop,  aud  Manning  give  the  limit  as  a  marine 
leagne,  or  three  miles.  Helft«r  mentions  this  limit,  but  says  it  may  be  extended.  Orto- 
lan, Calvo,  and  Mass^  put  the  right  as  one  of  jurisdiction,  and  not  of  property,  but  do 
not  limit  it  further  than  that  the  former  writer  says  that  the  laws  of  police  and  surety 
are  there  obligatory,  and  Mass^  also  writes  of  police  jurisdiction.  Bluntsobli  says  the 
territorial  waters  are  subject  to  the  military  rnd  police  authorities  of  the  place. 
Fanstin  Helie  speaks  of  crimes  in  these  waters  coming  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
tribunals  of  the  land  to  which  they  belong.  Unless  these  words,  "  military,  police, 
tnd  surety,"  be  taken  to  impose  a  limit,  no  limit  to  the  jurisdiction  of  a  country  over 
it»  territorial  waters,  beyond  a  right  of  passage  for  foreign  ships,  is  mentioned,  as  far 
u  I  could  gather  from  the  numerous  aathorities  cited,  except  by  Mr.  Manning,  who 


158 


▲WARD   OF  THE   FISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


confineti  it  (though  not  by  words  expressly  negativing  other  riehta)  to  fisheries,  cnm 
toms,  harbors,  lighthouses,  dues,  and  protection  of  territory  during  war.  Orotiiig, 
Ortolan,  Bluntsehli,  Schmaltz,  and  Massfe  consider  there  is  a  right  of  peaceable  piiHHii|;e 
for  the  ships  of  nth«r  nations;  and  Vattel  says  that  it  is  the  duty  of  nations  to  permit 
this,  bnt  seems  to  think  that,  as  a  matter  of  absnlnt«  right,  they  may  prohibit  it. 

Such  are  the  conclusions  of  the  princiiml  publicists,  most  of  whom  are  of  very  hi(,'li 
authority  on  questions  of  international  law. 

The  result  of  them  is  to  show  that,  as  in  the  case  of  many  other  rights,  a  territorial 
jurisdiction  over  a  neighboring  belt  of  sea  had  its  origin  iu  might,  its  limits  buin;;  at 
first  doubtful  and  contested ;  but  ultimately,  by  a  concession  or  comity  of  nations,  it 
became  fixed  at  what  was  for  a  long  time  the  supposed  range  of  a  cannon-shot,  viz, 
three  miles'  distance. 

In  addition  to  the  authority  of  the  publicists,  this  three-mile  range,  if  not  expressly 
recognized  as  an  absolute  boundary  by  international  law,  is  yet  tixed  on,  apparently 
without  dispute,  in  acts  of  Parliament,  in  treaties,  and  iu  Judgments  of  courts  of  law 
in  this  country  and  America. 

Brett,  J.,  uses  the  following  langaage : 

What  are  the  limits  of  the  realm  should,  in  general,  be  declared  by  Parliament.  Its 
declaration  would  be  conclusive,  either  as  authority  or  evidence.  Rut,  in  this  ciise  ot 
the  open  sea  there  is  no  such  declaration;  and  the  question  is  in  this  case  necesHiiriiy 
left  to  the  judges,  and  to  be  determined  on  other  evidence  or  authority.  Such  evidence 
might  have  consisted  of  proof  of  a  continuous  public  claim  by  the  crown  of  England, 
enforced,  when  practicable,  by  arms,  but  not  consented  to  by  other  nations.  I  slionid 
have  considered  such  proof  sufficient  for  English  judges.  In  England,  it  cannot  be 
admitted  tl>at  the  limits  of  England  depend  on  the  consent  of  any  other  nation.  But 
no  such  evidence  was  offered.  The  only  evidence  suggested  in  this  case  is,  that  hy 
law  of  nations  every  country  bordered  by  the  sea  is  to  be  held  to  have,  as  part  of  Its 
territory  (meaning  thereby  a  territory  in  which  its  law  is  paramount  and  exclusive), 
the  three  miles  of  open  sea  next  to  its  coast;  and,  therefore,  that  England,  anions 
others,  has  such  territory.  The  question  on  both  sides  has  been  made  to  depend  on 
whether  such  is  or  is  not  proved  to  be  the  law  of  nations. 

I  cannot  but  think,  therefore,  that  substantially  all  the  foreign  jurists  are  in  accord 
in  asserting  that,  by  the  common  consent  of  all  nations,  each  which  is  bordered  by  an 
open  sea  ban  over  three  adjacent  miles  of  it  a  territorial  right.  And  the  sense  in  which 
they  all  use  that  term  seems  to  me  to  be  fully  explained  by  Vattel  (lib.  i,  c.  18,  $  'iOo). 
He  says: 

"  Lorsqu'une  nation  s'empare  d'un  pays  qui  n'appartient  encore  h  personne,  elle  est 
cens^e  y  occuper  I'empire,  on  la  souverainet^,  en  ni6me  temps  que  le  domaine.  Tont 
I'espace  dans  lequel  une  nation  €tend  son  empire  forme  le  ressort  de  sa  juridiction,  et 
s'apppelleson  territoiro."  At  lib.  ii,  $  84  :  "L'empire,  uni  an  domaine,  ^tablit  lajnri- 
diction  de  la  nation  dans  le  pays  qui  lui  appartient,  dans  son  territoire." 

This  seems  plain ;  sovereignty  and  dominion  necessarily  give  or  import  jurisdiction, 
and  do  so  throughout  the  territory. 

Applying  this  to  the  territorial  sea,  at  lib.  i,  c.  2.\  $  295,  he  says  : 

"  Quand  une  nation  s'empare  de  certaiues  parties  de  la  mer,  elle  y  occnpe  I'empire 
anssi  bien  que  le  domaine,  &c.  Ces  parties  de  la  mer  sont  de  la  juridiction  dn  terri- 
toire de  la  nation.  Le  soaverain  y  conimande ;  il  y  donne  des  lois,  et  pent  reprimer 
ceux  qui  les  violent;  en  un  mot  il  y  a  tons  les  mfimes  droits  qui  lui  appartienuet  snr 
la  terre,"  &,o. 

It  seems  to  me  that  this  is,  in  reality,  a  fair  representation  of  the  accord  or  agree- 
ment of  substantially  all  the  foreign  writers  on  international  law ;  and  that  they  all 
agree  in  asserting  that,  by  the  consent  of  all  nations,  each  which  is  bordered  by  open 
sea  has  a  right  over  such  adjacent  sea  as  a  territorial  sea ;  that  is  to  say,  as  a  part  of 
its  territory ;  and  that  they  all  mean  thereby  to  assert  that  it  follows,  as  aconseqnence 
of  such  sea  being  a  part  of  its  territory,  that  each  such  nation  has,  in  general,  the  same 
right  to  legislate  and  to  enforce  its  legislation  over  that  part  of  the  sea  as  it  has  over 
its  land  territory. 

Considering  the  authorities  I  have  cited,  the  terms  used  by  them,  wholly  inconsist- 
ent, as  it  seems  to  me,  with  the  idea  that  the  adjacent  country  has  no  property,  no  do- 
minion, no  sovereignty,  no  territorial  right,  and  considering  the  necessary  foundation 
of  the  admitted  rights  and  duties  of  the  adjacent  country,  as  to  neutrality,  which  have 
always  been  made  to  depend  on  a  right  and  duty  as  to  its  territory,  I  am  of  opinioa 
that  it  is  proved  that  by  the  laws  of  nations,  made  by  the  tacit  consent  of  substantially 
all  nations,  the  open  sea  within  three  miles  of  the  coast  is  a  part  of  the  adjacent  nation, 
as  much  and  as  completely  as  if  it  were  land  and  a  part  of  the  territory  of  such  nation. 
By  the  same  evidence  which  proves  this  proposition,  it  is  equally  proved  that  every 
nation  which  possesses  this  water  territory  has  agreed  with  all  other  nations  that  all 
shall  have  the  right  of  free  navigation  to  pass  through  such  water  territory,  if  such 
navigation  be  with  an  innocent  or  harmless  intent  or  purpose.    The  right  of  free 


t\k 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


159 


empire 
terri- 
•eprimer 
uet  snr 


iconsist- 
r,  no  do- 
indatioa 
ich  liave 


;  nation, 
I  nation, 
at  every 
that  all 
r  if  such 
of  free 


navigation  cannot,  according  to  ordinary  principles,  be  ^rithdrawn  withont  common 
coMHent  J  bnt  it  by  no  means  derogates  from  the  sovereign  authority  over  all  its  ter- 
ritory of  the  state  which  has  agreed  to  grant  this  liberty  or  easement  or  right  to  all 
tlie  world. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Ooolibnrn  delivered  the  judgment  of  the  court,  from 
which  the  fullowing  pasisages  are  extracted : 

By  the  old  common  law  of  England  every  offense  was  triable  in  the  county  only  in 
which  it  had  been  committed,  as  from  that  county  alone  the  "  pais,"  as  it  was  termed, 
in  other  words,  the  jurors  by  whom  the  fact  was  to  be  ascertained,  could  comn.  But 
only  BO  much  of  the  laud  of  the  outer  coast  as  was  uncovered  by  the  sea  was  held  to 
be  within  the  body  of  the  adjoining  county.  If  an  offense  was  committed  in  a  bay, 
gulf,  or  estuary,  tn<«r /attoe«  terra;,  the  common  law  could  deal  with  it,  because  the 
parts  of  the  sea  so  circumstanced  were  held  to  be  within  the  body  of  the  adjacent 
county  or  oounties;  but,  along  the  coast,  ou  the  external  sea,  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
common  law  extended  no  further  than  to  low-water  mark. 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  admiral,  however  largely  asserted  in  theory  in  ancient  times, 
being  abandoned  as  untenable,  it  becomes  necessary  for  the  counsel  for  the  Crown  to 
have  recourse  to  a  doctrine  of  comparatively  modern  growth,  namely,  that  a  belt  of 
gea,  to  a  diHtance  of  three  miles  from  the  coast,  though  so  far  a  portion  of  the  high  seas 
as  to  be  still  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  admiral,  is  part  of  the  territory  of  the  realm, 
80  as  to  make  a  foreigner  in  »  foreign  ship,  within  such  belt,  though  on  a  voyage  to  a 
foreign  port,  sulject  to  our  law,  which  it  is  clear  he  wonld  not  be  ou  the  high  sea 
beyond  sucli  limit.  It  >s  necessary  to  keep  the  old  aSoertion  of  jurisdiction  and  that  of 
to-day  essentially  distinct ;  and  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  it  is  because  all  proof 
of  the  actual  exercise  of  any  jurisdiction  by  the  admiral  over  foreigners  in  the  narrow 
sens  totally  fails  that  it  bfcomes  necessary  to  give  to  the  three-mile  zone  the  character 
of  territory,  in  order  to  make  good  the  assertion  of  jurisdiction  over  the  foreigner 
therein. 

Now,  it  may  be  asserted  without  fear  of  contradiction,  that  the  position  that  the  sea 
within  the  belt  or  zone  of  three  miles  from  the  shore,  as  di.<tingui8hed  from  the  rest  of 
the  open  sea,  forms  part  of  the  realm  or  territory  of  the  Crown,  is  a  doctrine  unknown  to 
tlie  ancient  law  of  England,  and  which  has  never  yet  received  the  sanction  of  an  En- 
glish criminal  court  of  justice.  It  is  true  that  from  an  early  period  the  kings  of  England, 
possbssing  more  ships  than  their  opposite  neigbbors,  and  being  thence  able  to  sweep 
the  ehaniiel,  asserted  the  right  of  sovereignty  over  the  narrow  seas,  as  appears  from  the 
commissious  issued  in  the  fourteenth  century,  of  which  examples  are  given  in  the  4th  In- 
stitnte,  in  the  chapter  on  the  court  of  admiralty,  and  others  are  to  be  found  in  Selden's 
"  Mare  Clbusum,"  book  2.  At  a  later  period  still  more  extravagant  pretensions  were 
advanced.  Selden  does  not  scruple  to  assert  the  sovereignty  of  the  King  of  England 
over  the  sea  as  far  as  the  shores  of  Norway  ;  in  which  he  is  upheld  by  Lord  Hale  in 
his  treatise  "  De  Jure  Maris."     (Hargrave's  Law  Tracts,  p.  10.) 

All  these  vaiu  and  extravagant  pretensions  have  long  since  given  way  to  the  influ- 
ence of  reason  and  common  sense.  If,  indeed,  the  sovereignty  thus  asserted  had  a  real 
existence,  and  could  now  be  maintained,  it  would  of  course,  independently  of  any  ques- 
tions as  to  the  three-mile  zone,  be  conclusive  of  the  present  case.  But  the  claim  to 
such  siivereignty,  at  all  times  unfounded,  has  long  since  been  abandoned.  No  one  would 
now  dream  of  asserting  that  the  sovereigu  of  these  realms  has  any  greater  right  over 
the  Burronndiug  seas  than  thii  sovereigns  on  the  opposite  shores;  or  that  it  is  the  es- 
pecial duty  and  privilege  of  the  Queen  of  Qroat  Britain  to  keep  the  peace  in  these  seas ; 
or  that  the  Court  of  Admiralty  could  try  a  foreigner  for  an  offense  committed  in  a  for- 
eigD  vessel  in  all  parts  of  the  channel. 

The  conaenauB  of  jurists,  which  has  been  so  much  insisted  on  as  authority,  is  perfectly 
unanimous  as  to  the  nonexistence  of  any  such  jurisdiction.  Indeed,  it  is  because  this 
claim  of  sovereignty  is  admitted  to  be  untenable  that  it  has  been  found  necessary  to  resort 
to  the  theory  of  the  three-mile  zone.  It  is  in  vain ,  therefore,  that  the  ancient  assertion  of 
Bovereigiity  over  the  narrow  seas  is  invoked  to  give  counteuitice  to  the  rule  now  sought 
to  be  established,  of  jurisdiction  over  the  thiee-iuile  zone.  If  this  rule  is  to  prevail,  it 
must  be  on  altogether  different  grounds.  To  invoke  as  its  foundation  or  in  its  support^un 
assertion  of  sovereignty,  which,  tor  all  practical  purposes,  is,  and  always  bos  been,  idle 
and  unfounded,  and  the  invalidity  of  which  rendurs  it  necessary  to  have  recourse  to 
the  new  doctrine,  involves  an  inconsistency  on  which  it  would  be  superfluous  to  dwell. 
I  must  confess  myself  unable  to  comprehend  how,  when  the  ancient  doctrine  as  to  sov- 
ereignty over  the  narrow  seas  is  adduced,  its  operation  can  be  confined  to  the  three- 
mile  zone.  If  the  argument  is  good  for  anything,  it  must  apply  to  the  whole  of  the 
enrrouDding  seas.  But  the  counsel  for  the  Crow  q  evidently  shrank  from  applying  it  to 
this  extent.  Such  a  pretension  would  not  be  adu  itted  or  endured  by  foreign  nations. 
That  it  is  out  of  this  extravagant  assertion  of  sovereignty  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
three-mile  jurisdiction,  asserted  on  the  part  of  the  Crown,  and  which,  the  older  claim 
being  necessarily  abandoned,  we  are  now  called  upon  to  consider,  has  sprung  up,  I 
nadily  admit. 


160 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


From  the  review  of  thene  anthoritiea,  we  arrive  at  the  following;  reanlts.  There  can 
be  DO  doubt  that  the  8UKK*>Hti(in  of  BynlcerHhoeli,  that  the  sea  surrounding  the  co«8t 
to  the  extent  of  oanuon-range  should  be  treated  as  belonging  to  the  state  owniii);  the 
coast,  has,  with  but  very  few  exceptions,  been  accepted  and  adopted  by  the  pul>liciHti« 
wlio  nave  followed  him  during  the  last  two  centuries.  But  it  is  equally  c'ear  that, 
in  the  practical  application  of  the  rule  in  respect  of  the  particular  of  distance,  as  ui^o 
in  the  still  more  essential  ]>articu!ar  of  the  chariuster  and  degree  of  sovereignty  iiml 
dominion  to  be  exercised,  great  dilTureuce  of  opinion  and  uncertainty  have  prevailed, 
and  still  continue  to  exist. 

As  regards  distance,  while  the  majority  of  authors  have  adhered  to  the  three-mile 
zone,  otliers,  like  M.  Ortolan  and  Mr.  Halleck,  applying  with  greater  consistency  the 
principle  on  which  the  whole  doctrine  rests,  insist  i»n  extending  the  distance  to  the 
modern  range  of  cannon — in  other  words  doubling  it.  This  ditference  of  opinion  may 
be  of  little  practiciil  importance  in  the  present  instance,  inasmuuh  as  the  plnceat 
which  the  offense  occurred  was  within  the  lesser  distance;  but  it  is,  nevertheless,  not 
immaterial,  as  showing  how  unsettled  this  doctrine  still  is.  The  question  of  sover- 
eignty, on  the  other  hand,  is  all-important.    And  here  we  have  every  shade  of  opinion, 

One  set  of  writers,  a»,  for  instance,  M.  Hautefeuille,  ascribe  to  the  state  territorial 
property  and  Hovereignty  over  the  three  miles  of  sea,  to  the  extent  of  the  right  of  ex- 
olnaing  the  ships  of  all  other  nations,  even  for  the  purpose  of  passage;  a  doctrine 
flowing  immediately  from  the  principle  of  territorial  property,  but  which  is  too  mon- 
Btrons  to  be  admitted.  Another  set  concede  territorial  property  and  sovereignty, 
but  make  it  subject  to  the  right  of  o'her  nations  to  use  thene  waters  for  the  purpuw 
of  navigation.  Others  again,  like  M.  Ortolan  and  M.  Calvo,  deny  any  right  of  territo- 
rial property,  but  concede  "jurisdiction";  by  which  I  undersiand  them  to  mt-aii  the 
power  of  applying  the  law,  aiqtiicable  to  persons  on  the  land,  to  all  who  are  within  the 
territorial  warer,  and  the  powur  of  legislating  in  respect  of  it,  so  as  to  bind  every  one 
who  comes  witiiin  the  jurisdiction,  whether  sul>jects  or  fomigners.  8ome,  likH  M. 
Ortolan,  would  confine  this  jurisdiction  to  purposes  of  "safety  and  police"  ;  by  which 

I  should  be  disposed  to  nnderstand  measures  for  the  protection  of  tho  territory,  and 
for  the  regulation  of  the  navigation  and  the  use  of  harbors  and  roadsteads,  and  the 
maintenance  of  order  among  the  shipping  therein,  rather  than  the  general  application 
of  the  criminal  law. 

Other  authors — for  instance,  Mr.  Manning — would  restrict  the  jurisdiction  to  certain 
specified  purposes  in  which  the  local  state  has  an  immediate  interest;  namtsly,  the 
protection  of  its  revenue  and  fisheries,  the  exacting  of  harbor  and  light  dues,  and  the 
protection  of  its  coasts  in  time  of  war. 

Some  of  these  authors — for  instance.  Professor  Bluntschli — make  a  most  important 
distinction  between  a  commorant  and  a  ]>assingship.  According  to  this  author,  while 
the  commorant  ship  is  liable  to  the  local  jurisdiction  only  in  matters  of  "  military  and 
police  regulations  made  for  the  safety  of  the  territory  and  population  of  the  coast," 
none  of  these  writers,  it  should  lie  noted,  discuss  the  question  whether,  or  go  the  length 
of  asserting  that,  a  foreigner  in  a  foreign  ship,  using  the  waters  in  question  for  the 

}>nrpose  of  navigation  solely,  on  its  way  to  another  country,  is  liable  to  the  criminal 
aw  of  the  adjoining  country  for  an  offense  committed  on  board. 

To  those  who  assert  that,  to  the  extent  of  three  miles  from  the  coast,  the  sea  forms 
part  of  the  realm  of  England,  the  question  may  well  be  put.  When  did  it  become  ho? 
Was  it  so  from  the  beginning  f  It  certainly  was  not  deemed  t  •  be  so  as  to  a  three-mile 
zone,  any  more  than  as  to  the  rest  of  the  high  seas,  at  the  time  the  statutes  of  Richard 

II  were  passed.  For  in  those  statutes  a  clear  distmction  is  made  between  the  realm 
and  the  sea,  as  also  between  the  bodies  of  counties  and  the  sea ;  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
admiral  being  (subject  to  theexieption  already  stated  as  to  murder  and  mayhem)  con- 
fined strictly  to  the  latter,  and  its  exercise  "  within  the  realm  "  prohibited  in  terms. 
The  language  of  the  first  of  these  statutes  is  especially  remarkable :  "The  admirals 
and  their  deituties  shall  not  meddle  from  henceforth  with  any  thing  done  within  the 
realm  of  England,  but  only  with  things  done  upon  the  sea." 

It  is  impossible  not  to  be  struck  by  the  distinction  here  taken  between  the  realm  of 
England  and  the  sea;  or,  when  the  two  statutes  are  takea  together,  not  to  see  that 
the  term  "  realm,"  used  in  the  first  statute,  and  "  dodies  of  couuties,"  the  term  nsed 
in  the  second  statute,  mean  one  and  the  same  thing.  In  these  statutes,  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  admiral  is  restricted  to  the  high  seas,  and,  in  respect  of  murder  and  may- 
hem, to  the  great  rivers  below  the  bridges;  while  whatever  is  within  the  realm,  in 
other  words,  within  the  body  of  a  county,  is  left  within  the  domain  of  the  common 
law.  But  there  is  no  distinction  taken  between  one  part  of  the  high  sea  and  another. 
The  three-mile  zone  is  no  more  dealt  with  as  withiu  the  realm  than  the  seas  at  large. 
The  notion  of  a  three-mile  zone  was  in  those  days  in  the  womb  of  time.  When  its 
origin  is  traced,  it  is  found  to  be  of  comparatively  modern  growth. 

For  centuries  before  it  was  thought  of,  the  great  landmarks  of  onr  judicial  system 
bad  been  set  fast;  the  jurisdiction  of  the  common  law  over  the  land,  and  the  inland 
waters  contained  within  it,  forming  together  the  realm  of  England;  that  of  the 


AWARD   OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


161 


forms 
iniB  sof 
mile 
cliard 
realm 
of  the 
)  con- 
terms. 
Imirals 
thill  the 


system 

I  inland 

of  the 


admiral  over  Eiijjlisb  vesseln  on  the  8ea«,  the  coiiiuiou  luoporty  or  highway  of  man- 
klri<l. 

ISiit  fo  what,  ftftor  all,  do  theHo  niicieiit  anthnritics  amount?  Of  what  avail  are 
tlicy  to\var<lM  fxtabliNhiinr  that  the  soil  in  the  throe-iiiilt!  zoiu'  is  jiart  of  the  territorial 
ildinaiii  of  tlie  Crown  *  Tlu'se  ahHertitniM  of  sovt^reijjnty  wtMo  niaiiifcNtly  liaHed  on  the 
iloctiiiie  that  the  narrow  MrnM  are  part  of  the  realm  of  Kn^^land.  But  that  doctrine  in 
iMiw  txiiltided.  Who  at  this  day  would  venture  to  aniriii  that  the  8o\  erei>{nty  thuH 
asNcrttMl  in  tlioHe  times  now  exists  T  What  Ennllsh  lawyer  is  there  who  would  not 
sill  ink  fi'fun  maintaining,  what  foreij;n  jurist  who  would  not  deny,  what  foreif^n  gov- 
(•rniiieiit  whieh  would  not  rejiel,  such  a  jirettMision  /  I  listened  carefully  to  see  whether 
;iiiy  Hiicli  asseition  would  he  made;  but  none  was  made.  No  one  has  ^one  the  lenj{th 
(if  Mnji){e8tinn,  much  less  of  openly  asserting,  that  the  Jurisdiction  still  exists.  It 
hecins  to  me  to  follow,  that,  when  the  sovereignty  and  jiMisdiclioii  tVoiii  which  the 
jii(i|iei  ty  in  the  soil  of  the  sea  was  inferred  is  gone,  the  territorial  which  was  sni;gested 
t<i  III'  i'iiiisei|Uent  upon  it  must  necessarily  go  with  it. 

lint  we  are  met  here  by  a  subtle  and  ingenious  argument.  It  is  said  that,  although 
the  iliictrine  of  the  criminal  Jurisdiction  of  the  aduiiral  over  foreigners  on  the  foitr 
Hca.s  has  died  out  and  can  no  longer  be  upheld,  yet,  as  now,  by  the  consent  o)  other 
iiatitiiis,  sovereignty  over  this  territorial  sea  is  conceded  to  us,  tint  Jurisdiction 
fiii'inerly  asserted  may  be  revived  and  made  to  attach  to  the  newly-aciiuired  domain. 
1  ant  luiable  to  adopi.  this  reasmiing.  L'x  cihiuhhw,  the  Jiiiisdiction  over  foreigners  in 
t'drcigii  ships  never  really  existed ;  al  all  events,  it  has  long  been  dead  and  buried; 
even  I  he  ghost  of  it  has  been  laid.  Hut  it  is  evoked  from  its  grave,  and  brought  to 
lilc.  I'or  the  [uirpose  of  applying  it  to  a  part  of  the  sea  whicli  was  includctl  in  the 
wiidle,  as  to  whi(th  it  is  now  luactically  admitted  that  it  never  existed.  From  the 
time  the  Jurisdiction  was  assertwl  to  the  time  when  the  pretension  to  it  was  dropped, 
it  was  asserted  over  this  portion  of  the  sea  as  )>art  of  the  whole,  to  whicli  the  Jnrisdic- 
tidii  was  said  tt>  extend.  If  it  was  bad  as  to  the  whole  indiscriminately,  it  was  bad  as 
t(i  every  ])art  of  the  whole.  Ibit  why  was  it  bad  as  to  the  whole  ,'  .Simply  because 
the  Jurisdiction  did  not  extend  to  foreigners  in  foreign  ships  on  the  high  seas.  J$nt 
tlie  waters  in  question  have  always  formed  part  of  the  high  seas.  They  are  alleged  in 
this  indictment  to  be  so  now.  How,  then,  can'  the  admiral  have  the  jiirisdict-  'i  over 
them  contended  for,  if  he  had  it  not  before  .'  There  having  been  no  uew  statute  con- 
ferring it,  how  has  he  acquired  it? 

First,  then,  let  us  see  how  the  nuttter  stands  ns  regards  tre.ities  It  may  bo  asserted, 
witlmut  fear  of  contradiction,  that  the  iiile  that  the  sea  surrounding  the  coast  is  to  be 
treated  as  a  jiart  of  the  adjactuit  territory,  so  that  the  State  shall  have  exclusive 
(idiiiiiiion  over  it,  and  that  the  law  of  the  latter  shall  be  generally  applicable  to  those 
passing  over  it  in  the  ships  of  other  nations,  has  never  been  made  the  subject-matter 
of  any  treaty,  or,  as  mat  ter  of  acknowledged  right,  has  forinetl  the  basis  of  any  treaty, 
or  Las  even  been  the  subject  of  diplomatic  discussion.  It  has  been  entirely  the  crea- 
tidii  of  the  writers  on  international  law.  It  is  true  that  the  wi  iters  who  have  been 
cited  constantly  refer  to  treaties  in  snpjiortof  the  doctrine  they  assert.  Hut  when  the 
treaties  they  rett.«r  to  are  looked  at,  they  will  be  found  to  relate  to  two  subjects  only — 
the  (il)servance  of  the  rights  and  oi)l!gations  of  neutrality,  and  the  exclusive  right  of 
tisiiiiig.  Ill  fixing  the  limits  to  which  these  rights  should  extend,  nations  have  so  far 
fdlldweil  the  writers  on  international  law  as  to  adopt  the  three-mile  range  as  a  con- 
venient distance.  There  are  several  treaties  by  which  nations  have  engaged,  in  the 
event  rif  either  of  them  being  at  war  with  a  third,  to  treat  the  sea  within  three  miles 
of  each  other's  coasts  as  neutral  territory,  within  which  no  warlike  operations  should 
lie  carried  on,  instances  of  which  will  be  fonud  in  the  various  treaties  on  iuternatioual 
law. 

A{;ain.  nations  possessing  opijosite  or  neighboring  coasts,  bordering  on  a  common  sea, 
have  sometimes  found  it  expedient  to  agree  that  the  subjects  of  each  shall  exercise  an 
exiliisi\e  right  of  fishing  to  a  given  distance  from  their  own  shores,  and  here,  also, 
have  accejited  the  three-mile  as  a  convenient  distance.  Such,  for  instance,  are  the 
tn'aties  made  between  this  country  and  the  United  .States  in  relation  to  the  fishery  off 
the  roast  of  Newfoundland,  and  those  between  this  country  and  l-'rauce  in  relation  to 
the  tisliery  on  their  respective  shores  ;  and  local  laws  have  been  passed  to  give  effect 
t(i  these  engagements, 

lint  in  all  these  treaties  this  distance  is  adopted,  not  as  a  matter  of  existing  right 
I'stalilished  by  the  general  law  of  nations,  but  as  matter  of  mutual  concession  and 
Kiuveiition.  Instead  of  upholding  the  doctrine  contended  for,  the  fact  of  these  treaties 
having  been  entered  into  has  rather  the  opposite  tendency  ;  for  it  is  obvious  that,  if 
the  territorial  right  of  a  nation  bordering  on  the  sea  to  this  portion  of  the  adjacent 
waters  had  been  established  by  the  common  assent  of  nations,  these  treaty  arrange- 
uientH  would  have  been  wh(dly  superfluous.  Each  nation  would  have  been  bound, 
independently  of  treaty  engagement,  to  respect  the  neutrality  of  the  other  in  these 
waters  as  much  as  in  its  inland  waters.  The  foreigner  invading  the  rights  of  the 
lecal  fishermen  would  have  been  amenable,  consistently  with  international  law,  to 

11  P 


h 


H 


162 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


local  legislation  prohibiting  such  infringement,  without  any  stipnlation  to  that  effect 
by  treaty.  For  what  object,  then,  have  treaties  been  resorted  to?  Manifestly  in 
order  to  obviate  all  questions  as  to  concurrent  or  conflicting  rights  arising  under  the 
law  of  nations.  Possibly,  after  these  precedents  and  all  that  has  been  written  on  tbig 
subject,  it  may  not  be  too  much  to  aay  that,  independently  of  treaty,  the  three-mile 
belt  of  sea  might  at  this  day  be  taken  as  belonging,  for  these  purposes,  to  the  local 
state. 

So  much  for  treaties.  Then  how  stands  the  matter  as  to  usage,  to  which  reference 
is  so  frequently  made  by  the  publicists  in  support  of  their  doctrine?  When  the  wiat- 
ter  is  looked  into,  the  only  usage  fouud  to  exist  is  such  as  is  con-iected  with  naviga- 
tion, or  with  revenue,  local  tisheries,  or  neutrality  ;  aud  it  is  to  ^hese  alone  that  the 
usage  relied  on  is  confined. 

It  may  well  be,  I  say  again,  that,  after  all  that  has  been  said  and  done  in  this 
respect,  after  the  instances  which  have  been  mentioned  of  the  adoption  of  the  three- 
mile  distance,  and  the  repeated  assertion  of  this  doctrine  by  the  writers  on  pnl)lic 
law,  a  nation  which  should  now  deal  with  this  portion  of  the  sea  as  its  own,  so  as  to 
make  foreigners  within  it  subject  to  its  law,  for  the  prevention  and  punishment  of 
offenses,  would  not  be  considered  as  infringing  the  rights  of  other  nations.  But  1 
apprehend  that,  as  the  ability  so  to  deal  with  these  waters  would  result,  not  from  any 
original  or  inherent  right,  but  from  the  acquiescence  of  other  states,  some  outward 
manifestation  of  the  national  will,  in  the  shape  of  open  practice  or  municipal  legisia. 
tion,  so  as  to  amount,  at  least  constructively,  to  an  occiipatiou  of  that  which  was 
before  unappropriated,  would  be  necessary  to  render  the  foreigner  not  previously 
amenable  to  our  general  law  subject  to  its  control. 

And  this  brings  me  to  the  second  branch  of  the  argument,  namely,  that  the  juris- 
diction having  been  asserted  as  to  the  narrow  seas  at  tlie  time  the  statute  passed, 
it  must  be  taken  to  have  been  transferred  by  the  statute.  The  answer  to  such  a  con- 
tention is  that,  no  reference  being  made  in  the  statute  to  this  now  exi»loded  claim  of 
sovereignty,  we  must  read  the  statute  as  having  transferred— as,  indeed,  it  could 
•  alone  transfer — such  jurisdiction  only  as  actually  existed.  Jurists  are  now  agreed 
that  the  claim  to  exclusive  dominion  over  the  narrow  seas,  and  consequent  jurisdic- 
tion over  foreigners  for  otl'tuises  committed  thereon,  was  extravagant  and  unfouudcd, 
and  the  doctrine  oi'  the  three-mile  jurisdiction  hiis  taken  the  place  of  all  such  jjreten- 
sions.  In  truth,  though  largely  asserted  in  theory,  the  jurisdiction  was  never  practi- 
cally exercised  in  respect  of  foreigners. 

Hitherto,  legislation,  so  far  as  relates  to  foreigners  in  foreign  shijjs  in  this  part  of 
the  t^ea,  has  been  confined  to  the  maintenance  of  neutral  rights  and  obligations,  the 
prevention  of  breaches  of  the  revenue  and  lisliery  luws,  and,  under  ])articular  circuni- 
stan",e8,  tocases  of  collision.  In  the  two  first,  the  legislation  is  altogether  irrespective 
of  the  thre(i-niile  distance,  being  f'oundtd  on  a  totally  different  principle,  namely,  the 
right  of  a  State  to  tal'e  all  necessary  measures  for  tlie  protection  of  its  territory  aud 
rights,  and  the  prevention  of  any  breach  of  its  revenue  laws. 

Such  are  the  fft^iieral  principles  of  English  law  to-day  aa  hiid  down  by 
the  Chief  Justice  of  England.  Tiie  jurisdiction  of  a  state  or  country 
over  its  adjoining  waters  is  limited  to  three  miles  from  low-water  mark 
along  its  .scii  coast,  and  the  same  rule  applies  e(iuiilly  to  bays  artd  gulfs 
whose  width  exceeds  six  miles  from  headland  to  heatlland.  Property 
in  and  dominion  over  the  sea  can  only  exist  as  to  those  portions  capable 
of  permanent  possession  ;  that  is,  of  a  possession  from  the  laud,  wliicli 
possession  can  ouiy  he  maintained  l)y  artillery.  Atone  mile  beyond  tlie 
reach  of  coast-guns  there  is  no  more  possession  than  in  tnidocean.  Tliis 
is  the  rule  laid  down  by  almost  all  the  writers  ou  irtternational  law,  a 
few  extracts  from  whom  we  proceed  to  quote: 

At  present  [says  Vattel,  Law  of  Nations,  liook  1,  ch,  xxiii,  $}  289,  21)1]  the  whole 
space  of  the  sea  within  eaiuiou-.shot  of  the  coast  is  eonsidered  as  making  a  part  of  the 
territory ;  and,  for  that  reason,  a  vessel  taken  under  the  guns  of  a  neutral  fortress  is 
not  a  good  prixe. 

All  we  have  said  of  the  parts  of  the  sea  near  the  const  may  be  said  more  particularly, 
and  with  much  greater  reason,  of  the  roads,  hays,  aud  straits,  as  still  more  cipable  of 
being  occupied,  and  of  greater  iini»ortauee  to  the  safety  of  the  country.  But  I  speak 
of  the  bays  and  straits  of  small  extent,  and  not  of  those  great  jiarts  of  the  sea  to  which 
these  names  are  sometimes  given — as  Hudson's  Bay  and  the  Htraits  of  Magellan— over 
which  the  empire  cannot  extend,  and  still  less  a  right  of  property.  A  bay  whose  en- 
trance may  be  d«  fended  may  be  ))ossessed  and  renilored  subject  to  the  laws  of  the  sov- 
ereign; and  it  is  of  importance  that  it  should  be  so,  since  the  couutry  may  be  ninch 
more  easily  insulted  in  such  a  place  than  on  the  coast,  open  to  the  winds  and  the  im- 
petuosity of  the  waves. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


163 


fr 


Professor  Bluntschli,  iu  his  Law  of  Nations  (book  4,  §§  302, 309),  states 
the  rule  in  the  same  way: 

When  the  frontier  of  a  8tate  is  formed  by  the  open  sea,  the  jtart  of  the  sea  over  wuich 
the  state  can  from  the  shore  make  its  power  res])ected— i.«.,  a  jiortion  of  the  sea  ex- 
tending as  far  as  a  cannou-shot  from  the  coast — is  considered  as  belongiii<r  to  the  terri- 
tory of  that  state.    Treaties  or  agreements  can  establish  other  and  more  precise  limits. 

NoTK. — The  extent  practiced  of  this  sovereignty  has  remarkably  increased  since  the 
invention  of  far-shooting  cannon.  This  is  the  conseciuence  of  the  im)>rovement8  made 
in  the  means  of  defense,  of  which  the  state  makes  nse.  The  sovereignty  of  states  over 
tlie  sea  extended  originally  only  to  a  stone's  throw  from  the  coast;  later,  to  an  arrow's 
shot;  fire-arms  were  invented,  and  by  rapid  progress  we  have  arrived  to  the  far-shootin); 
cannon  of  the  present  age.  But  still  we  preserve  the  principle,  " Terra;  dominium  Jinitur, 
«/;i  fiuitur  armonim  vix. 

Within  certain  limits,  there  are  snbmittcd  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  bordering  state — 

(a)  The  portion  of  the  sea  placed  within  a  cannon-shot  of  the  shore. 

(6)  Harbors. 

((■)  Gulfs. 

(d)  Koadsteads. 

Note. — Certain  i)ortions  of  the  sea  are  so  nearly  Joined  to  th<5  terra  firma  that,  in 
>H)nie  nieasnre  at  least,  they  ought  to  form  a  part  of  the  territory  of  the  bordering 
state;  tliey  are  considered  as  accessories  to  the  terra  firma.  The  safety  of  the  state, 
and  the  public  (xuiet,  are  so  dependent  on  them  that  they  cannot  be  contented,  in  cer- 
tain gulfs,  with  the  portion  of  the  se.i  lying  under  the  fire  of  cannon  from  the  coast. 
Tliese  exceptions  from  the  general  rule  of  the  libi^rty  of  the  sea  can  only  be  made  for 
weighty  reasons,  and  when  the  extent  of  the  arm  of  the  sea  is  not  large;  thns,  Hud- 
son's Hay  and  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  evidently  are  a  i)art  of  the  open  sea.  No  one  disputes 
tho  power  of  England  over  the  arm  of  the  sea  lying  between  the  Isle  of  Wight  and  the 
P',ii}fiisli  coast,  which  could  not  be  admitted  for  the  sea  lying  betwei'u  England  and 
Inland;  the  English  admiralty  has,  however,  sometimes  maintained  the  theory  of 
•narrow  seas",  and  has  tried,  but  without  success,  to  keep  for  its  own  interest,  under 
the  name  of  "  King's  chambers,"  some  considerable  extents  of  the  sea. 

Kliiber  (Droit  des  Geus  Modernes  de  I'Europe,  Paris,  ed.  1831,  vol. 

i.  p.  210) : 

An  territf>ire  maritime  d'un  (>tat  appartiennent  les  districts  maritiines,  on  parages 
susceptibles  d'une  ])osHession  exclusive,  snr  lesquels  I'etat  a  accjuis  (par  occupation  on 
iiiMvcntiou)  et  continue  lasonverainet<>.  Sont  do  ce  nombre,  (I)  Les  partiesde  l'oc6au 
i[ui  avoisinent  le  territoire  continental  do  I'tStat,  du  nioins,  d'apres  l'o]>inion  i>resque 
^iT.iMaleuieut  adoptee,  autaiit  qu'elles  se  trouvent  sous  la  portce  dn  canon  (jui  serait 
[ilaciJ  Miir  li^  rivage;  ("i)  les  parties  de  I'ocoan  (jni  s'otendent  dans  le  territoire  conti- 
lU'iitai  de  I'etat,  si  elles  peuvent  etro  gonvern^ies  par  le  canon  des  deux  linrds,  on  que 
Icntroi^  senlement  en  pent  etre  d^fendue  anx  vaisseaiix  (g(dfes,  baion,  et  cales) ;  (;{)  les 
(ii'troiiH  (|ui  8eparent<ieux  coutinens.et  qui  i^galement  sont  sous  la  port<^edu  canon  plac6 
siir  It)  rivage,  on  dont  I'entrde  et  la  sortie  peuvent  etre  det'endues  (dotroit,  canal,  bos- 
lihiirc, soiiil).  Sont  encore  du  meine  nombre,  (4)  les  golfes,  d<5troits,  et  niers  avoisinant 
let(',niti)ire  continental  d'un  (^tat,  lesquels,  ()Uoiqu'ils  no  soient  pasenti^renu;nt  sous  la 
poiii'cdu  canon,  sont  n<>aumoins  reconnus  par  d'autres  puissances  (M>nime  nier  fernu^e  ; 
I't'Nt-a  ilire,  eonuue  sousmis  i\  uno  domination,  et,  par  const^quent,  inaccessibles  aux 
vaisscaux  Strangers  (jui  n'ont  point  obtenu  la  permission  d'y  naviguer. 

Ortolan,  ill  his  "  Diploinatie  de  la  Mer"  (|)p.  145,  1.53,  ed.  18GJ),  after 
la.viii},'  down  the  rule  that  a  nation  had  control  over  the  navijjatiou  iu 
II  strait  or  road  whose  width  did  L">t  exceed  six  miles,  continues: 

On  doit  ranger  sur  la  nieme  ligne  que  rades  et  les  portes  les  golfes  et  les  bales,  et  tons 
li'H  ent'oMeemeiits  connus  sous  d'autres  denominations,  lorsqueces  enfonceiiients,  fornids 
par  Us  ferres  d'un  nuune  6tat,  ne  d(5passent  pas  en  largeiu'  la  double  portec  tUi  canon, 
uM  lorsipie  I'entree  pent  en  «>tre  gouvern6e  par  I'artillerie,  on  qu'elleest  ddt'endue  natii- 
ri'lleniHut  par  des  lies,  par  des  bancs,  on  par  des  roches.  Dans  tons  ces  cas,  en  elt'et,  il 
estyrai  dt;  dire  que  ces  golfes  on  ces  bales  sont  en  la  puissance  de  l'<^tat  mattredu  ter- 
ritoire ((ui  les  enserre.  CeC  (Stat  en  a  la  possession:  tons  les  raisonnements  <iue  nous 
avons  lait  ii  I't'^gard  des  rades  et  des  ports  peuvent  se  rdp6ter  ici.  Les  bords  et  rivages 
ili^  la  iner  (pii  baigne  les  o6tes  d'un  6tat  sont  les  limites  maritimes  nalurelles  de  cet  6tat. 
MaiH  pour  la  protection  pour  la  defense  plus  etticaoe  de  ces  limites  naturelles,  la  cou- 
tunie  ^^n6rale  des  nations,  d'accord  avec  beaucoup  de  traitds  publics,  permettre  tracer 
Kiir  niur,  ii  une  distance  convenable  des  cAtes,  et  siiivant  leurs  contimrs,  une  ligne 
iiiiaKinairc  qui  doit  6tre  con8id<Sr6e  comme  la  frontii>re  maritime  artilicielle.  Tout 
liatinient  qui  se  trouve  &  terre  de  cette  ligne  est  dit  6tre  dans  les  eaux  de  l'6tut  dout 
•-'He  limite  le  droit  de  soiiveraiuetd  et  dejuridiction. 


I: 


164 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Hautefeuille  (Droits  et  Devoirs  des  Xations  Heutres,  torn.  1,  tit.  1, 
cb.  3,  §  1) : 

La  Hier  est  libre  d'line  inauiire  abaolne,  saiif  les  eanx  baignant  les  cotes,  qui  font 
pai'tie  dn  doinaiiie  de  la  nation  riveraiiie.  Les  causes  de  cetto  exception  soiit,  (1) 
(jue  ces  poifions  de  I'ocean  sont  sn8cei»tibles  d'une  possession  continue;  ("2)  niif  Ic 
peuple  <|ui  les  possede  pent  en  exclure  les  aiitres ;  (15)  qu'il  a  iutdret,  soit  ])oiir  hij 
sdcurit*"',  soit  pour  couserver  les  iivautajjes  <|u'il  tire  de  la  nier  territoriale,  a  proni)in,'or 
cette  exclusion.  Ces  causes  connnes,  il  est  facile  de  poser  les  liniites.  Le  doiiiaiiit 
maritime  s'arrete  a  I'eudroit  oii  cesse  la  possession  continue,  on  le  penitle  proprictiiire 
ne  pent  plus  exercer  sa  pnissauce,  a  I'eudroit  oil  il  ne  pent  plus  exclure  les  dtraiifjers, 
enfln  a  I'endroit  on,  lenr  presence  n'6tant  plus  dangereuse  pour  sa  sftrett?,  il  n'ii  [ilus 
iut^ret  de  les  exclure. 

Or,  le  point  oil  cessent  les  trois  canses  rini  rendent  la  mer  suaceptiblo  de  possession 
priv<5e  est  le  nictne:  c'est  la  liniite  de  la  puissance,  ijui  est  n^presentt^e  paries  niaciiiiies 
de  guerre.  Tout  I'espace  i>arcouru  jiar  les  projectiles  lances  du  rivage,  prot<ig('  et  dc- 
fendu  ]iar  la  puissance,  de  ces  machines,  est  territorial,  et  sonmis  an  domaine  dn  in.-iitiv 
de  la  cote.  La  ]dus  grande  porti5e  du  canon  monte  a  terre  est  done  rdeliemeut  la  liiuite 
de  la  mer  territoriale. 

Kn  ett'et,  cet  ewpace  seul  est  r<^ellement  souniis  a  la  ])ui8s,ance  du  souverain  territo- 
rial, la,  mais  la  seulenieiit,  il  pent  faire  respecter  et  executer  ses  lois  ;  il  a  la  puissiinoe 
de  punir  les  iniracteurs,  d'exclure  ceiix  (|u'il  ne  jieut  jias  admettre.  Dans  cette  liiiiitc, 
la  prt'sence  de  vaisseanx  etrangers  vent  menacer  sa  surete  ;  au  dela,  elle  est  inditH'ifiite 
pour  lui,  elle  ne  pent  lui  causer  aucune  inrjui«5tude,  car,  an  dela  de  la  portee  du  canon, 
lis  ne  peuvent  lui  nuire.  La  liniite  de  la  mer  territoriale  est  rtSellemeut,  d'apns  If 
droit  primitif,  la  jiortee  d"un  canon  plac6  a  terre. 

Le  droit  secondaire  a  sanctionnd  cette  disposition  ;  la  plupart  des  traitds  fiiii  ont 
parl<S  de  cette  portion  de  la  mer  ont  adojitc  la  meine  legle.  Grotius,  Hubner,  Byiikcr- 
shoek,  Vattel,  (ialiani,  Aznni,  Kliiber,  et  presfiue  tons  les  publicistes  niodernes  les  iihit 
jnsteineut  estiuies,  ont  pris  la  portee  du  canon  comme  la  seule  liiuite  de  la  mer  torii- 
toriale  (|ui  fut  rationelle  et  cttnt'onne  aux  piescriiitions  du  droit  primitif.  Cette  liniite 
naturelle  a  dt^  reconnue  par  un  grand  uombre  de  peuples,  dans  les  lois  et  rdgleineuts 
iutdrieurs.      ##»*»♦=» 

Les  cotes  de  la  mer  ne  prdsentent  yias  nue  ligno  droite  et  rdguliere;  elles  sont,  an 
coutraire,  pres(|ue  toujours  couiides  de  bales,  de  caps,  etc.;  si  le  domaine  luarilinie 
devait  toujours  etre  niesure  de  cliacun  des  points  du  rivage,  il  en  resulterjiit  des  gra\  "s 
incouvdnients.  Aus^i,  est-on  convenn,dans  I'usage  de  tirer  nne  ligne  Active  d'un  jiij- 
montoire  a  Tautre,  et  de  jirendre  cette  ligne  luiiir  point  de  ddpart  de  la  portee  du  ciinoii. 
Ce  mode,  adoptd  par  presipie  tons  les  peuples,  ne  s'appliqne  (|u'aux  petites  bales,  ci  nou 
aux  gidfes  d'uue  grande  efendiie,  eonipu;  le  golfe  de  Gascoigue,  comme  celiii  de  Lyon, 
qui  sont  en  lealitd  de  grandes  i)arties  de  mer  cinnpletemeiit  ouvertes,  et  dont  il  est  im- 
possible de  nier  rassiinilation  conii>l«ite  avec  la  haute  mer. 

Tlie  latest  Englisli  writer,  Mr.  Amos,  in  bis  edition  of  Manninji's  Law 
of  Nations,  wbicb  is  praised  and  qnoted  witli  approval  by  Lord  Cock- 
burn  in  (Jmen  v.  Kajn,  extends  tbe  jurisdiction  of  a  state  to  the  waters 
of  bays  whose  width  is  more  than  six  miles  and  less  than  ten: 

An  obvious  riglit,  enjoyed  by  every  state  equally,  i.'>  the  claim  to  have  an  equal  share 
in  the  enjoyment  of  such  things  as  are  in  their  nature  common  to  all,  whether  from  not 
being  suscejitibleof  apiii'oi>riation,  or  irom  not  having  been  asyet,  in  fact,api)ropriate(l. 
Such  a  thing,  pre-eminently,  is  the  open  sea,  whether  treated  for  purposes  of  inivi!;a- 
tioii  or  fishing.  »  *  *  JJevertheless,  for  some  limited  i>urposes,  a  special  right  ot' 
jurisdiction,  and  even  (for  a  few  definite  purjioses)  of  dominion,  is  conceded  to  a  Ntate 
in  resjK'ctof  the  part  of  the  ocean  imii'e<liately  adjoining  its  own  coast  line.  The  pur- 
poses for  which  this  jurisdiction  and  dominion  have  been  recognized  are,  (1)  the  rcjjn- 
lation  of  fisheries  ;  ('J)  the  prevention  of  frauds  on  customs  laws;  (;i)  the  exaction  of 
harbor  and  light-house  dues;  and  (4)  the  protection  of  the  territory  from  violation  in 
time  of  war  lietween  other  states.  The  distance  from  the  coast  Mne  to  which  this 
qualified  privilege  extends  has  been  variously  measured  ;  the  most  prevalent  dislanei'S 
being  that  of  a  cannon-shot,  or  of  a  marine  league  from  the  shore.  *  *  •  In  the 
case  of  bays,  harbors,  and  creeks,  it  is  a  well-recognized  custom,  provided  the  oijcninj; 
be  not  more  than  ten  miles  in  width  as  measured  from  headland  to  headland,  to  take 
the  line  joining  the  headlands,  and  to  measure  from  that  the  length  of  the  distance  of 
a  cannon-shot,  or  of  a  marine  league.  The  limiting  provision  here  introduced  was  ren- 
dered necessary  by  the  great  width  of  some  of  the  American  bays,  such  as  the  liayof 
Fundy  and  Hudson's  Bay,  in  respect  of  which  questions  relating  espocially  to  rights  of 
fishing  had  arisen.  At  one  time,  indeed,  the  distance  of  six  miles,  in  place  of  that  of 
ten  miles,  was  contended  for.  It  is  held  that,  in  the  ease  of  straits  or  narrow  seas  less 
than  six  miles  in  breadth,  the  general  jurisdiction  and  control  is  equally  shared  hy  all 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


165 


tlio  states  the  territories  of  which  form  tlie  coastlines;  and  that  all  the  states  are 
iit'lil  bound,  in  times  of  peace  at  auj-  rate,  to  allow  a  free  passage  at  all  times  to  the 
ships  of  war  of  all  other  states. 

Martens,  "Precis  du  Droit  des  Gens  Moderues  de  I'Enrope"  (Pin- 
bciro  Ferriera,  ed.  Paris,  1864),  §§  40,  41: 

C'c  qui  vient  d'etre  dit  des  rivieres  et  des  lacs  oat  <?galenient  ai>plical)le  aux  dt^troits 
(le  nier  at  anx  golfs,  snrtont,  en  taut  quo  cenx-ci  ue  passent  pas  la  largeur  ordinaire 
des  rivit  res,  on  la  double  port<5e  du  canon. 

Dc  iiieme  une  nation  pent  s'attribner  nu  droit  exclnslf  snr  ces  parties  voisines  de  la 
nier  (mare  proximiim)  snsceptibles  d'etre  maintennes  du  rivage.  On  aononec  diverses 
opinions  sur  la  distance  h laqutlle  s'etendent  les  droits  du  niaitre  du  rivage.  Aujour- 
il'lmi  toutes  les  nations  de  I'Enrope  conviennent  que,  dans  la  regie,  les  detroits,  les 
jjolfcs,  la  nier  voisine,  appartiennent  au  maitre  du  rivugo,  pjur  lo  moins  jusqu'a  la 
pdrti'o  du  canon  qui  pourrait  etre  jdace  sur  le  rivage. 

On  vena  ri-apris  que  le  pleiue  uier  ue  pent  devenir  I'objet  d'uno  propriete  plus  on 
iiiiiiiis  exclusi\e,  d'une  part  parce  que  son  usage  est  iiiopnisable  (!t  innocent  en  lui- 
iiK'iiie,  <l'autre  part  parce  tpio,  n'6taut  pas  de  nature  a  etre  occupee,  persoune  ue  pent 
h'opposer  a  sou  usage  ;  uiais  de  ce  ([ue  la  mer  n'est  susceptible  de  I'appropriation  de 
riioiinne,  par  suite  <lo  I'impossibilite  pour  lui  de  la  rdteuir  sous  son  oboissance,  ot  d'en 
cxcliire  les  autres  homnies;  at  anssi,  i\  raison»de  son  imniensitd  et  dc  sa  qualitcS  d'etre 
iiiopuisiible,  il  rdsulte  i|ue  pour  les  parties  de  l'oc(5au  qui  ne  rennissent  pas  ces  condi- 
tions, pour  cellos  (jui  par  leur  nature  peuvent  subir  la  tlomination  de  riioiume  et  I'ex- 
cliisioii  des  autres,  pour  celles,  enliu,  dont  I'usage  conimun  ne  saurit  etre  maintenu 
suns  iiuire  a  la  nation  interess«5e,  et  (pii  sont  snsceptibles  do  pro]>ri6t*^,  le  principo  de 
la  libi'ite  s'etVace  et  disparatt.  Cela  a  lieu  notaninient  pour  les  niers  territoriales  et 
pour  les  uiers  fernit'^es.  Par  rexpression  de  "mors  territoriales,"  il  taut  outendro  celles 
i|ni  baignent  les  cOtes  d'uue  nation  et.  la  serveut  pour  ainsi  dire  de  frontiere.  Ces 
iiiers  sont  souniises  a  la  nation  niaUrcsse  do  la  c6te  qu'elles  baignent,  et  peuvent 
t'lie  rodiiites  sous  la  puissance  de  la  nation  propri(''taire  ((ui  a  d<>s  lors  le  droit  d'en  ex- 
chire  les  autres.  La  possession  eat  sontenne,  entiere,  de  nieme  que  s'il  s'agissait  d'uu 
tli'Mve,(l'iin  lai',  on  d'une  partie  de  territorie  continental.  Anssi  tons  les  traites  recon- 
iiaisscnt  anx  nations  da:is  uu  interet  de  navigation,  de  pechc.  et  anssi  de  defense,  lo 
droit  (riiiiposer  lenr  lois  dans  les  niers  territoriales  (|ui  les  bordeut,  de  nieine  ([ue  tons 
Ifs  piililicistesj  s'accordent  pour  attribuer  la  propriete  de  la  mer  teriitoriiile  a  la  nation 
rivi'Viiine.  Mais  oil  s'est  longtenips  demand)^  quelle  etait  retenduo  de  oette  partio 
liriviiegiue  de  la  uier.  Les  anciens  auteurs  portaient  trivs-loins  les  liinites  du  terri- 
toii'cs  niaritimes,  les  uns  a  soixante  uiilies,  c'l^tait  r<)pinii>n  gt'^nerale  an  quatorziiMue 
siii'li';  les  autres  a  cent  inilles.  Loceenius.  do  Jar.  Marit.,  lib.  v.  cap.  iv.  vS  ti.  parle  do 
(Ipux  joiirnees  de  cliemin  ;  Valin,  dans  son  <  oinmentaire  xur  I'Orduinaiiie  dc  lli"'!,  propose 
la  sonde,  la  portee  du  canou,  on  une  distance  de  deux  lienes. 

l)"aiitres  auteurs  out  pense  ([ue  retendne  de  la  mer  territorialene  pouvaitetre  r(^gl<5o 
(Vinie  inaiiiere  nnifornie,  niais  devait  etre  jiroporticuiee  a  I'iuipcu'tance  de  la  nation 
riveriiine.  Au  milieu  de  ces  opinions  contradictoires  il  fant,  suivant  Ilautefeuille, 
'■  Iiroitu  (I  Deroirx  dvn  yalioitu  Xcitlirn,'"  'id  edit.  t.  i.  i>.  .*i".{  et  suiv.,  pour  fixer  ces  princi- 
pi's,  reinonter  aux  causes  qui  out  fait  excepter  de  la  regie  de  la  liberte  des  mers,  les 
i-aux  baignent  les  cotes,  et  qui  les  out  fiit  rangt^'  dans  la  doniaine  do  la  nation  rivo- 
laiiie.  Ces  cansesjdtant  que  ces  portions  de  la  mer  sont  snsceptibles  il'une  i)ossession 
iiintiinio;  que  le  penple  ([ui  les  jtossede  jtent  en  exeluie  les  autres;  eniin,  iin'il  a 
iiitoret  a  prononcer  cette  exclusion,  soit  pour  sa  se'cnritr-.  soit  a  raison  des  avantages 
quo  liii  procure  la  mer  territm-iale,  le  donuiine  maritime  doit  cesser  la  ofi  cesso  la  i)os- 
session  continue,  la  oil  cessent  d'atteindre  les  machines  de  guerres.  Vai  d'antres  termes, 
la  jilns  grando  ]»ortt'^e  du  canon  \}\{ic6  a  terre  est  la  limite  de  la  mer  territoriale — terro; 
potistKH  fiiiitHi;  iibitiiiilur  ariiior>im  ris ;  et  nous  devons  ajouter  que  la  plupartdes  traitc^s 
out  adoptt'  cette  regie  ;  beaucoup  (le  peuples  I'out  reeonnue  dans  lenr  lois  et  lour 
ro^flcnients  int(5rieurs  ;  ))resque  tons  les  publicistes  I'ont  regavii<^e  comme  ratiouelle, — 
luitannnent  Grotius,  Hubiu'r,  liynkershoek,  Vattol,(Jaliaui,  A/uni,  Kliilxsr. 

An  I'este,  le  donmine  maritime  ne  se  inesure  pas  de  chacun  des  points  du  rivage.  On 
tire  liabituellement  une  ligne  tietive  d'uu  promontoire  a  I'autre,  et  on  la  ]irend  comme 
point  de  (leparte  de  la  port<?e  du  canon ;  cela  se  pratique  ainsi  pour  les  petites  baies, 
lisfrolfi's  d'nue  grande  6tenduo  otant  assiniil<;s  a  le  pleiue  mer.  La  conservation  du 
tloiuaine  de  la  mer  territoriale  par  le  mitioii  ri  veraine,  n'est  pas  snbordonm'^e  a  I'dtablis- 
st'iit  et  ;\  I'entretien  d'ouvrage  perinanents,  ttds  quo  batteries  ou  forts :  la  souverainet6 
(ie  la  mer  territoriale  n'est  pas  plus  suboi-dom^e  ii  son  mode  d'exercice  t\\\e  la  souvo- 
mm6,  du  territoire  mduie. 

Ajontons  un  mot  sur  les  niers  fermdes  oulnterieures,  qui  sont  les  golfes,  rades,  bales, 
0.  parties  du  mer  qui  ne  comuiuniquent  i\  I'oedan  que  par  uu  d<5troit  assez  resserr^ 
pinu'  etre  rdputdes  faire  partie  du  domaine  uiaritimo  de  I'dtat  niilitre  des  ci'ites.  La 
liialitid  de  mer  termdo  est  subordonnee  a  nne  double  condition :  il  faut  d'une  part  qu'il 
stiit  impossible  de  pdudtrer  dans  cotte  mer  sans  traverser  la  mer  territoriale  de  I'etat 


jifl 


^I'i'^l 


166 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


et  sans  exposer  h  son  canon ;  d'autre  part,  il  faat  que  toutes  les  cdtes  soient  souniiseg 
ii  la  nation  m&itresse  du  d^troit. 

Mais  one  nation  ne  pent-elle  acqu6rir  un  droit  exclusif  sur  dos  Heaves,  des  ddtroits, 
des  golfes  trop  larges  pour  6tre  converts  par  les  canons  dn  rivage,  on  sur  les  parties 
d'une  mer  adjaceute  qui  passent  la  port6e  du  canon,  ou  m£me  la  distance  de  truis 
lieues  ?  Nul  doute  d'aliord  qu'un  tel  droit  exclusif  ne  puiase  dtre  acquis  contre  une 
nation  individuelle  qui  consent  k  le  reconnaltre.  Cependant  il  semble  mdoie  que  co 
consentement  ne  soit  pas  un  rdquisite  esseutiel  pour  une  telle  acquisition,  en  taut  que 
le  maltre  du  rivage  se  voit  en  ^tat  de  la  maintenir  k  I'aide  du  local,  ou  d'une  flotte,  et 
que  la  s(iret<)  de  hcm  possessious  territoriaies  offre  une  raisou  justicative  pour  I'exclusion 
des  nations  ^trang^res.  Si  de  telles  parties  de  la  mer  sont  susceptibles  de  domination, 
c'est  une  question  de  fait  de  savoir  lesquels  de  ces  ddtroits,  golfes,  ou  mors  adjaceutea, 
situds  en  Europe,  sont  libres  de  domination,  lesquels  sont  domiuds  (elausa),  ou  quela 
Ront  ceux  sur  la  libert6  desquels  ou  dispute. 

De  Cussy,  "  Phases  et  Causes  Celfebres  du  Droit  Maritime  des  Na- 
tions" (Leipzig,  ed.  1856),  liv.  i,  tit.  3,  §§  40,  41 : 

Mais  la  protection  du  territoire  de  l'€tat  du  cAt<^  de  la  mer,  et  la  p6che  qui  est  la 
prinoipale  ressource  des  habitants  du  littoral,  ont  fait  comprendre  la  ndcessit^  de  recon- 
naltre un  territoire  maritime.  Ou  niieux  encore  une  mer  territoriale  d6penduiit  de 
tout  dtat  riverain  de  la  mer ;  c'e8t-&,-dir«^,  uue  d'stance  qeulconque  h  partir  de  la  cAte, 
qui  fut  r^put6e  la  continuation  du  territoire,  et  h  laquelle  devait  s'dteudre  pour  tout 
6tat  maritime  la  souverainetd  spdciale  de  la  mer. 

Cette  souverainetd  s'dtend  aux  districts  et  parages  maritimes,  tels  que  les  rades  ct 
baies,  les  golfes,  les  ddtroits,  dont  I'entrde  et  la  sortie  peuvent  6tre  d^fendues  par  le 
canon. 

Tons  les  golfes  et  d^troits  ne  sauraient  appartenir,  dans  la  totalit<5  de  lenr  surface 
on  de  leur  6tendue,  a  la  mer  territoriale  des  dtats  dont  ils  baignent  les  cdtes ;  la  soii- 
Yerainet6  de  I'dtat  reste  borude  sur  les  golfes  et  ddtroits  d'uue  grande  dtendue  k  la 
distance  qui  a  dtd  indiqnde  an  prdcddent  paragraphe  ;  an  deli,  les  golfes  et  ddtroits  de 
cette  categoric  sent  assimilds  a  la  mer,  et  leur  usage  est  libre  pour  toutes  les  nations 

Many  authorities  maintain  that  whenever,  under  the  law  of  nations, 
any  part  of  the  sea  is  free  for  navigation,  it  is  likewise  free  for  ttsbiiig 
by  those  who  sail  over  its  surface.  But,  without  insisting  upon  this 
position,  the  inevitable  conclusion  is,  that,  prior  to  the  Treaty  of  Wash- 
ington, the  fishermen  of  the  United  States,  as  well  as  those  of  all  other 
nations,  could  rightfully  fish  in  the  open  sea  more  than  three  miles  from 
the  coast;  and  could  also  fish  at  the  same  distance  from  the  shore  in  all 
bays  more  than  six  miles  in  width,  measured  in  a  straight  line  from 
headland  to  headland. 

The  privileges  accorded  by  Article  XVIII  of  that  treaty  are,  to  take 
fish  within  the  territorial  waters  of  the  British  North  American  colo- 
nies; and  the  limits  of  territorial  waters  have  been  thus  defined  by  the 
law  of  nationvS. 

It  is  not,  however,  to  be  forgotten  that,  at  the  time  when  the  treaty 
was  framed,  the  privileges  actually  enjoyed  by  American  fishermen  cor- 
responded precisely  with  the  rules  of  international  law  as  hereinbefore 
set  forth.  And  it  is  apparent  that  the  present  Commission  was  not  con- 
stituted  as  a  tribunal  to  decide  upon  grave  questions  of  internatioDal 
law,  but  simply  to  estimate  what,  if  anything,  is  the  greater  value  of 
the  privileges  accorded  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  by  Article 
XVIII  beyond  such  as  they  previously  practically  enjoyed,  over  and 
above  those  accorded  to  the  subjects  of  Her  Majesty  by  Articles  XIX 
and  XXI  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

It  is  the  manifest  duty  of  the  Commissioners  to  proceed  upon  the  basis 
of  the  stains  existing  at  the  date  of  the  treaty,  no  matter  what  were  the 
claims  or  pretensions  of  either  national  government.  Of  still  less  conse- 
quence is  it  what  were  the  claims  of  colonial  authorities. 

By  the  orders  of  the  home  government,  before  and  at  the  date  of  the 
treaty,  the  American  fishermen  were  not  excluded  from  any  bays  ex- 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


167 


ceeding  six  miles  in  width  froji  headland  to  headland.  All  larger 
bodies  of  water  were  then  treated,  by  the  command  of  Her  Majesty,  like 
the  open  sea;  and  in  all  such  bays  the  territorial  limit  was  measured 
aloDg  the  shore,  according  to  its  sinuosities  three  miles  from  low-water 
mark.  The  Oommissioners  are  bound  to  adopt  the  same  view.  This 
position  is  insisted  upon  because  of  its  practical  common  sense  and 
intrinsic  rectitude,  and  not  becauso  any  doubt  is  entertained  as  to  the 
rales  and  principles  of  international  law,  by  which  tbe  honorable  Oom- 
mission  ought  to  bo  governed. 

DWIGHT  FOSTER, 

Agent  of  the  United  States. 


Eli 
AM 


:V 


l( 


views 
Amei 

Two 

First 
treaty,' 
country 
the  coil 
tbe  rul 
United 
])ower8 

Secoi 
the  qiit 
ttialiy  e 
to  "  the 
at  and  1 

The  (, 
tion  ail 
tions  of 
nioutlivS 

It  is  ri 
cussioii 
upon  th< 
a  luariti 
of  tiie  A 
tention  i 
tradition 
iivshinjjf  ii 
mouths. 

It  is  d 
that  this 
Miijesty'j 
nition  is 
and  that 

And  w 
in  the  Bi 
never  ah 
advancet 
that  it  is 
of  interru 
Her  Majt 
inquiry,  1 


^PPEISTDIX    D. 


It'U'LY  OX  DEHALF  OF  HER  BRITANNIC  MAJESTY'S  GOV- 
ERNMENT TO  TUE  ANSWER  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF 
AMERICA. 

PART  I.— CANADA. 

I. 

That  portion  of  the  Answer  which  first  claims  attention  embodies  the 
views  presented  by  the  United  States  as  to  the  area  of  the  British  North 
American  fisheries. 

Two  things  are  relied  on  : 

First.  It  is  submitted  by  the  United  States  that  "  independently  of 
treaty,"  and  for  the  "purposes  of  llshing,"  the  territorial  waters  of  every 
countrj'  extend  three  miles  from  low-water  mark,  to  be  measured  along 
the  contour  of  the  shores  of  bays  according  to  their  sinuosities,  and  that 
the  rule  upon  which  this  assertion  is  maintained  is  believed  by  the 
United  States  to  have  received  a  traditional  recognition  from  other 
])owers,  including  Great  Britain. 

Second.  It  is  urged  that  it  is  the  dutj'  of  the  Commissioners  to  "treat 
the  question  practically,  and  proceed  upon  the  basis  of  the  status  ac- 
tually existing  when  the  Treaty  of  Washington  was  adopted,''  according 
to  "the  practical  extent  of  privileges  enjoyed  by  American  fishermen" 
at  and  before  that  date. 

The  Commissioners  are  thus  invited  to  dismiss  from  their  considera- 
tion all  claim  to  compensation  for  the  privilege  of  fishing  in  such  por- 
tions of  British  American  bays  greater  than  six  miles  in  width  at  their 
mouths  as  are  beyond  three  miles  from  the  shore. 

It  is  not  understood  that  the  Answer  either  raises  or  invites  the  dis- 
cussion of  any  rules  or  doctrines  of  international  law,  save  such  as  bear 
upon  the  question  of  what  are  to  be  considered  the  territorial  waters  of 
a  maritime  state  for  the  purposes  of  exclusive  fishing.  The  contention 
of  the  Answer  n  relation  to  these  doctrines  which  requires  special  at- 
tention is  that  which  aSvserts  that  Great  Britain  and  other  powers  have 
traditionally  recognized  a  rule  by  which  foreigners  were  excluded  from 
fishing  in  those  bays  only  which  are  six  miles  or  less  in  width  at  their 
mouths. 

It  is  distinctly  asserted,  on  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's  Government, 
that  this  alleged  rule  is  entirely  unknown  to,  and  unrecognized  by,  Her 
Majesty's  Government,  and  it  is  submitted  that  no  instance  of  such  recog- 
nition is  to  be  found  in  the  Answer  or  the  Brief  accompanying  the  same, 
and  that  none  can  be  produced. 

And  while  abundant  argument  supported  by  authorities  will  be  found 
in  the  Brief  to  be  submitted  to  the  Commissioners,  to  establish  the  view 
never  abandoned  by  Great  Britain,  and  entirely  adverse  to  that  now 
advanced  by  the  United  States,  the  admission  by  the  United  States 
that  it  is  not  the  province  of  the  Commission  to  decide  upon  questions 
of  international  law,  does  not  seem  to  be  at  variance  with  the  views  of 
Her  Majesty's  Government  as  to  the  mode  of  conducting  the  present 
inquiry,  because  it  is  clear,  that  entirely  independent  of  the  unsettled 


170 


AWAHD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


doctrines  of  iDternational  law,  the  rights  of  Great  Britain  and  the  United 
States,  respectively,  are  to  be  ascertained  by  Commissioners,  who  are 
directed  to  confine  their  inquiry  exclusively  to  the  terms  of  the  Treaty 
of  Washington  and  the  Ist  Article  of  the  Convention  of  1818. 

It  is  asserted  in  the  Answer,  at  i)age  3,  that  the  Commissioners  who 
framed  the  Treaty  of  Washington  "decided  not  to  enter  into  an  exam- 
ination of  the  respective  rights  of  the  two  countries  under  the  Treaty 
of  1818  and  the  general  law  of  nations,  but  to  approach  the  settle- 
ment of  the  question  on  a  comprehensive  basis."  It  is  submitted  that 
no  such  decision  was  ever  come  to  by  tlie  Commissioners,  and  in  i)roof 
of  this  assertion  attention  is  directed  to  the  Protocols  of  the  Joint  High 
Commission  preceding  the  treaty.  These  Protocols  prove  that  Her 
Majesty's  Government  were  prepared  to  discuss  the  question  "  either  iu 
detail  or  generally,  so  as  either  to  enter  into  an  examination  of  the  re- 
spective rights  of  the  two  countries  under  the  Treaty  of  1818  and  the 
general  law  of  nations,  or  to  approach  the  settlement  of  the  question 
on  a  comprehensive  basis ;"  and  in  answer  to  an  inquiry  on  the  part  of 
the  American  Commissioners  as  to  what  in  the  latter  case  would  be  the 
proposition  of  the  British  Commissioners,  the  latter  replied,  "  the  restor- 
ation in  principle  of  the  Keclprocity  Treaty  of  1854."  The  American 
Commissioners  having  declined  to  proceed  to  the  basis  of  the  Recipro- 
city Treaty,  negotiations  were  again  resumed  and  resulted  in  the  adop- 
tion of  the  clauses  iu  the  Treaty  of  Washington  already  referred  to  in 
the  Case,  and  which,  as  if  to  remove  the  possibility  of  a  doubt,  expressly 
make  the  Convention  of  1818,  and  the  respective  rights  of  the  two  coim- 
tries  under  it,  the  basis  upon  which  the  value  »f  the  new  concessions  is 
to  be  measured. 

The  words  of  Article  1  of  that  convention,  used  by  the  United  States 
in  renouncing  forever  all  liberty  previously  "  claimed  or  enjoyed  of 
taking  fish  within  three  marine  miles  of  any  of  the  coasts,  hays,  creeks,  or 
harbors  of  Her  Majesty's  Dominions  in  America,"  seem  too  clear  and 
binding  for  dispute,  whatever  notions  may  have  previously  existed 
among  writers  as  to  the  territorial  jurisdictiou  of  a  nation  over  its  ad- 
jacent waters. 

This  privilege  so  renounced  forever  is  conceded  for  twelve  years  by 
the  Treaty  of  Washington,  and  the  extent  of  territorial  waters  iu  ques- 
tion is  easily  ascertainable. 

A  portion  of  the  first  section  of  the  Answer  is  devoted  to  extracts 
from  public  documents,  which  were  prepared  as  instructions  of  a  purely 
temporary  character  and  to  prevent  embarrassment  and  h)ss  to  United 
States  fishermen,  and  the  section  closes  with  an  extract  from  the  lan- 
guage used  by  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  England  in  a  recent  criminal 
case. 

The  special  attention  of  the  Commissioners  is  directed  to  the  entire 
inapplicability  of  these  extracts. 

Had  the  word  "  status  "  iu  the  Answer  been  used  as  meaning  the  legal 
status  under  the  Convention  of  1818,  then  Her  Majesty's  Government 
would  be  in  perfect  accord  with  that  of  the  United  States.  But,  as  it 
is  evidently  intended  to  mean  the  state  of  facts  existing  during  the 
periods  when  Her  Majesty's  Government  either  granted  fishing  licenses 
to  American  fishermen  or  otherwise  voluntarily  relaxed  for  a  time  their 
undoubted  rights,  then  Her  Majesty's  Government  entirely  dissents.  In 
the  latter  case  the  express  words  of  the  Convention  of  1818  would  be 
ignored,  and  the  Commissioners  asked  to  adopt  as  a  basis,  in  lieu  of 
that  convention,  certain  indulgences  which  Her  Majesty's  Government 
were  pleased,  from  motives  of  goodwill  and  friendship,  to  extend  to  the 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


171 


United  States  flahertnen.  These  relaxations  of  legal  rights  were  only 
temporary  in  their  nature,  were  alwavs  given  with  an  express  reserva- 
tion of  the  undoubted  rights  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,  and  cannot, 
on  any  principle  of  law,  justice,  or  equity,  be  considered  by  the  Com- 
mission  with  the  object  of  prejudicing  the  government  ^so  temporarily 
conceding  them. 

As  an  instance  of  such  express  reservation,  attention  is  called  to  a 
telegraphic  dispatch  from  Lord  Clarendon  to  the  British  minister  at 
Washington,  protesting  agaiiist  the  terms  of  a  circular  from  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  United  States  Treasury,  dated  May  16, 1870,  addressed  to 
collectors  of  customs,  notifying  them  that  the  Dominion  Government 
bad  terminated  the  system  of  granting  fishing-licenses  to  foreign  vessels, 
and  warning  American  tishermeu  of  the  legal  consequeuces  of  encroach- 
ing  upon  prohibited  limits. 

This  is  dated  June  7, 1870,  and  is  as  follows : 

Take  an  opportunity  to  point  out  to  Secretary  of  State  that  Mr.  Bontwell's  circular 
of  May  16,  1870,  respecting  the  Canadian  inshore  fisheries,  may  lead  to  future  niisuu- 
(lerHtandiug,  inasmuch  aH  it  limits  the  maritime  jurisdiction  of  the  Dominion  to  three 
luarine  miles  of  the  shores  thereof,  without  regard  to  international  usage,  which  extends 
such  jurisdiction  over  creeks  and  hays,  or  to  the  stipulations  of  the  Treaty  of  1818,  in 
which  the  United  States  renounce  the  right  of  fishing  within  three  miles,  not  of  the 
coast  only,  hut  of  the  bays,  creeks,  and  harbors  uf  Her  Majesty's  dominions  in  America. 

In  the  quotation  given  in  the  Answer  from  the  instructions  issued  from 
time  to  time  by  Her  Majesty's  Government  and  the  Minister  of  Marine 
and  Fisheries  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  to  the  commanders  of  gov- 
ernment vessels  engaged  in  protecting  the  fisheries,  no  mention  of  the 
express  reservations  which  were  invariably  inserted  of  the  rights  of 
Her  Mfijesty's  Government  under  the  Convention  of  1818  is  made ;  and 
it  is  deemed  at  present  suliicient  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Commission 
to  these  omissions,  and  to  the  text  of  the  instructions  themselves,  where 
they  will  be  found  fully  and  clearly  made. 

It  is  confidently  submitted  and  urged  on  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's 
Government,  that  it  is  not  "the  manifest  duty  of  the  Commissioners" 
to  award  compensation  on  the  basis  of  "  the  practical  extent  of  the  privi- 
leges enjoyed  by  American  fishermen  at  and  before  the  Treaty  of  Washing- 
ton,^^ unless  those  i>rivileges  were  enjoyed  legally,  as  a  matter  of  right, 
and  not  temporarily,  and  by  the  favor  of  Great  Britain  ;  and  it  is  fur- 
ther urged  that  the  true  and  equitable  basis  upon  which  the  Commis- 
sioners should  proceed  is  that  ot  the  legal  status,  at  the  date  of  the 
Treaty  of  Washington,  of  American  fishermen  in  British  waters  under 
the  Convention  of  1818. 

The  quotation  from  Ihe  judgment  of  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  En- 
gland in  the  case  of  the  Franconia,  already  alluded  to,  has  no  reference 
whatever  to  any  subject  involved  in  this  inquiry,  but  to  a  question  of 
an  entirely  different  character,  and  it  is  sutiicient  to  call  the  attention 
of  the  Commission  to  the  judgment  itself  from  which  the  quotation  is 
made,  reported,  L.  R.  2  Ex.  Division,  page  63,  to  prove  its  utter  irrele- 
vancy. 

The  attention  of  the  Commission  is  called  to  the  judgment  of  the  ju- 
dicial committee  of  the  privy  council,  delivered  February  14,  1877,  in 
the  case  of  the  Direct  United  States  Cable  Company  against  the  Anglo- 
American  Telegraph  Company,  in  which  judgment  the  following  lan- 
guage is  used:  "There  was  a  convention  made  in  1818  between  the 
United  States  and  Great  Britain  relating  to  the  fisheries  of  Labrador, 
Newfoundland,  and  His  Majesty's  other  possessions  in  North  America, 
by  which  It  was  agreed  that  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States  should 


172 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


have  the  right  to  fish  on  part  of  the  coast  (not  including  the  part  of  the 
Island  of  Newfoundland  on  which  Conception  Bay  lies),  and  should  not 
enter  any  'bays'  in  any  other  part  of  the  coast,  except  for  the  purpose 
of  shelter  and  repairing  damages,  and  purchasing  wood,  and  obtaining 
water,  and  no  other  purposes  whatever.  It  seems  impossible  to  doul)t 
that  this  convention  applied  to  all  bays,  whether  large  or  small,  on  that 
coast,  and  consequently  to  Conception  Bay." 

II. 

Section  2  of  the  answer  is  devoted  to  a  consideration  of  the  reciprocal 
privileges  accorded  to  Her  Majesty's  subjects  by  articles  19  and  21  of 
the  Treaty  of  Washington,  and  contests  the  right  of  the  Colony  of  New- 
foundland to  be  considered  in  the  sum  to  be  awarded. 

In  this  section  it  is  contended  that  no  account  is  to  be  taken  of  the 
right  "to  admit  fish  and  fish-oil  free  of  duty  from  the  United  States 
into  Canada  and  Prince  Edward  Island,  in  the  estimate  and  adjustment 
of  equivalents  which  the  Commissioners  are  directed  to  make."  This 
proposition  is  not  assented  to,  but,  on  the  contrary,  it  Is  contended  that 
the  Commissioners  cannot  ignore  these  concessions  "in  their  adjustment 
of  equivalents."  Article  22  of  the  treaty  provides  that  having  regard 
to  the  privileges  accorded  by  the  United  States  to  the  subjects  of  IT'i 
Britannic  Majesty,  as  those  privileges  are  stated  in  Articles  19  and  21, 
the  Commissioners  shall  determine  the  compensation  to  be  paid  by  tlie 
United  States  to  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  in  return  for  the  privileges  ac- 
corded to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  under  Article  18.  It  is  con- 
tended in  the  answer  that  the  privileges  accorded  by  the  United  States 
to  the  subjects  of  Her  Majesty,  and  having  regard  to  which  the  amount 
of  compensation  is  to  be  awarded,  are  the  absolute  benefits  which  Cana- 
dians will  derive  from  the  free  admission  of  their  fish  and  fish-oil  into 
the  United  States,  without  regard  to  the  reciprocal  rights  of  the  citizens 
of  the  United  States  to  the  free  admission  of  their  fish  and  fish-oil  into 
Canada.  Such  a  contention  is  not  based  upon  a  proper  construction  of 
Articles  21  and  22.  Article  22  expressly  directs  the  Commissioners,  iu 
making  their  award,  to  have  regard  to  the  privileges  accorded  by  tiie 
United  States  to  the  subjects  of  Great  Britain,  as  these  privileges  are 
stated  in  Articles  19  and  21.  Tlie  right  or  privilege,  as  stated  in  the 
latter  article,  is  not  the  absolute  right  of  one  country  to  export  free  into 
the  other,  but  a  reciprocal  right  conferred,  and  to  be  enjoyed  in  com- 
mon. The  value  of  this  privilege  to  Canada  is  simply  the  reciprocal 
value  as  stated  in  the  article  itself,  and  in  putting  a  i)ecuniary  estimate 
upon  it  the  reciproc.d  character  of  the  privilege  cannot  be  ignored. 

III. 

The  advantages,  so  explicitly  set  forth  in  the  Case,  of  freedom  to  trans- 
fer cargoes,  outfit  vessels,  obtain  ice,  procure  bait,  and  engage  hands, 
&c.,  are  not  denied  in  the  Answer.  Nor  is  it  denied  that  these  privi- 
leges have  been  constantly  enjoyed  by  American  fishermen  under  the 
operation  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington.  Neither  is  the  contention  on 
the  part  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,  that  all  these  advantages  are 
necessary  to  the  successful  pursuit  of  the  inshore  or  outside  fisheries, 
attempted  to  be  controverted.  But  it  is  alleged  in  the  3d  section  of 
the  answer  that  there  are  statutes  in  force,  or  which  may  be  called  into 
force,  to  prevent  the  enjoyment  by  American  fishermen  of  these  indis- 
pensable privileges. 


AWARD    OP   THE   FISHEKY   COMMISSION. 


173 


It  is  presumed  that  by  these  "  former  inhospitable  statutes,"  iis  they 

are  termed  by  the  United  States,  are  meant  the  following?,  viz : 

1.  The  Imperial  Act,  59  Geo.  Ill,  cap.  o«.  r^  J^-^    >"'" 

l'.  The  Acts  of  the  i'arliaujent  ofl'anada,  31  Vic,  cap.  (Jl,  passed  18G8j 

33  Vic,  cap.  1"»,  passed  1870;  and  M  Vic,  cap.  3.'3,  passed  1871.       -    -u. 

3.  The  Act  of  Parli.inient  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  G  Vic,  cap.  14, 
passed  1843. 

4.  Th»^  Act  of  the  Parliament  of  New  Urnnswick,  IG  Vic.,  cap.  G9, 
passetl  18.j3. 

f).  The  Act  of  Parliament  of  Nova  Scotia,  27  Vic,  cap.  94,  passed 
18(it. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  mention  tliat  these  statutes  were  passed  by 
the  several  parliaments  solely  to  enforce  the  i»rovisions  contained  in  the 
Convention  of  1818,  and  they  are  entirely  susjjended  for  the  period  dur- 
ing which  (Ireat  Biitain  has  conceded  the  fishery  privileges  under  the 
Treaty  of  Washinjjton  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States,  by  the 
tollowing  enactments : 

1.  The  Act  of  the  Imperial  Parliament,  3o  and  3G  Vic,  cap.  45. 

L'.  The  Act  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  3o  V.,  cap.  2,  entitled  Au  a<!t 
iclatinfic  to  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  1871. 

3.  The  Act  of  Parliament  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  3i5  Vic,  cap.  2. 

Previous  to  the  date  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  American  flslier- 
meu  were,  by  the  1st  Article  of  the  Convention  of  1818,  admitted  to 
enter  the  bays  and  harbors  of  His  Britannic  Majesty's  Dominions  in 
America  for  the  purpose  of  shelter  and  of  purchasing  wood,  and  of 
obtaining  water,  andybr  no  other  jmrpose  ichatcvcr. 

liy  the  terms  of  Article  18  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  United  StJites 
fishermen  were  granted  "permission  to  land  upou  the  said  coasts  and 
shores  and  islands,  and  also  upon  the  Jlagdalen  Islands,  for  the  purpose 
of  <liying  their  nets  and  curing  their  fish." 

The  words  "/o>-  no  other  piirpoae  whatever^''  are  studiously  omitted  by 
the  tramers  of  the  last-named  treaty,  and  the  privilege  in  common  with 
the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  to  take  fish  aud  to  land  for  fish- 
ing purposes,  clearly  includes  the  liberty  to  purchase  bait  and  supi»lies, 
transship  cargoes,  «S:c,  for  which  Her  Majesty's  Government  contend  it 
Las  a  right  to  claim  compensation. 

It  is  clear  that  tiiese  privileges  were  not  enjoyed  under  the  Conven- 
tion of  1818,  and  it  is  equally  evident  that  they  are  enjoyed  under  the 
Treaty  of  Washington. 

IV. 

In  Section  3  of  the  Answer  it  is  stated  that  the  fishing  pursuits  of 
American  fishermen  in  British  territorial  waters  are  limited  to  the 
luaukerel  and  herring  fisheries;  and  that  the  halibut  and  cod  fisheries, 
iucluding  the  subvarieties  of  hake,  haddock,  cask,  aud  pollack,  beloug 
"  exclusively  "  to  the  open  sea.  This  statemeut  is  altogether  erroneous, 
as  evidence  will  fully  establish.  It  will  further  be  proved  not  only  that 
United  States  citizens  actually  fish  within  British  waters  for  the  various 
kinds  of  fishes  aud  baits  named  in  the  Case,  but  also  that  the  deep-sea 
ttshfciies  proper,  which  are  admittedly  pursued  iu  the  vicinity  of  British 
American  coasts,  could  not  be  carried  ou  profitably,  if  indeed  at  aP,  by 
Auiericau  fishermen  without  the  privilege  of  resorting  to  the  inshores 
tor  the  purpose  of  procuring  bait,  and  without  availing  themselves  of 
facilities  for  preserving  the  same  iu  a  fit  state  for  effective  use,  which 
the  Treaty  of  Washington  affords.  It  is  admitted  on  page  8  of  the 
Auswer  that  the  herring  thus  procured  forms  '.'  the,  best  bait  for  cod 


M 


H: 


174 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


and  other  similar  fish,*'  but  asHerted  that  it  is  obtained  chiefly  by  pur- 
chase, because  the  American  il:}hernien  <'  find  it  more  eoonomical  to  buy 
it  than  to  catch  it.'' 

It  has  been  shown  that  this  privilo^re  of  purchasinf;  bait  is  derived 
through  the  provisions  of  the  treaty.  In  some  phices  within  the  limits 
now  thrown  open  to  them,  as  will  be  proved.  United  iStates  citizens, 
since  the  Washintjton  Treaty,  catch  bait  for  tliemselves,  where  formerly 
they  used  to  buy  it. 

Notwithstanding  the  statement  to  the  contrary  at  page  8  of  the  An- 
swer, it  can  be  shown  in  evidence  that  tlie  American  fishermen  do  land 
on  tite  British  shores  to  haul  and  dry  their  nets  and  cure  their  fish. 

On  page  9  it  is  alleged  that  the  increased  produce  of  the  fisheries  ob- 
tained by  British  subjects  during  the  past  ti,even  years  is  due  to  the 
"  benign  ii  m*  „c(.s  "  of  the  Treaty  of  Wasliington.  This  Her  Majesty's 
Government  distinctly  deny,  and  contend  that  it  has  been  the  result  of 
progress  and  improvement,  from  increased  numbers  of  men  and  ma- 
ter.ais,  from  improved  facilities,  and  from  greater  development  coinci- 
dent with  the  system  of  protection  and  cultivation  applied  to  them. 

The  reciprocal  c»yiicession  of  fishing  privileges  in  American  waters 
being  absolutely  valueless,  as  set  forth  in  the  Case,  cannot  be  taken 
into  account. 

The  Commissioners  will  readily  perceive,  on  referring  to  the  table 
appended  to  the  Case — 

1.  That  the  increase  of  catch  by  British  sulyt'cts  consists  principally 
of  those  kinds  of  fish  which  arc  not  att'ected  in  any  way  whatever  by 
the  remission  of  the  United  States  customs  duties  under  the  Treaty  of 
Washington,  inasmuch  as  fresh  fish  was  admitted  free  of  duty  into  the 
United  States  at  the  time  of  the  Treaty  of  VVashingtoti,  and  for  some 
time  previously. 

2.  That  the  aggregate  annual  value  of  fish  caught  by  British  subjects 
increased  in  much  greater  ratio  for  the  four  years  preceding  the  com- 
I)lete  operation  of  the  treaty  than  for  succeeding  years. 

3.  Tliat  the  value  of  the  British  catch  in  1872 — the  year  before  the 
treaty  took  eft'rct  as  regards  customs  duties — amounted  to  more  than 
double  that  of  1801),  winle  the  value  of  1875  was  considerably  less  than 
that  of  1873. 

The  statement  made  in  the  Answer  that  since  the  date  of  the  Wash- 
ington Treaty  tlie  American  cod  and  mackerel  fisheries  have  declined, 
cannot  for  a  moment  be  admitted.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  asserted  that 
they  have  shown  a  gradual  and  progressive  increase  over  the  average 
catch  of  those  years  which  preceded  the  signing  of  the  treaty. 

The  important  statement  hazarded  on  page  20,  that  "  almost  the  only 
fish  taken  by  the  Americans  within  the  three-mile  limit  off  the  coasts  of 
the  British  provinces  are  the  mackerel,  and  that  of  the  entire  catch  of 
these  fish  only  a  very  small  fractional  part  is  so  taken,"  Her  Majesty's 
Government  feel  called  upon  to  deny  in  the  strongest  terms.  Not  only 
will  it  be  shown  that  codfish  in  limited  quautities  aud  herring  in  large 
quantities  are  so  taken,  but  that  by  far  the  larger  proportion  of  tlie 
catch  of  mackerel  in  British  waters  is  taken  within  "  the  three-mile 
limit,"  and  the  right  to  fish  in  the  entire  extent  of  waters  claimed  by  the 
United  States  as  "  the  open  ocean  free  to  all"  is  practically  valueless, 
when  not  coupled  with  the  privileges  accorded  by  the  Treaty  of  Wasli- 
ington; and,  further,  that  without  the  liberty  of  fishing  within  this  limit 
the  entire  fishery  would  have  to  be  abandoned  by  the  American  fleet 
as  useless  and  unremunerative. 

In  the  language  of  John  Quincy  Adams,  one  of  the  United  States 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


175 


cominiaHioners  at  Ghent,  in  a  work  puhlislieil  bj'  him  8o  long  ago  as 
W2:  "The  Newfoundland,  Nova  Scotia,  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence,  and 
Labrador  fisheries  are  in  nature  and  in  ttonsideration  both  ,  f  their  value 
ami  of  the  right  to  share  in  tliem,  one  tisliery.  To  be  cut  off  from  the 
enjoyment  of  tliat  right  would  be  to  the  people  of  Massachusetta  similar 
in  liind  and  comparable  in  degree  with  an  interdict  to  the  people  of 
Georgia  or  Louisiana  to  cultivate  cotton  or  sugar.  To  be  cut  oft'  even 
from  that  portion  of  it  which  was  within  the  exclusive  British  jurisdic- 
tion in  the  strictest  sense  within  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  and  on  the 
coast  of  Librador  would  have  been  like  an  interdict  u|>on  the  peo|)le  of 
Georgia  or  Louisiana  to  cultivate  with  cotton  or  sugar  threelourths  of 
tbose  respective  States." 

And  Andrews,  at  page  35  of  his  official  report,  1852,  to  the  Secretary 
of  the  United  States  Treasury,  says:  "A  free  participation  in  the  sea- 
flsheries  near  the  shores  of  the  colonies  is  regarded  as  the  Just  prescript- 
ive privilege  of  our  tishermen.  Without  such  privilege  our  deep-sea 
fisberies  in  that  region  will  become  valueless." 

And  United  States  Commander  Shubrick,  in  1853,  reported :  "The 
shores  of  Prince  Edward  Island  abound  with  fish  of  all  kinds.  The 
mackerel  strike  in  early  in  the  season  and  can  only  be  talcen  clone  innhoreJ" 
(Ex.  Doc.  1853-'54,  No.  21,  page  32.)  Numbers  of  similar  auth«>rities  can 
be  produced. 

Willi  regard  to  the  statement  in  page  10  of  the  Answer,  that  for  a 
number  of  years  past  the  value  of  tiie  mackerel  fishery  in  British  waters 
has  diminished,  while  during  the  same  period  the  quantity  and  quality 
of  these  fish  taken  oft"  the  coast  of  New  England  has  greatly  improved, 
it  is  siithcient  to  mention  that  the  result  of  the  present  season's  tishing 
80  far,  in  American  waters,  ha8  been  very  small,  and  the  indications  are 
that  the  remainder  of  the  season  will  also  be  poor.  On  tbe  other  hand, 
the  waters  of  the  British  Canadian  territories  teem  with  mackerel,  as  in 
former  years. 

The  catch  of  mackerel  in  British  waters  by  Cana»Tian  fishermen  has 
actually  increased  during  several  years  past.    Kecent  reports  show  tliat 
the  prospects  for  tbe  current  season  are  good,  and  that  American  fiahing- 
ves.stls  are  preparing  to  turn  them  to  i)rofltable  account,  the  mackerel 
fishery  off  the  United  States  shores  having  failed  this  j'ear.    The  Cape 
Auu  Weekly  Advertiser  of  June  14,  1877,  notices  the  early  appearance 
of  n)ackerel  in  the  Bay  of  Saint  Lawrence,  and  anticipates  "a  more 
suceessful  season  than  that  of  187«»,  and  tliat  quite  a  large  fleet  will 
engage  in  the  bay  fishery."    The  same  journal  of  June  29, 1877,  records 
"a  good  mackerel  catch"  along  the  eastern  shore  of  Nova  Scotia.    The 
Boston  Commercial  Bulletin  of  July  7,  1877,  states  that  "mackerel  are 
plenty"  at  Prince  Edward  Island,  also  that  "quite  a  large  fleet"  of 
mackerel  fishing  vessels  had  arrived  at  Boston  and  Gloucester  from  the 
United  States  coast,  "  but  most  of  them  report  no  catch,  and  the  aver- 
age will  not  exceed  a  few  barrels  per  vessel."    The  same  paper,  under 
date  of  July  14,  1877,  states  on  official  authority  that  the  catch  of 
mackerel  "is  very  light,"  the  returns  to  July  12,  this  year,  being  only 
28,043  barrels,  against  81,193  barrels  to  July  1,  last  year  (i87t)).    The 
Oape  Ann  Weekly  Advertiser  of  July  13,  1877,  contains  the  following 
announcement:  "A  few  small  mackerel  have  been  taken  oft"  shore,  suf- 
ficient to  meet  the  local  demand  for  fresh  mackeiel,  but  the  fleet  have 
met  with  ill  success,  and  none  of  consequence  have  been  landed.   *  •   * 
The  entire  receipts  for  July  from  a  large  fleet  will  not  exceed  800  barrels. 
*  *  *   The  schooner  Allen  Lewis,  from  the  Magdalen  Islands,  for  Booth 
Bay,  reports  small  codfish  plenty  at  the  Magdalens,  and  numerous 


I 


116 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


i^^m 


schools  of  large  mackerel  in  tbe  North  Bay,  between  East  Point,  Prince 
Edward  Island,  and  Port  Hood.  The  vessel  was  hove  to,  and  several 
large  mackerel  taken.  The  skipper  of  the  Allen  Lewis  thinks  the  pros 
pects  for  the  mackerel  fislierj'  in  the  bay  as  good  as  he  ever  knew  ir.'' 
These  extracts  may  bo  taken,  with  many  others,  as  proof  of  the  uncertain 
character  of  the  mackerel  fishery  on  the  American  coast,  although  tlie 
Answer  describes  it  as  being  "  unsurpassed  by  any  in  the  world  "  (|).  1!»), 
They  at  the  same  time  alford  fresh  indications  of  the  continued  depend- 
ence of  the  American  mackerel  flsiunMneu  on  the  British  inshores, 
which  really  are  in  a  tliriving  condition,  and  yield  increased  returns 
every  year. 

CeJtain  exi)r(  ssions  used  in  the  A  iswer,  which  reflect  unjustly- on  the 
Dominion  lishrries  and  tishoimen,  cannot  be  passed  over  in  silence. 
They  are  contained  in  the  following  ])aragrapiis: 

"All  descrii)tions  of  ttsh  foun<l  in  British  waters  also  abouiul  along 
this  portion  of  tlie  coast  of  the  United  States" — that  is,  down  to  the 
thirty  ninth  parallel  of  north  latitude.  "  If  the  provincial  tishermen  in- 
vested the  same  amount  of  capital  in  the  business,  and  exerted  e(|iial 
enterprise,  industry,  and  skill,  they  would  fiiul  the  American  waters 
fully  as  valuable  to  them  as  theirs  are  to  tishermen  of  the  United 
States"  (p.  18).  Tins  admission  of  value contlicis  with  the  assumption 
(p.  13)  that  the  inshore  fisheries  possess  no  "coiiiUKircial  or  intrinsic 
value." 

At  pages  19  and  L'O,  after  describing  the  United  States  inshore  fish- 
eries for  mackerel  as  being  unsurpassed  by  any  in  the  world,  it  is  said 
that  "  they  conibine  advantages  compared  with  which  the  Dominion 
fisheries  are  uncertain,  poor  in  qnality,  and  vastly  less  in  quantity. 
The  Canadian  fisheries  are  a  long  voyage  from  any  market  whatever, 
and  involve  far  more  exposure  to  loss  of  vessels  and  life.  These  lisheriCvS 
along  the  shores  of  the  United  States  are  now  open  to  the  competition 
.>f  the  cheap-built  vessels,  cheap-led  crews,  and  poorly-paid  labor  of  tiie 
Dominion  lishernien,  who  pay  trifling  taxes,  and  live,  both  on  board 
their  vessels  and  at  home,  at  less  than  half  the  expense  of  American 
fishermen.  It  is  only  from  lack  of  enterprise,  cai)ital,  and  ability  that 
the  Dominion  lishermen  iuive  failed  to  use  them." 

It  might  suffice  to  renu'rk,  in  answer  to  these  statements,  that  the 
conditi(uis  are  not  at  all  analogous.  The  Dominion  tishermen  have  at 
their  own  doors  the  richest  fisheries  in  the  world.  They  produce  from 
them  an  annual  value  far  exceeding  that  of  the  fisheries  carried  on  by 
New  England  lishernien  in  their  own  waters.  It  would  be  simply  ab- 
surd for  them,  therefore,  to  make  long  and  costly  voyages  to  American 
waters  for  the  purpose  of  engaging  there  in  fishing  o|)erations  which 
fail  to  support  American  fishermen,  as  evidenced  l)y  their  annual  ap- 
pearance in  great  numbers  on  the  coasts  of  Canada.  It  will  be  shown 
that,  according  to  the  testimony  of  public  men  and  others  in  the  United 
States,  the  American  fisheries  in  former  years  have  been  on  the  verge 
of  ruin;  th.it  American  fishermen  have  pursued  their  calling  in  despair, 
although  aiiled  by  liberal  bt)unties,  drawbacks,  and  allowances,  and 
that  their  business  has  lieen  in  a  "  sinking  state"  because  of  their  exclu- 
sion from  the  inshore  tisheries  of  the  British  piovinces.  It  seems, 
therefore,  somewhat  out  of  place  to  claim  for  them  such  supciiority  at 
the  expense  of  others.  Particularly  so  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  fishing 
classes  of  a  population  numbering  four  millions  produce  more  fish  from 
the  waters  of  Canada  than  the  New  England  contingent  of  forty  uullions 
of  people  can  produce  in  their  own  fisheries,  which  are  said  to  be  (p.  IS) 
"nearly  as  extensive,  territorially,  and  ecpially  valuable,"  as  those  of 
Canada,  abounding  in  "all  descriptions  of  fish  found  in  British  waters. 


f^ir^^^- 


AWARD   OF    THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION 


V. 


177 


The  Answer  (pp.  18  and  19)  lays  much  stress  on  the  importance  to 
Canadian  fishermen  of  the  njenhaden  bait  fishery  on  the  coasts  of  the 
New  Enghmd  States.  The  menhaden  is  here  represented  to  be  the  best 
l»aitfor  mackerel,  and  is  said  to  inhabit  exclusively  the  Anierican  coast. 
All  entirely  fictitious  value  has  been  attached  to  this  fishery.  British 
tislicrmen  do  not  frequent  United  States  waters  for  the  purpose  of 
catching  bait  of  any  kind,  or  for  any  other  purposes  connected  with  flsh- 
iiiff;  coasequently  the  privilege  of  entering  those  waters  to  catch  men- 
haden is  of  no  practical  value.  Any  bait  of  that  descrii)tion  which  thej' 
require  may  be  purchased  as  an  article  of  commerce. 

There  are  not  now,  nor  have  there  ever  been,  treaty  stipulations  to 
prevent  British  fishermen  from  entering  American  waters  to  buy  bait, 
if  they  prefer  to  do  so.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  whatever  menhaden  bait 
British  fishermen  use  is  either  purchased  from  Amttri.van  dealers  or 
troni  Canadian  traders,  who  import  and  keei)  it  for  sale  like  any  other 
iiierchaiulise.  Reference  is  made  in  the  Answer  to  the  possible  contiu- 
i;ency  of  legislation  prohibiting  the  export  or  sale  of  menhaden  bait,  the 
implied  consequence  being  a  serious  disadvantage  to  Canadian  fisher- 
men in  prosecuting  the  mackerel  fishery.  It  would  in  ^^ucl'  jantingency 
be  necessary  to  use  other  baits  equally  good  or  resort  lo  some  other 
method  of  fishing,  such  as  that  described  at  page  10,  enabling  the  fish- 
ermen to  dispense  with  bait.  Moreover,  it  is  well  known  that  menha- 
den are  now  caught  in  the  open  sea  many  miles  distant  from  the  Ameri- 
can coast.  The  Answer  asserts  at  page  19,  that  "it  is  entirely  an  in- 
siiore  fishery  ;"  also  that  menhaden  "are  caught  solely  with  seines  near 
the  shore."  It  can  be  proved  that  menhaden  are  chiefly  caught  off  shore, 
tre(iueutly  "  out  of  sight  of  land." 

Mr.  S.  L.  Boardman,  of  Augusta,  Me.,  in  an  interesting  report  to 
the  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  of  which  he  is  secretary,  published  in 
IsT.j,  at  page  00,  says:  "Parties  engaged  in  taking  menhaden  now  go 
ort'  ten  or  twenty  miles  from  shore,  whereas  they  formely  fished  near  the 
coast,  and  they  now  find  the  best  and  most  profitable  fishing  at  that  dis- 
tance." This  fish  is  included  among  the  shore  fishes  described  by  Prof. 
S.  F.  Baird  as  having  suffered  "an  alarming  decrease"  along  the  in- 
shores  of  the  United  States,  owing  partly  to  excessive  fishing  through- 
out their  spawning  time  in  order  to  supply  the  oil  factories. 

Chapter  5  of  the  Answer  deals  with  "the  specific  benefits  which  the 
treaty  directs  the  Commission  to  regard  in  its  comparison  and  ailjust- 
meiit  of  equivalents."  The  admission  of  British  subjects  to  United  States 
tishing  grounds  has  been  dealt  with  at  length  in  the  third  chapter  of 
the  Case.  There  is  nothing  in  the  Answer  on  this  subject  calling  for 
any  reply  excepting  the  statement  at  page  20,  that  Dominion  fishermen 
"have  ill  the  United  States  waters  to-day  over  30  vessels  equipped  for 
seining,  which,  in  company  with  the  American  fleet  are  sweeping  the 
shore.-,  of  New  England."  Leaving  out  of  question  the  "American 
tieet,"  which  has  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  matter,  the  correct- 
ness of  the  statement  is  directly  challenged  in  so  far  as  it  implies  that 
these  130  vessels  or  any  of  them  are  British  bottoms,  owned  by  Domin- 
ion flshermeu  ;  and  the  United  States  is  hereby  called  upon  to  produce 
L'vidence  in  its  support. 

VI. 

The  free  admission  of  fish  into  the  markets  of  the  United  States  is 
claimed  in  the  Answer  to  be  of  enormous  pecuniary  value  to  the  Caua 

12  F 


m 


m 


I 


178 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


dian  exporter.  In  support  of  this  conteDtion  certain  extracts  are  given 
on  page  20  purporting  to  be  contained  in  a  dispatch  from  Lord  Elgin  to 
Mr.  Webster,  dated  June  24, 1851,  and  in  quoting  these  extracts  it  is 
stated  that  Her  Majesty's  Government  were  prepared  to  throw  open  the 
fisheries  of  the  British  North  American  colonies,  to  the  United  States 
fishermen,  if  the  United  States  Government  would  admit  fish  free  of 
duty. 

The  quotations  given  are  not  contained  in  a  dispatch  from  Lord  Elgin, 
"who  was  then  governor-general  of  Canada,  and  not  British  minister 
at  Washington,  but  in  an  extract  inclosed  in  a  despatch  addressed  on 
June  24,  1851,  by  Sir  H.  Bulwer  to  Mr.  Webster,  and  being  given  with- 
out the  dispatch  in  which  they  were  inclosed,  are  made  to  convey  a 
meaning  at*  variance  with  the  actual  proposal  made.  The  dispatch  with 
the  extract  is  as  follows: 

Wasiiinoton,  June  24,  Ir^'A. 

Sir  :  I  have  already  expressed  to  yon  at  different  periods,  and  especially  in  my  note 
of  the  22d  of  March  last,  the  disappoint  nieut  which  was  experienced  in  Canada,  when, 
at  the  close  of  the  last  session  of  Congress,  it  was  known  that  no  progress  had  beun 
made  in  the  bill  which  had  been  brought  forward  for  three  years  successively,  for  re- 
ciprocating the  measure  which  passed  the  Canadian  Legislature  in  1847,  and  which 
granted  to  the  natural  produce  of  this  countrj'  an  entry,  free  from  duty,  into  Canada, 
■whensoever  the  Federal  Legislature  of  the  United  States  should  pass  a  measure  simi- 
larly admitting  into  the  Uuited  States  the  natural  produce  of  the  Canadas. 

This  disappointment  was  greater,  inasmuch  as  the  Canadian  Government  has  always 
adopted  the  most  liberal  commercial  policy  with  respect  to  the  United  States,  as  well 
in  regard  to  the  transit  through  its  canals,  as  in  regard  to  the  admission  of  manufac- 
tured goods  coming  from  this  country. 

I  have  now  the  honor  to  inclose  to  you  the  copies  of  a  a  official  communication  which 
I  have  received  from  the  governor-general,  Lord  El^^in,  by  which  you  will  perceive 
that  unless  I  can  hold  out  some  hopes  that  a  policy  will  be  adopted  in  the  United  States 
similar  to  that  which  has  been  adojtted  in  Canada,  and  which  the  Canadian  authorities 
■would  be  willing,  if  met  in  a  cornspondiug  8i»irit,  to  carry  out  still  farther,  the  Cana- 
dian Government  and  Legislature  are  likely  forthwith  to  take  certain  measures  which, 
both  in  themselves  and  their  consequences,  will  effect  a  considerable  change  in  the 
commercial  intercourse  between  the  Canadas  and  the  United  States. 

I  should  see  with  gi'eat  regret  the  adoption  of  stich  measures,  and  I  am  induced  to 
Lope,  from  the  conversations  I  have  recently  had  with  you,  that  they  will  be  unueces 
eary. 

The  wish  of  Iler  Majesty's  Government,  indeed,  would  be  rather  to  improve  tliati 
impair  all  relations  of  triendship  and  good  neighborhood  between  Her  Majesty's  Ameri- 
can posses-ions  and  the  United  States,  and  I  feel  myself  authorized  to  repeat  to  you 
now,  what  I  have  at  different  times  already  slated — to  Mr.  Clayton  and  yourself— viz, 
that  Her  Majesty's  Government  would  see  with  pleastire  any  arrangement,  either  by 
treaty  or  by  legislation,  establishing  a  free  interchange  of  all  natural  productions  not 
only  between  Canada  and  the  Uuited  States,  but  between  the  United  States  and  all  Her 
Majesty's  North  American  provinces ;  and  furthermore,  I  am  willing  to  say,  that  iu  tlie 
event  of  such  an  arrangement.  Her  Majesty's  Government  would  be  ready  to  oi>en  to 
American  shipping  the  waters  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence,  with  the  canals  adjoining, 
according  to  the  terms  of  the  letter  which  1  addressed  to  Mr.  Clayton,  on  tlie'-iTth 
March,  1850,  for  the  information  of  the  Cotntnittee  on  Commerce  in  the  House  of  Kep- 
reseutatives,  and  to  which  I  take  the  liberty  of  referring  yoii,  while  1  may  add  that 
Her  Majesty's  Government  would,  iu  this  case,  be  likewise  willing  to  open  to  Atnericau 
iishermeu  the  fisheries  along  the  coasts  of  Nova  Scotia  and  New  Brunswick,  according 
to  the  conditions  specified  in  the  inclosed  extract  from  instructions  with  which  1  am 
furnished. 

The  willingness  to  grant  to  American  citizens,  on  such  reasonable  conditions,  two 
important  privileges,  so  long  enjoyed  exclusively  by  the  subjects  of  Great  Britain,  will 
testify  clearly  to  the  spirit  by  which  the  British  Government  is  on  this  occasion  ani- 
mated; and,  as  affairs  nave  now  arrived  at  that  crisis  in  which  a  frank  explanation 
of  the  vier^B  of  either  party  is  necessary  for  the  interests  and  right  uuderstandiiiK  of 
both,  I  lii  xe  the  liberty  of  begging  you  to  inform  me  whether  you  are  disposed,  oti  tho 
part  of  the  United  States,  to  enter  into  such  a  convention  as  would  place  the  coniiiier- 
oial  relations  between  the  Uuited  States  and  the  North  Americnn  colonies  on  the  foot- 
ing which  I  have  here  proposed,  or  whether,  in  the  event  of  there  appearing  to  you  any 
objection  to  proceed  by  convention  iu  this  matter,  you  can  assure  me  that  the  Uuited 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


179 


Staten  Government  will  take  the  earliest  opportunity  of  urgently  recommending  Con- 
giosd  to  carry  out  the  object  aforcBaid  by  the  means  of  legislation. 
I  avail,  &c., 

H.  L.  BULWER. 
Hon.  D.  Webster,  cfc,  ije. 

[Extract.] 

IIiT  Majesty's  GoviTiiment  is  prepared,  on  certain  conditions,  and  with  certain  roser- 
vntions,  to  make  the  loiicession  to  whidi  so  nnich  importance  seems  to  have  been 
attached  by  Mr.  Clayton,  viz,  to  throw  open  to  the  lisliermeu  of  the  United  States  the 
fisheries  in  the  waters  of  the  British  North  American  colonies,  with  permission  to  those 
fislierinen  to  land  on  the  coast  of  those  colonies,  for  the  i)nri)ose  of  dryinj?  tlieir  nets 
and  curing  their  fisii ;  provided  that  in  so  doing  they  do  not  interfere  with  the  owners 
of  private  property,  or  with  the  operations  of  British  fishermen. 

Her  M.ajesty's  Government  would  require,  as  an  iudispensablo  condition,  in  return 
for  this  concession,  that  all  fish,  either  fresh  or  cured,  imported  into  the  United  States 
from  the  British  North  American  possessions,  in  vessels  of  any  nation  or  description, 
should  bo  admitted  into  the  United  States  duty  free,  and  upon  terms  in  all  respects  of 
ecjuality  with  fish  imported  by  citizens  of  the  United  States. 

N.  B. — As  the  concession  above  stated  applies  solely  to  the  sea  fishery,  the  fisheries 
ia  estuaries  and  mouths  of  rivers  are  not  of  course  included. 

Her  Majesty's  Government  does  not  propose  that  any  part  of  this  arrangement  should 
apply  to  Newfoundland. 

How,  after  reading  the  above,  can  it  be  asserted  that  Her  Majesty's 
Government  made  an  offer  to  throw  open  the  fisheries  in  return  for  the 
free  admission  of  fish  I  This  offer  was  part  only  of  a  general  proposi- 
tion to  i)ut  the  comrocccial  relations  between  the  United  States  and  the 
British  North  American  colonies  upon  a  better  footing,  and  it  was  ex- 
pressly made  contingent  upon  the  establishment  of  tlie  reciprocal  free 
interchange  of  all  natural  productions. 

VII. 

The  fourth  section  and  a  very  large  additional  portion  of  the  Answer 
is  devoted  to  a  consideration  of  the  advantages  alleged  to  be  derived 
hy  British  subjects  from  the  provisions  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 
These  are,  first,  increased  catch  of  fish  taken  by  colonial  fishermen  as 
the  result  of  the  admission  of  American  fishermen  into  British  waters; 
second,  incidental  benefits  arising  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  Canadian 
fishing  villages  and  others  on  the  coast  of  the  maritime  provinces  from 
tratiic  with  American  fishermen. 

This  subject  is  introduced  for  the  purpose  of  diminishing  any  com- 
pensation to  which  Great  Britain  may  be  entitled.  In  the  first  place 
these  alleged  benefits  are  not  founded  in  fact,  and,  secondly,  their  con- 
sideration is  beyond  the  duty  of  the  Commissioners  and  the  scope  of  the 
inquiry. 

The  attention  of  the  Commission  is  directed  to  the  entire  absence  of 
anything  whatever  in  the  treaty  to  warrant  the  introduction  of  this 
large  mass  of  extraneous  matter  in  the  Answer,  inasmuch  as  the  Com- 
mis.sioner8,  when  estimating  any  advantage  which  msiy  accrue  to  Great 
Britain  uuder  the  treaty,  are  confined  to  the  subjects  named  in  Articles 
19  and  21. 

There  are,  it  wiii  be  apparent,  many  reciprocal  advantages  which  both 
nations  may  enjoy,  as  the  result  of  the  treaty  to  certain  classes  of  indi- 
viduals not  within  the  province  of  the  Commission  to  consider,  and 
those  above  alluded  to  are  clearly  and  unmistakably  among  the  number. 

To  support  these  assertions  in  the  Answer,  lengthy  extracts  are  quoted 
from  speeches  delivered  in  the  Canadian  House  of  Commons  upon  the 
occasion  of  the  debate  on  the  adoption  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

The  speakers,  it  must  be  considered,  were  addressing  themselves  to 


'■% 


\ 


'A 


k — — 


180 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


If 


the  Treaty  of  Washington  us  a  whole,  and  not  simply  to  the  fishery 
clauses  of  that  treaty.  In  dealing  with  these  clauses  not  one  of  those 
speakers  ventured  the  assertion  or  opinion  that  the  advantages  to  be 
derived  by  Canada  were  in  any  way  or  sense  equivalent  to  those  con. 
ferred  upon  the  United  States.  They  spoke  and  the  assembly  by  them 
addressed  was  impressed  with  the  full  knowledge  of  the  clauses  whicli 
provide  for  the  assessment  and  payment  to  Canada  of  full  compensation 
for  the  privileges  secured  by  Article  23  of  the  treaty. 

It  is  reasonable  to  assume,  considering  especially  the  occasion  and 
circumstances  of  the  debate,  the  numerous  issues  there  raised  inapplica- 
ble to  the  present  discussion,  and  the  forcible  arguments  offered  in 
speeches  not  quoted,  that  the  Commissioners  will  onlj'  give  such  weight 
to  opinions  as  are  relevant  to  and  consistent  with  the  testimony  to  be 
produced  before  them. 

The  debate  in  the  United  States  Senate  on  the  subject  of  the  adoption 
of  the  Treaty  of  Washington  was  held  with  closed  doors,  and  thus  it  is 
not  possible  to  cite  the  opinions  then  off'ered.  It  may,  however,  be  men- 
tioned that  many  eminent  statesmen  and  public  writers  in  the  United 
States  maintain  that  free  access  to  the  British  American  fisheries  is 
highly  promotive  of  her  commerce  and  absolutely  essential  to  her  mer- 
cantile and  naval  greatness. 

And  when  the  Keciprocity  Treaty  was  under  discussion  before  the 
United  States  Senate,  in  1852,  distinguished  American  statesmen  fully 
acknowledged  the  value  of  the  Canadian  fisheries  to  the  fishermen  of 
the  United  States.    Mr.  Secretary. Seward  said: 

Will  the  Senata  please  to  notice  that  the  principal  fisheries  in  the  waters  to  which 
these  limitations  ai)pl.v  are  the  mackerel  and  the  herring  fisheries,  and  that  these  me 
what  are  called  "  shoal  fisheries ;"  that  is  to  say,  the  best  fishing  for  mackerel  and  licr- 
rings  is  within  three  miles  of  the  shore.  Therefore,  by  that  renunciation,  the  United 
States  renounced  the  best  mackerel  and  herring  fisheries.  Senators,  please  to  notice, 
also,  that  the  privilege  of  resort  to  the  shore  constantly  to  cure  and  dry  fish,  is  very 
important.  Fish  can  be  cured  sooner,  and  the  sooner  cured  the  better  they  are,  anil 
the  better  is  the  market  price.  This  circumstance  has  givtn  to  the  colonies  a  great 
advantage  over  us  in  this  trade.  It  has  stimulated  their  desire  to  .abridge  the  Ameri- 
can fishing  as  much  as  possible;  and,  indeed,  they  seek  naturally  enough  to  procure 
our  exclusion  altogether  horn  the  fishing-grounds. 

Further  on,  alluding  to  the  construction  of  the  Convention  of  1818,  as 
regards  large  bays,  Mr.  Seward  said : 

While  that  (inestion  is  kept  up,  the  American  fisheries,  which  were  once  in  a  most 
prosperous  condition,  are  comparatively  stationary,  or  declining,  although  supported 
by  large  bounties.  At  the  same  time  the  Provincial  fisheries  ai'e  gaining  in  the  <iuan- 
tity  of  fish  exported  tv  this  country,  and  largely  gaining  in  their  exportations  abroml. 

Our  fishermen  want  all  that  our  own  construction  of  the  convention  gives  them,  ;iml 
want  and  must  have  »io,-e— tliey  want  and  must  ha  -9  the  privilege  of  fishing  witbiii 
the  three  inhibited  miles,  and  of  curing  fish  on  the  shore. 

Senator  Hamlin,  of  Maine,  after  describing  the  magnitude  and  im- 
portance of  the  American  fisheries  "as  the  great  fountains  of  comuiei- 
cial  prosperity  and  na,  al  power,"  ''"clared  that  if  American  fishermen 
were  kept  out  of  thew  inshore  waters,  the  "  immense  amount  of  prop- 
erty thus  invested  will  become  useless,  and  leave  them  in  want  and  beg- 
gary, or  in  prison  in  foreign  jails." 

In  the  House  of  Representatives,  Mr.  Scudder,  of  Massachusetts,  re- 
ferring to  the  mackerel,  said : 

These  fish  are  taken  in  the  waters  nearer  the  ooa^t  than  the  codfish  are.  A  cotinid- 
erable  pro)iortion,  from  one-third  to  one-half,  are  taken  on  the  coasts  and  in  the  baja 
and  gulfs  of  the  Uritisb  Provinces.  The  inhabitants  of  the  Provinces  take  many  ut 
them  in  lioits  and  with  seines.  The  boat  and  seine  tishery  is  the  more  successful  and 
profitable,  and  would  be  pursued  by  our  fishermen  were  it  not  for  the  stipulations  of 


AWARD   OF   TFE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


181 


the  Convention  of  1818,  betwixt  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  by  which  it  is 
contended  that  all  the  fisheries  within  three  miles  of  the  coasts,  vith  tew  unimportant 
exceptions,  are  secured  to  the  Provinces  alone. 

"Mr.  Tuck,  of  New  Hampshire,  said : 

This  shore  fishery  which  we  have  renounced  is  of  great  value,  and  extremely  impor- 
tant to  American  fishermen.  »»»##•'# 

From  the  first  of  September  to  the  close  of  the  season  the  mackerel  run  near  the 
shore,  and  it  is  next  to  impossible  for  our  vessels  to  obtain  fares  without  taking  fish 
witiiin  the  prohibited  limits.  »»»»»*• 

The  truth  is,  our  fishermen  need  absolutely  and  must  have  the  thousands  of  miles 
of  shore  fishery  which  have  been  renounced,  or  they  must  always  do  an  uncertain  busi- 
ness. If  our  mackerel  men  are  prohibited  from  going  within  three  miles  of  the  ahore, 
anil  are  forcibly  kept  away  (and  nothing  but  force  will  do  it),  then  they  may  as  well 
give  nj)  their  business  first  as  last.    It  will  be  always  uncertain. 

They  (the  American  fishermen)  want  the  shore  fisheries.  They  want  a  right  to 
erect  and  maintain  structures  on  shore  to  cure  codfish  as  soon  as  taken,  thus  saving 
tost,  and  making  better  fish  for  market ;  and  believing  their  wishes  to  be  easy  of 
aiconiplishment,  they  will  not  consent  to  the' endurance  of  former  restrictions,  the 
aunojauces  and  troubles  of  which  they  have  so  long  felt. 

The  foregoing  statements  are  amply  sustained  by  reports  which  have 
been  published  hy  the  United  States  Government,  and  by  other  Amer- 
ican statesmen  and  writers  on  this  subject,  and  which  can  be  laid  before 
the  Commission. 

VIII. 

The  United  States  contend,  at  page  31  of  the  Answer,  that  the 
remission  of  duties  to  Canadian  tishermeu  during  the  four  years  which 
liave  already  elapsed  under  the  operation  of  the  treaty  has  amounted 
to  about  $400,000  annually  ;  and  in  connection  with  this  statement  the 
following  principle  is  laid  down  : 

JThin  a  iax  or  duty  is  impo/ted  upon  only  a  small  portion  of  the  producers  of  any  commod- 
ilil.  from  whivh  the  great  body  of  its  producers  are  exempt,  such  tax  or  duty  necessarily 
niiiuins  a  burden  upon  the  producers  of  tlie  smaller  quantity,  diminishing  thtir  profits,  and 
ainiiiil  be  added  to  the  price  and  so  distributed  among  tlw  purchasers  and  consumers. 

Without  controverting  the  correctness  of  this  principle  in  its  appli- 
cation to  certain  conditions  of  international  commerce,  it  cannot  be 
admitted  to  be  universally  correct,  but  the  accuracy  of  the  statement 
tliat  the  remission  of  duties  has  amounted  to  $400,000  annually,  or  auy- 
tliiiig  like  that  anjount,  is  challenged.  lu  the  United  States  the  demand 
fo"  mackerel  is  large,  but  not  unlimited.  That  demand  cannot  ordina- 
rily be  supplied  by  fish  taken  in  United  States  waters,  and  it  will  be 
jiroved  that  the  average  prices  obtained  by  the  Canadian  exporter  into 
tlie  United  States  during  those  years  in  which  foreign  Hshermen  were 
excluded  from  British-American  waters,  in  face  of  the  duty  of  $2  per 
l)arrel,  have  been  quite  equal  to  the  i>rices  realized  since  these  waters 
liave  been  thrown  open  to  American  fishermen  and  the  duties  removed. 

Upon  a  careful  examination  of  all  the  facts  to  be  submitted,  the  Com- 
missioners will,  it  is  confidently  believed,  be  satisfied  that  the  remission 
<tt  duties  upon  mackerel,  coupled  with  the  throwing  open  of  Canadian 
flsliiiig  grounds  to  the  American  fishermen,  has  not  resulted  in  pecuniary 
protit  to  the  British  fisherman,  but,  on  the  contrary,  to  the  American 
dealer  or  consumer.  At  the  same  time  it  is  frankly  admitted  that  dur- 
ing those  periods  when  American  fishermen  enjoyed,  as  stated  in  page 
fl  0}  the  Answer,  the  privilege  of  fishing  in  Canadian  waters,  and  Cana- 
•liaiicanght  fish  were  subject  to  duty,  that  duty  may  have  been  paid 
to  a  certain  extent  by  the  exporter,  increasing  or  lessening  in  propor- 
tion as  the  catch  of  United  States  vessels  in  Canadian  waters  was  small 
or  great. 


182 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHEEY   COMMISSION. 


In  conclusion  it  is  submitted  that  the  principle  insisted  on  by  the 
United  States  on  page  31  of  the  Answer  in  regard  to  the  burden  of  duty 
falling  upon  the  producer,  already  quoted,  is  conclusive  in  showing  the 
value  at  which  the  United  States  estimate  the  compensation  to  be  paid 
for  the  concessions  granted  to  them  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

In  this  relation  Her  Majesty's  Government  calls  particular  attention 
to  the  offer  made  by  the  United  States  Commissioners  during  the  nego- 
tiation preceding  that  treaty,  as  appears  from  the  protocols  of  the  Con- 
ference.   That  offer  is  expressed  in  the  following  words : 

That  iDasmuch  as  Congress  had  recently  more  than  oiiue  expressed  itself  in  favor 
of  the  abolition  of  the  duties  on  coal  and  salt,  they  would  propose  that  coal,  salt,  iind 
fish  be  reciprocally  admitted  free,  and  that  inasmuch  as  Congress  had  removed  the 
duty  from  a  portion  of  the  lumber  heretofore  subject  to  duty,  and  as  the  tendency  of 
legislation  in  the  United  States  was  toward  the  reduction  of  taxation  and  of  duties  iu 
proportion  to  the  reduction  of  the  public  debt  and  expenses,  they  would  further  pro- 
pose that  lumber  be  admitted  free  of  tu,iy  from  and  after  the  Ist  July,  1874. 

The  British  Commissioners  declined  the  offer,  on  the  ground  of  its  in- 
adequacy, unless  supplemented  by  a  money  payment,  and  it  was  subse- 
quently withdrawn. 

This  offer  of  the  American  C'^rnrissi oners  embraced  the  free  admis- 
sion into  the  United  States  •.  '  ''  ■■•.""i  flsh-oil,  coal  and  salt,  to  which 
lumber  was  to  be  added  aftt/   bv  -ly,  1S7  .. 

The  treaty,  as  subsequently  a^t'  ""  ipou,  confined  the  reciprocal 
remission  of  duty  to  fish  and  flc3li-oil. 

The  difference,  then,  between  t'le  offer  of  the  American  Commissioners 
and  the  actual  treaty  concessiou  '  =  Iu  t!.*^  ^ee  admission  of  fish  and 
fish-oil,  while  coal,  salt,  and  lumber  ai\  stih  h  ^hyc^.  to  duty.  Her  Maj- 
esty's Govojcameut  are  prepared  to  prove  thul  up.ards  of  $17,000,000 
would  ha\f  been  the  aggregate  remissions  upon  these  three  last  named 
articles  for  the  term  of  years  over  which  the  treaty  extends,  after  de- 
ducting the  duties  upon  the  same  articles  when  imported  into  Canada 
from  the  United  States,  and  upon  the  principle  enunciated  as  an  axiom 
in  the  Answer  of  the  United  States,  it  may  be  fairly  assumed  that  this 
sum  of  $  17,000,000  is  the  value  which  the  United  States  High  Commis- 
sioners themselves  placed  upon  the  fishery  privileges  which  they  ob- 
tained for  their  country  under  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  over  and 
above  the  privileges  conceded  to  (xreat  Britain  and  now  enjoyed  under 
•the  treaty. 

PART  II.— NEWFOUNDLAND. 

In  the  Answer  to  the  Case,  it  is  contended  that  "  in  regard  to  New- 
foundland no  special  remarks  seem  to  be  required  at  this  point,  except 
that,  by  Article  32,  the  provisions  and  stipulations  of  Articles  18  to  25, 
inclusive,  are  extended  to  that  island  so  far  as  they  are  applicable.  But 
there  is  no  previous  mention  of  ^Newfoundland  in  the  treaty ;  and  it 
seems  a  strained  and  unnatural  construction  of  Article  32  to  hold  that 
by  this  general  language  it  was  intended  to  make  the  provisions  as  to 
this  Commission  applicable  thereto.  The  United  States  assert  that  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Commissioners  does  not  extend  to  inquiring  whether 
compensation  should  be  made  for  the  inshore  fisheries  of  that  island, 
both  because  the  language  of  the  treaty  does  not  authorize  them  to  do 
80,  and  because  the  extensive  rights  to  the  inshore  fisheries  of  that 
island,  and  to  dry  and  cure  fish  upon  its  shores,  already  possessed 
by  the  United  States  under  the  Convention  of  1818,  render  it  ex- 
tremely improbable  that  any  idea  of  possible  compensation  to  that 


1 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


183 


island  could  have  been  entertained  by  either  of  the  High  Contracting 
Powers  when  the  treaty  was  framed." 

This  contention  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  to  exclude  from  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Commissioners  the  claim  of  the  Colony  of  Newfound- 
land for  compensation  is  submitted  to  be  wholly  untenable,  and  it  can 
scarcely  be  supposed  that  such  a  positiou  is  intended  to  be  seriously 
urged  by  the  United  States.  It  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  Article  32 
that  it  is  provided  that  "  the  provisions  and  stipulations  of  Articles 
18  to  25  of  this  treaty,  inclusive,  shall  extend  to  the  Colony  of  New- 
foundland as  tar  as  they  are  applicable."  If  it  had  been  contemplated 
to  exclude  Newfoundland  from  a  claim  for  compensation,  the  provisions 
aud  stipulations  of  Articles  23  to  25,  inclusive,  which  have  reference 
only  to  the  assertion  of  the  British  claim  for  compensation,  and  the 
mode  of  adjustment  thereof,  would  not  have  been  expressly  extended 
to  Newfoundland,  but  the  Articles  18  to  21,  inclusive,  would  have  been 
alone  suflicient  for  securing  the  mutual  concessions  therein  contained. 
Xo  language  could  have  been  employed  more  iilaiuly  providing  for  the 
right  of  Newfoundland,  conjointly  with  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  to 
claim  compensation  for  the  greater  value  of  the  concessions  as  regards 
the  colony  made  to  the  United  States  over  those  conceded  by  the  lat- 
ter to  Newfoundland.  The  assertion  made  that  the  United  States  pos- 
sessed extensive  rights  to  the  inshore  fisheries  of  Newfoundland  appears 
to  render  it  desirable  that  the  nature  and  extent  of  these  rights  should 
be  clearly  placed  before  the  Commissioners.  By  Article  13  of  the 
Treaty  of  Utrecht,  A.  D.  1713,  it  is  stipulated : 

The  island  called  Newfoundland,  with  the  adjacent  islands,  shall,  from  this  time  for- 
ward, belong  of  right  v.bolly  to  Great  Britain ;  and  to  that  end  the  town  and  fortress 
of  Placentia  and  whatever  other  places  in  the  said  island  are  in  the  possession  of  the 
Fanch  shall  be  yielded  and  given  up  within  seven  months  from  the  exchange  of  the 
ratifications  of  this  treaty,  or  sooner,  if  possible,  by  the  Most  Christian  King,  to  those 
who  have  a  commission  from  the  Queen  of  Great  Britain  for  that  purpose.  Nor  shall 
tho  Most  Christian  King,  his  heirs,  and  successors,  or  any  of  their  subjects,  at  any 
time  hereafter,  lay  claim  to  any  right  to  the  said  island  and  islands,  or  to  any  part  of 
it  or  them.  Moreover,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  the  subjects  of  France  to  fortify  any 
place  in  the  said  island  of  Newfoundland,  or  to  erect  any  buildings  there,  besides 
Btages  made  of  boards  and  huts  necessary  and  usual  for  drying  of  fish,  or  to  resort  to 
the  said  island  beyond  the  time  necessary  for  fishing  and  drying  of  fish.  But  it 
shall  be  allowed  to  subjects  of  Franco  to  catch  fish  and  to  dry  them  on  land  in  that 
part  only,  and  iu  no  other  besides  that,  of  the  said  island  of  Newfoundland  which 
stretches  from  the  place  called  Cape  Bouavista  to  the  northern  point  of  the  said  island, 
and  from  thence  running  down  the  western  side  reaches  as  far  as  the  place  called 
Point  Riche.  But  the  island  called  Cape  Breton,  as  also  all  others,  both  in  tho 
mouth  of  the  river  Saint  Lawrence  and  in  the  gulf  of  the  same  name,  shall  hereafter 
belong  of  right  to  the  French,  and  the  Most  Christian  King  shall  have  all  manner  of 
liberty  to  fortify  any  place  or  places  there. 

And  by  Article  V  of  the  Treaty  of  Versailles,  A.  D.  1783,  it  is  further 
agreed  that — 

His  Majesty  the  Most  Christian  King,  in  order  to  prevent  the  quarrels  which  have 
hitherto  arisen  between  the  two  nations  of  England  and  France,  consents  to  renounce 
the  right  of  fishing,  which  belongs  to  him  in  virtue  of  the  aforesaid  article  of  the 
Treaty  of  Utrecht,  from  Cape  Bonavista  to  Cape  St.  John,  situated  on  the  eastern 
coast  of  Newfoundland,  in  fifty  degrees  north  latitude;  and  His  Majesty  tho  King  of 
Great  Britain  consents,  on  his  part,  that  the  fishery  assigned  to  the  subjects  of  His 
Most  Christian  Majesty  beginning  at  the  said  Cape  St.  John,  passing  to  tho  north 
and  descending  by  the  western  coast  of  the  island  of  Newfoundland,  t^hall  extend  to 
the  place  called  Cape  Ray,  situated  in  forty-seven  degrees  fifty  minutes  latitude.  Tho 
French  fishermen  shall  enjoy  the  fishery  which  is  assigned  to  them  by  the  present 
article,  as  they  had  the  rigllt  to  enjoy  that  which  was  assigned  to  them  by  tho  Treaty 
of  Utrecht. 


n 


184 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


The  declaration  of  His  Britaunic  Majesty  accompanying  the  last- 
named  treaty  is  as  follows: 

The  King  having  entirely  agreed  with  His  Most  Christian  Majesty  npon  the  articlns 
uf  the  defiuitive  treaty,  will  seeli  every  means,  which  sliall  not  only  insure  the  exucii- 
tiun  thereof  with  his  accustomed  good  faith  and  punctuality,  and  will  besides  give,  on 
Lis  part,  all  possible  etlicacy  to  the  principles  which  shall  prevent  even  the  least  t'oiin. 
dation  of  dispute  for  the  future.  To  this  end,  and  in  order  that  the  fishermen  of  the 
two  nations  may  not  give  cause  for  daily  quarrels,  His  Britannic  Majesty  will  take  tlie 
most  positive  measures  for  preventing  his  subjects  from  interrupting  in  any  maniiui', 
by  their  competition,  the  fishery  of  the  French,  durini;  the  temporary  exercise  uf  it 
which  is  granted  to  them  upon  the  coasts  of  the  island  of  Newfoundland;  but  he  will 
for  this  purpose  cause  the  fixed  settlements  whicli  shall  be  formed  there  to  be  removt'd. 
His  Britannic  Majesty  will  give  orders  that  the  French  fishermen  bo  not  incommoded 
in  cutting  the  wood  necessary  for  the  repair  of  their  scati'olds,  huts,  aud  fishing- vessels, 

The  thirteenth  article  of  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht,  and  the  method  of  carrying  on  tha 
fishery,  which  has  at  all  times  been  acknowledged,  shall  be  the  plan  upon  wuich  the 
fishery  shall  be  carried  on  there ;  it  shall  not  bo  deviated  from  by  either  party ;  the 
French  fishermen  building  only  their  scaffolds,  confining  themselves  to  the  repair  of 
their  fishing-vessels,  and  not  wintering  there;  the  subjects  of  His  Britannic  Majesty, 
on  their  part,  not  molesting  in  any  manner  the  French  fishermen  during  their  fishing, 
Bor  injuring  their  scail'olds  during  their  absence. 

The  King  of  Great  Britain,  in  ceding  liie  islands  of  St.  Pierre  and  Miquelon  to  France, 
regards  tliem  as  ceded  for  the  purpose  of  serving  as  a  real  shelter  to  the  French  fishor- 
iiieu,  and  in  full  confidence  that  these  possessions  will  not  become  an  object  of  jealousy 
between  the  two  nations  ;  and  that  the  fishery  between  the  said  islands  and  that  of 
Newfoundland  shall  be  limited  to  the  middle  of  the  channel. 

The  "extensive  rights  to  the  inshore  fisheries"  of  Newfoundland, 
alleged  to  be  possessed  by  the  United  States  prior  to  the  Washington 
Treaty,  consisted,  first,  of  a  right  to  participate  in  common  with  British 
subjects  in  such  rights  of  fishitig  on  the  northern  and  western  parts  of 
the  coast,  between  Quirpon  Island  and  Cape  Ray,  as  British  subjects 
possessed  after  the  concessions  made  to  the  French  by  the  aforesaid 
tieaties  of  A.  D.  1713  and  1783;  secondly,  the  liberty,  in  common  with 
British  subjects,  to  take  flsh  on  the  southern  coast  from  Cape  Ray  to  the 
Rameau  Islands.  The  first  is  of  very  limited  value,  considering  the 
large  concessions  previously  made  to  the  French,  and  the  second  extends 
over  a  comparatively  short  line  of  coast  only.  The  coast  of  Newfound- 
land from  the  Rameau  Islands  to  Cape  Ray  and  thence  north  to  Quirpon 
Island  is  too  remote,  and  is  not  suitable  as  a  basis  for  carrying  on  the 
deep-sea  ami  Bank  fisheries,  the  eastern  and  southeastern  coasts,  now 
thrown  open  to  the  Utiited  States,  being  the  parts  of  the  island  which 
can  be  alone  availed  of  for  that  purpose  with  real  advantage.  The  United 
States,  moreover,  undertook  by  treaty  with  France  in  1801,  article  27, 
that  "  neither  party  will  intenneddle  in  the  fisheries  of  the  other  on  its 
coasts,  nor  disturb  the  other  in  the  exercise  of  the  rights  which  it  now 
liolds  or  may  acquire  on  the  coast  of  Newfonndland,  in  the  Gulf  of  St. 
Lawrence,  or  elsewhere  on  the  American  coast  northward  of  the  United 
States,  but  the  whale  and  seal  fisheries  shall  be  free  to  both  in  every 
quarter  of  the  world."  Therefore,  the  "  extensive  rights"  of  the  United 
States  on  the  coasts  of  Newfoundland  dwindle  down  to  the  mere  liberty, 
in  common  with  British  subjects,  to  take  fish  between  Cape  Ray  and  the 
Rameau  Islands,  and  to  dry  and  cure  fish  in  the  unsettled  bays,  harbors, 
and  creeks  of  that  part  of  the  coast.  It  is  impossible  to  conceive,  hav- 
ing regard  to  the  important  privileges  conceded  by  the  Washington 
Treaty,  that  the  extremely  limited  rights  enjoyed  by  the  United  States 
wnder  the  Convention  of  1818  could  in  any  way  have  been  entertained 
by  the  High  Contracting  Powers  as  operating  against  the  undoubted 
claim  of  the  Colony  of  Newfoundland  for  compensation.  It  is  asserted 
on  behalf  of  Newfoundland  that  the  United  States  have  never  claimed 
for  their  fishermen  the  right  to  enter  any  of  the  bays  of  that  island 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


185 


other  than  those  between  Quirpon  Island  and  Cape  Ray,  and  thence  to 
the  llameau  Islands,  except  "  for  the  purpose  of  shelter  and  of  repair- 
ing damages  therein,  of  purchasing  wood,  and  of  obtaining  water,"  as 
provided  by  the  Convention  of  1818. 

It  will  be  shown  by  conclusive  testimon.y,  that  whether  the  contention 
on  the  part  of  the  United  States  regarding  the  limit  or  extent  of  terri- 
torial waters  and  the  rights  in  bays,  gulfs,  and  inlets,  be  maintainable 
or  not,  it  has  no  appreciable,  practical  effect,  so  far  as  concerns  the 
oliiiin  for  compensation  made  by  Newfoundland,  inasmuch  as  the  cod 
anil  other  fisheries  of  that  island  set  forth,  in  the  Case,  as  producing 
anuually  over  six  million  dollars  by  the  labor  of  a  limited  number  of 
operatives,  and  which  are  now  by  Article  18  of  the  Treaty  of  Washing- 
ton thrown  open  to  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States,  are  carried  on 
within  three  miles  of  the  coast  line  following  the  sinuosities  of  the  shore. 
The  bait  fishery,  from  which  the  United  States  fishermen  can  now,  by 
virtue  of  the  same  article,  procure  all  the  bait  requisite  for  the  success- 
ful prosecution  of  the  deep-sea.  Bank,  and  insliore  fisheries,  is  also  car- 
ried on  within  the  said  three-mile  limit.  The  fact  that  such  a  large 
annual  amount  of  produce,  principally  of  codfish,  is  drawn  from  the 
waters  along  our  coast  and  within  the  admitted  territorial  limits  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Colony  of  Newfoundland,  effectually  refutes  the 
assertion  by  the  United  States  that  "  the  cod  fishery  is  solely  a  deep- 
sea  fishery,  and  not  a  subject  within  the  cognizance  of  this  Commission." 
The  privilege  of  landing  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  for  the  purpose 
of  curing  fish,  drying  nets,  &c.,  characterized  in  the  Answer  as  "cus- 
toms belonging  to  the  primitive  mode  of  fishing,"  is  nevertheless  highly 
valued  by  the  United  States,  inasmuch  as  its  insertion  has  .always  been 
insisted  on  in  all  treaties  relating  to  the  fisheries  between  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain,  and  it  has  been  practically  availed  of,  and 
may  in  the  future  be  reasonably  anticipated  to  become  more  generally 
used;  the  climate  of  Newfoundland  being  especially  adapted  to  the 
production  of  the  best  quality  of  dry  codfish  suitable  for  southern  and 
tropical  markets. 

The  claim  preferred  by  Newfoundland  is  based  alone  upon  the  new 
privileges  conceded  by  the  Washington  Treaty,  and  does  not  embrace 
a  demand  under  any  other  treaty  or  convention.  And  it  is  submitted 
that  in  estimating  compensation,  the  commissioners  should  not  confine 
their  jurisdiction  and  consideration  merely  to  the  expressed  specific, 
but  to  all  necessary  incidental  privileges,  which  before  could  not  be 
claimed,  and  were  not  enjoyed  as  they  have  been,  or  may  be,  under  this 
treaty. 

The  specific  and  consequential  concessions  have  already  been  set 
forth  in  the  Case,  and  ought  not  to  be  restricted  to  the  limits  proposed 
tor  awarding  compensation  in  the  Answer. 

So  far  as  Newfoundland  is  concerned,  these  concessions  are  of  great 
value  to  the  United  States  and  of  corresponding  detriment  to  British 
tishermen  residing  on  the  coast. 

The  restrictions  in  the  Treaty  of  1818  cannot  be  considered  as  in  pres- 
ent operation  as  regards  the  rights  conferred  on  and  exercised  by  the 
United  States  under  the  Washington  Treaty. 

The  free  and  uninterrupted  exercise  of  these  rights  by  the  United 
States  fishermen  on  the  Newfoundland  coast,  since  this  treaty  came  into 
effect,  may  be  accepted  as  a  practical  proof  of  the  interpretation  placed 
by  the  United  States  upon  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

Evidence  will  be  submitted  to  prove  that  the  United  States  is  not  a 
market  for  Newfoundland  produce,  except  to  a  very  limited  extent,  and 


"i 


186 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


tbat  neither  the  abro(;atioii  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  nor  the  passing 
of  the  Washington  Treaty  did  in  any  way  affect  exports  of  the  colony 
to  the  United  States,  or  the  value  of  its  produce,  as  the  shipments  of 
iiTewfoundland  fish  to  the  United  States  form  so  insignificant  an  item  of 
export.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  since  the  operation  of  the  present 
treaty,  fish  shipments  to  the  United  States  have  declined,  as  the  fisher- 
men  of  that  nation,  from  the  increased  advantages  conferred  on  them, 
can  now  supply  their  own  markets.  The  assumption,  therefore,  that 
the  treaty  has  opened  up  to  Newfoundland  a  free  market  with  forty 
millions  of  people,  consumers  of  its  produce,  is  utterly  untenable,  this 
being  in  reality  but  a  barren  right,  as  the  people  of  the  United  States 
are  not  to  any  marked  extent,  as  compared  with  those  of  Great  Britain, 
the  Mediterranean,  West  Indies,  or  Brazil,  consumers  of  Newfoundland 
dry  codfish.  Only  in  years  of  great  scarcity  in  the  United  States 
markets  is  Newfoundland  hard  cured  fish  called  for  to  supply  the  deii- 
ciency.  Having  shown  how  small  a  percentage  of  the  annual  exports 
of  Newfoundland  finds  its  way  to  the  markets  of  the  United  States,  it 
is  plain  that  the  remission  of  duties  thereon,  trivial  in  amount  as  they 
will  be  shown  to  be,  cannot  for  a  moment  be  considered  as  any  adequate 
set  off  to  the  extensive  fishing  privileges  ceded  to  the  United  States  by 
the  Colony  of  Newfoundland. 

As  regards  the  herring  fishery  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland,  it  is 
availed  of  to  a  considerable  extent  by  the  United  States  fishermen,  and 
evidence  will  be  adduced  of  large  exportations  by  them  in  American 
vessels,  particularly  from  Fortune  Bay  and  the  neighborhood,  both  to 
European  and  their  own  markets. 

The  presence  of  United  States  fishermen  upon  the  coast  of  Newfound- 
land, so  far  from  being  an  advantage,  as  is  assumed  in  the  Answer,  oper- 
ates most  prejudicially  to  Newfoundland  fishermen.  Bait  is  not  thrown 
overboard  to  attract  the  fish,  as  asserted,  but  the  United  States  Bank 
fishing  vessels,  visiting  the  coast  in  such  large  numbers  as  they  do,  for 
the  purpose  of  obtaining  bait,  sweep  the  coves,  creeks,  and  inlets, 
thereby  diminishing  the  supply  of  bait  for  local  catch,  and  scaring  it 
from  the  grounds  where  it  would  otherwise  be  an  attraction  to  the  cod. 

No  incidental  benefits  have  heretofore  accrued  to  the  people  of  New- 
foundland from  traflflc  with  United  States  fishermen  under  the  opera- 
tion of  any  treaty.  Since  the  abrogation  of  the  Eeciprocity  Treaty,  it 
is  true,  as  stated  in  the  Answer,  that  large  numbers  of  United  States 
mackerel-fishing  vessels  have  been  diverted  from  that  fishery  to  the 
Bank  fishery  of  Newfoundland,  and  hence  the  presence  at  this  time  of 
a  large  fleet  of  United  States  cod-fishing  vessels  upon  the  coast  of  that 
island. 

It  has  been  stated  in  the  Case  that  no  Newfoundland  fishermen  ever 
visit  the  coast  of  the  United  States  for  fishing  purposes,  and  it  is  now 
asserted  that,  even  though  the  fisheries  there  may  be  valuable  to  the 
United  States,  they  are  utterly  valueless  to  Newfoundland,  not  from 
lack  of  enterprise  on  the  part  of  Newfoundlanders,  as  alleged,  but  be- 
cause they  have  a  teeming  fishery  at  their  own  door  and  could  not 
advantageously  resort  to  localities  so  remote.  The  contrary,  however, 
f:8  the  case  with  the  United  States,  whose  fishermen  are  compelled  to 
seek  foreign  fishing-grounds. 

The  assertion  that  the  United  States  cod-fishery  has  declined  in 
amount  and  value,  if  this  be  sustained,  can  hardly  be  admitted  as  an 
argument  against  the  claim  for  compensation,  but  it  may  very  fairly, 
and  with  force,  be  contended  that,  in  view  of  the  material  and  unques- 
tionable benefits  conferred  upon  the  United  States  by  the  Washington 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERT  COMMISSION. 


187 


Treaty,  and  the  free  exercise  of  those  privileges,  the  falling  ofif  would 
have  been  much  more  considerable  had  the  treaty  not  existed. 

The  allegation  on  the  part  of  the  United  States, ''  that  they  desired 
to  secure  the  privilege  of  using  our  fisheries,  not  for  their  commercial 
or  intrinsic  value,  but  for  the  purpose  of  removing  a  source  of  irrita- 
tion," is  not  maintainable,  for,  while  the  Treaty  of  Washington  obviates 
the  necessity  of  a  continuance  of  that  vigilance  in  the  protection  of 
British  rights,  within  territorial  waters  of  the  island,  by  throwing  open 
all  its  preserves  to  the  free  use  of  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  it 
must  be  remembered  that  such  necessary  protection  was  not  the  conse- 
quence of  any  right  on  the  part  of  the  United  States,  but  the  immediate 
result  of  a  system  of  encroachment  by  the  fishermen  of  that  country  in 
British  waters,  not  in  accordance  with  the  observance  of  international 
rights — for,  notwithstanding  the  Convention  of  1818,  they  have  con- 
tinually attempted  to  participate  in  privileges  exclusively  belonging  to 
the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  thus  causing  much  annoyance 
and  vexation  between  the  two  nations,  and  forcing,  as  it  were,  the 
present  arrangement,  to  avoid  difficulties  between  two  peoples  whose 
mercantile  as  well  as  social  and  hereditary  connections  should  be  char- 
acterized by  respect  for  mutual  rights. 


DOCUME 
SION, 

187  7, 

GOVEll 


Extract  o 


The  ni 
2,414  to  3 
sail  of  tbi 
Gulf  of  S 
of  $4,500, 

XOTE.- 

to  50,000 
three- mile 


In  1865 
to  1,000  qn 
barrels.    I 
to  815  per 


Estimate  of 


The  tonn 
official  dati 

facts. 

Sea  (as  c 
ring): 

Tonnage  ., 
Value  of  fls 
Capital  in?c 

i^'OTE.— 1 

Ijoats  eraplc 
licensed. 


^PFEISTDIX    E. 


DOCUMENTS  FILED  WITH  THE  SECRET  ART  OF  THE  HALIFAX  COMMIS- 
SION, AND  READ  AT  THE  SITTING  HELD  ON  THE  SOtH  DAY  OF  JULY, 
1877,  IN  SUPPORT  OF  THE  "CASE  OF  HER  BRITANNIC  MAJESTY'S 
GOVERN  ." 

I. 

Extract  of  a  report  from  Mr.  E.  H.  Derby  to  the  Hon.  WiUiam  H.  Seward  y 

dated  January^  1867,  p.  44. 

The  number  of  vessels  in  the  fisheries  has  ranged  since  1850  from 
2,414  to  3,815  in  18G2,  besides  boats  in  the  shore  fisheries.  Six  hundred 
sail  of  these  vessels  have  in  a  single  season  fished  for  mackerel  in  the 
Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  and  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  and  taken  fish  to  the  amount 
of  $4,500,000. 

Note.— Nearly  one-fourth  of  our  fishing-fleet,  with  a  tonnage  of  40,000 
to  50,000  tons,  worth  $5,000,000  to  $7,000,000  annually,  fish  near  the 
three-mile  line  of  the  provinces. 

II. 

Extract  from  the  same  report,  p.  78. 

In  1865  vessels  in  the  cod-fishery  are  estimated  to  average  from  800 
to  1,000  quintals  of  dry  fish.  In  the  mackerel  business,  from  500  to  700 
barrels.  Dry  fish  are  now  worth  $8  to  $9  per  quintal,  and  mackerel  $12 
to  $15  per  barrel. 

III. 

Extract  from  the  same  r^ort,  p.  79. 

Estimate  of  the  fisheries  of  the  United  States  for  1859,  by  Hon.  L.  Sabine, 
Secretary  of  Boston  Board  of  Trade. 

Tlie  tonnage  alone  is  official.  The  sea  and  whale  are  estimated  on 
official  data;  the  shell,  lake,  river,  &c.,  rest  on  some  well-asceriained 
facts. 

Sea  (as  cod,  hake,  haddock,  mackerel,  halibut,  pollack,  and  sea-her- 
ring): 

Tonnage 175,306 

Value  of  fish  and  oil $6,730,000 

Capital  invested $7,280,000 

Note. — ^The  official  tonnage  is  less.  The  difference  is  added  for 
boats  employed  in  the  shore  fisheries,  which  are  neither  enrol le<l  nor 

licensed. 


190  AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 

IV. 

i 

Fisheries  of  Prince  Edicard  Island^  pursued  hy  Americans. 

Government  House,  Charlottetown,  P.  E.  I,, 

Fehrtiary  17,  1874. 
Sir  :  With  reference  to  your  dispatch  No.  510  on  297,  of  the  24th  of 
November  last,  I  have  now  the  honor  to  transmit  a  minute  of  the  ex- 
ecutive council  of  the  12th  February,  instant,  on  the  subject  of  the 
fisheries  and  flsh  trade  of  this  province,  in  connection  with  the  claim  for 
compensation  provided  for  by  Article  XXII  of  the  Treaty  of  Washing. 
ton,  as  required  by  his  excellency  the  governor-general ;  together  with 
a  copy  of  the  address  of  the  legislative  council  and  assembly  to  the 
Queen,  and  a  copy  of  minute  of  the  executive  council  of  the  2d  February, 
1873,  both  therein  referred  to. 
I  have  the  honor  to  be,  sir,  your  most  obedient,  humble  servant, 

E.  HODGSON, 
Administrator. 
The  Hon.  the  Secretary  of  State, 

Ottaica. 


Extracts  from  minutes  of  the  executive  council  of  Prince  Edicard  Island. 

Council  Chamber,  February  12, 1874. 
At  a  meeting  of  the  executive  council  in  committee : 
Present :  Mr.  Owen,  Mr.  Haviland,  Mr.  Brecken,  Mr.  Yeo,  Mr.  Lefurgy, 

Mr.  Sullivan,  Mr.  Strong,  Mr.  McDonald,  Mr.  Arseneault. 
The  following  minute  was  adopted  and  ordered  to  be  presented  to 

his  honor  the  administrator  of  the  government : 

1.  The  executive  council  in  committee  having  had  under  consideration 
severtil  communications  from  the  government  of  the  Dominion  bearing 
date  respectively  the  15th  October,  16th  November,  and  12th  December, 
1873,  requesting  this  government  to  furnish  a  report  "  regarding  the 
fisheries  and  flsh  trade  of  this  island,  connected  with  the  claim  for  com- 
pensation provided  by  Article  22  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,"  beg  to 
report  as  follows : 

2.  That  in  any  estimate  which  may  be  made  of  the  value  of  our  island 
fisheries,  no  credit  can  be  given  or  allowance  made  for  the  nominal 
privileges  accorded  to  the  inhabitants  of  this  island  by  Articles  19  and 
21  of  said  treaty,  inasmuch  as  the  fisheries  in  and  around  this  island 
are  in  a  comparatively  priinitive  state,  and  as  yet  undisturbed  by  the 
multifarious  appliances  of  bay-nets,  traps,  weirs,  «!tc.,  which  have  almost 
destroyed  the  sea-coast  and  Inland  fisheries  of  the  United  States. 

3.  The  situation  of  this  island  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  makes  it 
one  of  the  best  fishing  stations  in  the  world,  whilst  along  its  nearly  fonr 
hundred  miles  of  sea-coast  every  mile  abounds  in  cod,  hake,  haddock, 
salmon,  and  mackerel,  as  well  as  other  fish,  during  the  proper  seasons. 

Thus  situated,  fishermen  are  induced  to  use  itis  ports  in  preference 
to  other  ports  of  the  Dominion  on  the  mainland. 

4.  With  a  weekly  line  of  steamers  from  Charlottetown  to  Boston,  and 
daily  communication  by  rail  with  the  different  outports  of  this  island, 
the  American  fisherman  will  be  enabled  to  place  his  catch  weekly  in  the 
United  States  market  at  a  cost  of  one  dollar  per  barrel  from  all  ports  of 
this  island,  receive  new  outfits,  and  continue  bis  fishing  during  the  sea- 
son, thus  saving  the  long  and  dangerous  passage  of  each  trip  to  and 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


191 


from  the  Uuited  States,  as  well  as  enabling  vessels  to  make  three  or  four 
successful  trips  instead  of  one. 

5.  The  best  evidence  of  the  value  of  "free  fishery"  to  the  citizens 
of  the  United  States  may  be  shown  by  the  decrease  in  their  tonnage 
■\}A  men  from  1862  to  1868.  In  1862,  whilst  they  enjoyed  the  bene- 
lit  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  18;>4,  the  United  States  had  employed  in 
the  cod  and  mackerel  fishery  203,000  tons,  which  diminished  in  1868  to 
84,000  tons.  Last  year  the  United  States  had,  according  to  a  late  re- 
port, "  one  thousand  vessels  engaged  in  the  mackerel  fishery  alone, 
worth  not  less  than  $5,000,000,  manned  by  more  than  12,000  seamen  ; 
and  the  town  of  Gloucester,  Mass.,  alone  sent  out  more  than  400  of 
these  vessels." 

G.  In  connection  with  these  facts,  it  may  not  be  out  of  place  here  to 
state,  that  Mr.  Consul  Jackson,  in  his  *'  lieport  on  the  commercial 
relations  of  the  Dominion  and  the  United  States,"  places  the  total 
provincial  fisheries  at  $11,759,530,  and  the  United  States  fisheries  at 
87,000,000.  Owing  to  the  very  imperfect  manner  in  which  our  statistics 
Lave  been  collecte<l,  it  is  diificnlt  to  obtain  reliable  data  on  the  question, 
as  far  as  we  are  concerned.  For  example,  in  the  report  above  referred 
to,  Prince  Edward  is  put  down  as  yielding  only  $169,580.90,  which  is 
below  our  export  alone  for  that  year.  Besides  this,  our  exports  could 
not  possibly  show  what  fish  were  taken  inside  the  "three-mile  line"  by 
our  own  fishermen,  much  less  by  foreigners. 

Annexed,  marked  A,  is  a  statistical  return  showing  the  description  of 
property  used  in  the  fisheries,  and  the  quantity  of  fish  caught  by  our  fish- 
ermen, within  the  three-mile  line,  for  the  year  1871,  by  which  it  appears 
that  only  about  two  per  cent,  of  our  population  are  engaged  in  fishing 
pursuits ;  that  the  average  value  catch  per  man  for  the  same  is  two 
hundred  dollars,  the  whole  catch  about  three  hundred  and  twenty  thou- 
saud  dollars,  and  the  number  of  persons  engaged  therein  1,646. 

7.  It  is  alleged,  as  we  believe  untruly,  that  the  great  portion  of  the 
iiackerel  taken  by  the  United  States  fishing-fleet  is  obtained  or  caught 
Outside  the  "  three-mile  line,"  but  this  we  do  not  believe  to  be  the  fact, 
as  \e  have  no  doubt,  from  information  obtained  from  persons  actually 
engajj-'^d  in  the  fishing  business,  that  "  inside"  and  "outside"  fishing 
are  indispensable  to  the  success  of  the  voyage,  and  that  the  inside  fishery 
in  general  is  more  productive  and  remunerative  than  the  outside  fish- 
ery. 

8.  From  the  1st  July  to  the  1st  October  is  the  mackerel  season  around 
our  coasts,  during  which  time  the  United  States  fishing-fleet  pursues  its 
worii ;  and  as  it  has  been  shown  that  in  1872  over  one  thousand  sail  of 
United  States  schooners  from  40  to  100  tons  were  engaged  in  the  mack- 
erel tishery  alone,  from  this  fact,  together  with  onr  experiencearising  from 
the  collection  of  "  Light  money  "  (now  abolislied),  as  well  as  from  actual 
observation,  a  fair  average  of  United  States  vessels  fishing  around  our 
coast  during  the  season  referred  to  may  be  safely  stated  at  three  hun- 
dred sail ;  and  as  a  season's  work  is  usually  about  six  hundred  barrels 
per  vessel,  we  may  fairly  put  down  one-third  of  the  catch  as  taken  in- 
sid«  the  "  three-mile  limit ;"  which  should  give  the  following  result:  300 
sail  at  200  barrels  each,  60,000  barrels,  at  say  $5  per  barrel  for  net  cost  of 
tish  above  $300,000,  as  the  yearly  value  of  the  mackerel  alone  taken 
from  our  shores ;  or,  as  has  been  shown  in  paragraphs,  each  one  of  our 
own  men  engaged  in  the  inshore  mackerel  fishing  iu  boats  shared  two 
hundred  dollars  per  man. 

9.  It  will  be  perceived  that  the  preceding  observations  relate  solely 
to  the  mackerel  fishery,  by  far  the  most  important  in  oar  estimation ; 


m 


192 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


the  other  descriptions  of  fisheries  within  the  three  mile  boundary,  tbe 
right  to  prosecute  which  is  accorded  to  citizens  of  the  United  States, 
we  conceive  to  be  more  than  an  equivalent  for  the  supposed  privileges 
conceded  to  British  subjects  on  the  American  coasts. 

10.  This  government  trusts  that  one  of  tbe  most  important  matters 
will  not  be  overlooked  at  the  conference  about  to  take  place,  nainelv, 
the  preservation  of  our  tisheries,  by  making  effectual  provisions  against 
throwing  offal  on  the  fishing  grounds,  as  well  as  preventing  the  settiiij,' 
of  traps,  weirs,  &c.,  unless  under  very  stringent  regulations. 

11.  In  conclusion,  we  beg  to  bring  to  the  notice  of  the  Dominion  Gov- 
ernment the  annexed  minute  of  council,  bearing  date  the  2d  February, 
1873,  together  with  the  address  forwarded  to  Her  Majesty  tbe  Queen 
from  both  houses  of  tbe  local  legislature,  during  tbe  session  of  1873, 
respecting  tbe  claims  of  tbe  people  of  this  province  for  a  return  of  duties 
justly  due  to  them  from  the  United  States  Government  under  the  cir- 
cumstances detailed  in  said  minute  of  council  Jiud  address,  in  order  tbat 
the  Government  of  tbe  Dominion  may  be  enabled  to  press  for  tbe  liqui- 
dation of  these  claims  by  an  earnest  appeal  to  tbe  justice  and  honor  of 
the  United  States  Government  through  tbe  instrumentality  of  tbe  Fish- 
ery Commission. 

A. — Statistics  of  abstract  returns  from  the  census  taken  in  Prince  Edwanl 

Island  in  the  year  1871. 

Number  of  fishing  establishments 1.7G 

Barrels  of  mackerel  cured  last  year 10,047 

Barrels  of  herring  or  .alewives Ui,"<l)l 

Quintals  of  codfish  or  hake l'>.  W.t 

Pounds  of  hake  cured  last  year Vi,^ti 

Gallons  of  fish-oil  made  last  year ll,(K'i 

(Quantity  of  preserved  shell  and  other  fish  prepared  last  year lbs..  ti, 711 

Salmon  taken  last  year,  value  £',WS  10s $1, 1!».'). 'W 

Number  of  fish  barrels  manufactured  last  year 4"i,'27"< 

Number  of  cooper-shopa (xl 

Number  of  boats  owned  for  fishing  purposes 1,  IS! 

Number  of  men  engaged  in  fishing l.tiiH 

Mackerel,  barrels  of,  increase f,"''^ 

Herring  and  alewives,  decrease .', 5'^4 

Codfish,  quintals,  decrease 'H,  \2C) 

Fish-oil,  decrease  in  gallons r),'.i47 

Certified. 

WILLIAM  C.  DESBRISAY, 
Assistant  Chrh:  Executive  Coiinvil. 


Claim  for  refund  of  duties  on  fish  and  fish-oil. 
[Copy.] 

At  a  meeting  of  a  committee  of  the  executive  council  of  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island,  in  tbe  council  cbamber,  on  the  2d  day  of  February,  1872, 

Present:  Tbe  honorable  Mr.  Pope,  tbe  honorable  Mr.  Macdonald,  Mr. 
Colonial  Secretary,  Mr.  Ricbards,  Mr.  Attorney-General,  Mr.  Leturgy. 

The  following  minute,  addressed  to  tbe  Right  Honorable  Earl  Kimber- 
ley,  Her  Majesty's  principal  Secietary  of  State  for  the  Colonies,  on  tbe 
subject  of  his  lordship's  dispatch,  No.  48,  of  date  the  30th  Deceuiber, 
1871,  to  Lieutenant-Governor  Robinson,  was  adopted  by  the  committee 
and  ordered  to  be  han<led  to  tbe  lieutenant-governor  for  transmission 
to  the  Riglit  Honorable  Earl  Kimberly,  Her  Majesty's  principal  Secre- 
tary of  State  for  the  Colouios,  &c. : 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


193 


The  committee  of  the  executive  council  of  Prince  Edward  Island  have 
had  nnder  consideration  your  lordshiij's  dispatch,  No.  48,  dated  tiie 
30th  December,  1871,  addressed  to  Lieutenant-Governor  Robinson,  ou 
tbe  subject  of  the  "  refund  of  duties  collected  in  the  United  States  on 
fish  oil  and  flsh  exported  from  Prince  Edward  Island  during  the  season 
of  1S71;"  also  dispatch,  No.  59,  dated  25th  July,  from  Lieutenant- 
Governor  Kobinsou  to  your  lordship  on  the  same  subject ;  also  copy  of 
a  dispatch  dated  at  Washington,  12th  May,  1871,  addressed  to  Earl 
Granville  by  Sir  Edward  Tiiornton,  British  Minister  at  Washington,  and 
inclosing  a  letter  which  he  had  received  from  Uamiltun  Fish,  esq.,  of 
tbe  Department  of  State,  Washington,  dated  8th  May,  1871,  with  Sir 
E.  Thornton's  reply  thereto,  on  the  subject  of  a  proposed  provisional 
arrangement  he  wished  to  make  with  the  respective  colonies  named 
therein  until  legislative  action  could  be  had. 

In  Mr.  Fish's  letter  of  8th  May  last  he  proposed  to  Sir  Edward 
Thornton  in  the  following  words,  viz  : 

That  as  tlio  treaty  oonltl  not  come  into  full  operation  until  the  lejrislation  contem- 
lilittcil  in  that  inHlnuuent  shall  have  taken  place,  and  as  it  seems  to  lie  in  accordance 
with  the  interests  of  hoth  governments,  in  f  iiitheiance  of  the  objects  and  spirit  of  the 
treaty,  that  the  citi/AMis  of  the  United  States  should  have  the  enjoyment  of  that  lib- 
erty (luring  the  |)re8eut  season,  I  am  directed  by  the  President  to  express  to  yoii  liia 
hope  that  Her  Majesty's  Government  will  be  prepared,  in  the  event  of  the  ratiticat  iou 
of  the  treaty,  to  make  on  their  own  beiialf  and  to  urge  the  government  of  the  Do- 
minion of  Canada,  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  of  Newfoundland  to  make,  for  the 
seawon  referred  to,  within  their  respective  jurisdictions,  such  relaxations  and  regula- 
tions as  it  maj'  respectively  be  in  their  power  to  adopt,  with  a  view  t<»  the  admission 
of  American  fishermen  to  the  liberty  which  it  is  proposed  to  secure  to  them  by  tbe 
treaty.  The  Government  of  the  United  States  would  be  prepared  at  the  same  time  to 
aiimit  British  subjects  to  the  right  of  fishing  in  the  watersof  tlie  United  States,  specified 
ill  the  treaty  ;  but  as  the  admission  into  tlie  United  States,  free  of  duty,  of  any  ar- 
ticles whicli  are  by  law  subject  to  duty  cannot  he  allowed  witlu)Ut  the  sanction  of 
Congress,  the  President  will,  in  case  the  above  suggestion  meets  the  views  of  the 
Briiisii  Government,  recommend  and  urge  upon  Congress,  at  their  next  session,  that 
any  duties  which  may  have  been  collected  on  au<l  after  the  first  <la}'  of  July  nex:  on 
tish-oil  and  fish,  the  produce  of  the  fislierios  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  and  of  rnnce 
Pldward  Island,  shall  be  returned  an<l  refunded  to  the  parties  paying  the  same,  if  a 
siiiiilar  arrangement  is  made  with  respecri  to  the  admission  into  the  Brit  sh  Possessions 
of  lisli-dil  ami  fish  (with  certain  exceptions  as  in  the  treaty),  being  the  produce  of  the 
lisheries  of  the  United  States. 

The  proposal  was  agreed  to  by  the  government  of  Prince  Edward 
Island,  at  the  urgent  request  of  Her  jNIajesty's  Imperial  Government, 
and  on  the  21th  of  July  last  an  order  was  issued  in  accordance  there- 
with. From  that  date  American  fishermen  had  free  use  of  the  inshore 
fisheries  of  this  island,  and  landed  fish  and  tish  oil  without  being 
charjjed  any  duty  therefor;  while  the  merchants  of  this  island,  placing 
full  faith  and  confidence  in  Mr.  Fish's  proposal,  exported  their  fish  to 
the  United  States,  relying  implicitly  on  the  good  faith  of  the  United 
Stall's  Government  and  never  doubting  but  that  the  President  would 
recoiniiioud  to  and  urge  upon  Congress  the  expediency  of  making  pro- 
vision for  the  relunding  of  the  duties  which  they  had  paid. 

The  committee  of  the  executive  council  now  learn  with  great  surprise 
that,  on  inquiries  being  male  on  the  subject  of  refunding  those  duties, 
tlie  United  States  Government  have  replied  that  the  President  did  not 
iiiteiid  to  urge  upon  Conjiress  the  introduction  of  a  bill  in  accordance 
with  Mr.  Fish's  proposition.  It  would  appear  that  the  ground  taken  by 
the  President  of  the  United  States  for  declining  to  recommend  to  Con- 
gie.ss  the  introduction  of  a  bill  having  for  its  object  the  refund  of  the 
•luties  paid  on  British  tish  during  the  past  sea.son  is,  that  his  ''proposal, 
waile  through  Mr.  Fish  iu  May  last,  contemplated  the  united  action  of 
13  F 


m 


194 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


all  tbe  British  colonies,  and  that  it  would  not  be  practicable  to  separate 
them,  and  carry  into  effect  for  one  what  the  President  was  willing  to 
recommend  for  all  those  colonies. 

The  committee  submit  that  the  Treaty  of  Washington  itself  recognizes 
the  power  of  each  colonial  government  or  legislature  to  act  for  itself 
independently  of  the  other ;  that  no  legislation  on  the  part  of  one  of 
those  governments  can  interfere  with,  or  affect,  or  bind  the  territory 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  any  other  colonial  government. 

That  the  government  of  this  island  did,  on  the  recommendation  of  Her 
Majesty's  Imperial  Government,  on  tlie  24th  July  last,  issue  an  order  as 
proposed  by  Mr.  Fish,  giving  effect  to  the  treaty  within  this  island,  and 
admitting  American  tishermen  to  the  free  use  of  its  fisheries  during  tbe 
season  of  1871 ;  that  American  fishermen  at  once  availed  themselves  of 
this  valuable  privilege,  and  during  the  season  of  1871  were  not  molested 
in  the  prosecution  of  the  fisheries  around  the  shores  of  this  island. 
That  the  United  States  consul  resident  here  was  duly  notified  of  the 
relaxations  made  in  favor  of  American  fishermen,  and  that  Sir  Edward 
Thornton  was  at  the  same  time  informed  by  telegraph,  by  Lieutenant- 
Governor  llobinson,  that  the  pioposals  of  Mr.  Fish  were  agreed  to  by 
the  govennuent  of  this  island  ;  that  the  Government  of  tbe  United 
States  accepted  all  tbe  advantages  thus  conferred  upon  their  fishermen 
during  the  whole  season  of  1871 ;  and  now  when  the  season  has  ended, 
and  application  to  them  to  lulfill  their  part  of  the  agreement  thus  vir- 
tually made,  they  repudiate  the  payment  of  the  equivalent  for  the  advan- 
tages they  received,  on  the  ground  that  the  whole  of  the  provinces  named 
did  not  virtually  accept  their  proposals. 

If  they  purposed  taking  this  course  they  should  at  once,  on  becoming 
aware  that  tbe  Government  of  tbe  Dominion  of  Canada  had  not  acceded 
to  their  proposals,  have  intimated  to  the  government  of  this  island, 
through  the  proper  otficial  channel,  that  it  was  not  tbeir  intention  to 
fulfill  their  own  stipulations  unless  united  action  was  taken  on  thetu  by 
all  tbe  colonies,  and  have  forbidden  their  fishermen  to  fish  within  a 
marine  league  of  the  shores  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Kefunding  those  duties  to  tbe  parties  who  pay  the  same  is,  by  Mr. 
Fish's  inoposal,  made  contingent  only  on  the  suggestion  meeting  with 
the  approval  of  tbe  British  Government,  and  not  by  any  united  action 
of  colonial  governments.  Tbat  it  did  meet  the  approval  of  Her  Majes- 
ty's Imperial  Government  is  proved  by  your  lordship's  dispatcb,  ^o. 
444,  dated  17th  June,  1871,  addressed  to  Lord  Lisgar,  as  well  as  by 
the  action  of  the  government  of  this  island,  on  the  24th  July  last,  and 
by  the  free  admission,  during  the  present  season,  of  American  fish  and 
fish-oil  to  the  ports  of  this  i.sland,  and  of  American  fishermen  to  the 
privilege  of  the  inshore  fisheries  thereof. 

The  committee  of  the  executive  council,  therefore,  consider  it  to  be 
their  duty  to  call  the  special  attention  of  your  lordship  to  this  oxtni- 
ordinary  breach  of  faith  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  Goveninient, 
by  which  our  mercantile  men  will  sustain  heavy  pecuniary  losses,  and 
they  trust  that  Her  Majesty's  Imperial  Government  will  cause  tbe  Britisli 
minister  at  Washington  to  continue  earnestly  to  urge  upon  the  United 
States  Government  the  necessity  of  paying  a  claim  the  justice  of  whicli 
cannot  be  disputed. 

The  Treaty  of  Washington  not  having  yet  been  ratified  by  the  logis 
latures  of  tbe  several  provinces  named  therein,  the  moral  eti'ect  of  the 
repudiation  by  the  United  States  of  the  provisional  arrangement  of  last 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


19.=) 


ill, 


t  to  be 
oxtra- 
imeiit, 
's,  iiml 
[Jritisli 
rnited 
whicli 

legis- 
lot'  the 
lot'  hist 


season  will,  if  such  a  course  be  persisted  in,  materially  strengtheu  the 
opuosition  to  measures  uecessary  to  give  effect  to  the  said  treaty. 

JAMBS  <J.  POPE. 
J.  HEATH  HAVILAND, 

Colonial  Secretary. 
FREDERICK  BREKEN, 

Attorney-General. 

A.  A.  Mcdonald. 

VVM.  RICHARDS. 
JOHN  LEFURGY. 

(Certified.) 

WlLLTAM  O.   DeSBRTSAY, 

Assistant  Clerk  Executive  Council. 

To  the  Queen's  Most  Excellent  Majesty  : 

Most  Gracious  Sovereign:  We,  Your  Majesty's  dutiful  and  loyal 
subjects,  tiie  legislative  council  and  house  of  assembly  of  Your  Majfsty's 
islanil,  Prince  Edward,  in  colonial  parliament  convened,  desire  to  ap- 
proacl)  Your  Majesty  and  respectfully  submit  to  Y'our  Majesty  that,  in 
a  dispatch  dated  Dowling  street,  17  th  June,  1871,  addressed  by  the 
riglit  lionorable  the  Earl  Kimberley,  Your  Majesty's  principal  secre- 
tary of  state  for  the  colonies,  to  the  lieutenant-governor  of  Prince 
Edward  Island,  with  which  dispatch  were  inclosed  copies  of  the  treaty 
signed  at  Washington,  on  May  8,  by  the.Ioint  High  Commissioners;  of 
two  notes  which  had  passed  between  Sir  Edward  Thornton  and  Mr. 
Fish ;  and  of  a  dispatch  of  even  date  addressed  by  Earl  Kimberley  to 
the  governor-general  of  Canada,  stating  the  views  of  Her  Majesty 
on  these  important  documents.  Your  Majesty's  Imperial  Government 
strongly  urged  upon  the  government  of  Prince  Edward  Island  that,  for 
the  reasons  stated  in  the  dispatch  of  Earl  Kimberley  to  the  governor- 
general  of  Canada,  the  same  course  sliould  be  pursued  as  in  1854  ;  and 
tlie  ai»plication  made  by  the  United  States  Government  should  be  ac- 
cede 1  to  by  Prince  Edward  Island,  so  that  American  fishermen  should 
be  allowed,  during  the  season  of  1871,  the  provisional  use  of  the  privi- 
leges granted  to  them  by  the  treaty. 

That  in  deference  to  the  wishes  of  your  Imperial  Government,  the 
government  of  this  island  promptly  sanctioned  the  admission  of  Ameri- 
can fishermen  to  the  liberty  which  was  intended  to  be  secured  to  them  by 
the  Treatv  of  Washington,  1871. 

That  the  note  of  Mr.  Fish  to  Sir  Edward  Thornton,  dated  Sth  May, 
1871,  was  considered  by  the  government  of  this  island  a  proposition  on 
behalf  ot  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  "  That  should  the 
government  of  Prince  Edward  Island  admit  American  citizens  to  flsh 
within  the 'territorial  waters  of  Your  Majesty  on  the  coasts  of  this 
island  during  the  jear  of  1871,  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
would  recommend  and  urge  upon  Congress,  at  their  next  session, 
that  any  duties  which  should  be  collected  on  and  after  the  1st  July, 
1S71,  on  fish-oil  and  flsh,  the  produce  of  the  fisheries  of  Prince  Edward 
Island,  should  be  returned  and  refunded  to  the  parties  paying  the  same, 
should  a  similar  arrangement  be  made  with  respect  to  the  admission 
into  Prince  Edward  Island  of  fish  oil  and  fish  being  the  produce  of  the 
fisheries  of  the  United  States." 

That  several  of  Your  Majesty's  subjects  and  others,  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  imported  into  the  United  States  from  Prince  EihvarJ 
Island,  during  the  yejir  1871,  quantities  of  fish-oil  and  fish,  the  produce 
ot  the  fisheries  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 


196 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


That  aItboiij<;h  such  importers  of  fi8lioil  and  fish  have  demanded  the 
return  of  the  duties  collected  by  the  United  States  Government  on  and 
after  1st  July,  1871,  upon  such  fish  oil  and  fish,  such  duties  have  not 
been  returned  to  them. 

That  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  as  we  believe,  alle^je  as  a 
reason  for  not  refunding  such  duties,  that  the  proposal  made  iii  Mr. 
Fish's  note  to  Sir  Edward  Thornton,  in  Mny,  1871,  contemplated  the 
united  action  of  all  the  British  North  American  Colonies,  and  that  it 
would  not  be  practicable  to  separate  them,  or  carry  into  effect  for 
Prince  Edward  Island  what  the  President  of  the  United  States  was 
willing  to  recommend  for  all  those  colonies. 

That  on  the  26th  September,  1871,  Mr.  Isaac  C.  Hall,  an  American 
merchant  largely  engaged  in  the  exportation  of  fish-oil  and  tish  from 
this  island  to  the  United  States,  addressed  to  the  lieutenant-governor 
of  tins  island  a  note,  in  which  he  stated  in  effect  that  recent  reports 
from  the  United  States  led  to  the  belief  that  the  refusal  of  the  Domin- 
ion of  Canada  to  give  effect  to  the  Treaty  of  Washington  might  work 
adversely  to  the  interests  of  this  islands,  and  prejudice  her  claims  to  a 
return  of  duties. 

Tiiat  to  this  note  of  Mr.  I.  C.  Hall,  Lieutenant-Governor  Robinson 
replied,  in  a  note  dated  29th  September,  1871,  that  in  his  opinion  Mr. 
Hall's  apprehensions  were  unfounded,  which  opinion,  we  believe,  was 
indorsed  by  Sir  Edward  Thornton,  speaking  for  your  Majesty's  Imperial 
Government. 

That  the  duties  paid  to  the  United  States  Government,  on  and  after 
the  1st  July,  1871,  on  fish-oil  and  fish,  the  produce  of  the  fisheries  of 
Prince  Edward  Island  for  that  season,  amount  to  $47,293,  or  there- 
abouts, of  which  sum  about  $22,212  were  paid  by  subjects  of  Your 
Majesty. 

We  most  humbly  submit  to  Your  Majesty,  that  those  of  Yonr 
Majesty's  subjects  who  in  the  year  1871  imported  fish-oil  and  fish  into 
the  United  States,  under  the  circumstances  hereinbefore  set  forth, 
believing  that  the  duties  collected  thereupon  by  the  United  States 
Government  would  be  refunded  to  them,  and  whose  claim  for  a  return 
of  such  duties  has  been  refused  by  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  should  not  l)e  allowed  to  suffer  the  loss  of  such  duties  by  reason 
of  the  United  States  Government  construing  the  otter  contained  in  Mr. 
Fish's  note  of  the  8th  May  tliftereutly  from  the  sense  in  which  it  was 
accepted  and  acted  upon  by  the  government  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

That  inasmuch  as  neither  the  government  of  this  island,  nor  tliose  of 
Your  Majesty's  subjects  who  claim  the  return  of  such  duties,  have  the 
right  to  bring  this  subject  to  the  attention  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States,  we  humbly  pray  that  Your  Majesty  will  take  the  premises 
under  your  gracious  consideration,  in  order  that  justice  may  be  done 
those  of  Your  Majesty's  subjects  who  now  sutfer  loss  by  reason  of  the 
United  States  Government  refusing  to  fulfill  the  conditions  of  tlie  agree- 
ment under  which  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  were  in  1871  per- 
mitted to  fish  within  the  territorial  waters  of  Your  Majesty  on  tbe 
coasts  of  this  island,  aiid  to  prosecute  the  fisheries  within  such  waters, 
and  upon  this  island,  upon  equal  terms  with  the  subjects  of  Your 
Majesty. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


197 


I 


.2 

s 


JO    vtQU'uy 


'noi  Jdd  OIO^T       ^u^nu^iHoioininotnoC^ni^u^ootninu^tnu^ooo 


o 
o 

a 

'A 


=  .fe 

11 

~% 

'^  a 

Z  2 

«  s 

»•« 

-«  a 

~  a 

s    •. 

'^'% 

r*  a 

-1 

M 

!?■= 

O 

J-^ 

S^ 

>«  ■». 

< 

C>  3 

> 

a  ci 

O 

•C  a 

n^ 

a  e 

'B     - 

°c  !: 

y  a- 

«:■      -» 

%>   X> 

'"   ^ 

i^^ 

.a  a 

*  •*- 

"«t    - 

?  = 

o  a, 

h  o 

s^S. 

-^  ^ 

»j 

o  a 

■B' 

'^ 


^ 


o 
H 


£ 


,t::3o:oecoe90oo:oooeseoooeeee5:ooooo 


o 
!  'A 


■•ieoiiosiocccooosseicssoessoiecoooo 
'A 


©^©^Ojrtwrwirt^f^t^fOrtWrtvMO^ctM^'S'rsf'j'tcin^ox 


0 ;:■::■■:'■:*■■■:■■:::.• 

t>eeoooa3cooeosoooS9sssooocecec:ooo3 


J  — JO 

M  i:^  = 
«r  =  !t 


!al- 


>i-" 


3*  s,a 


Kl-5 


13  S 

c  o 


198 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


taoi  jod  a}«H 


B 

a 


4. 


s 


CO 

& 

9 


s 


'^ 


_^ 


o 

o 
e 


'A 


a 
m 


■r 

a 

o 
H 


I 


►ooeoooeeoa9eooea30aoas9aooooooeoeoooo:o3 

o 


>o03339oooos3aooeooo9aQoooooo3oeoooaooae3 

■JJ>3 -e  "O  "C  •O  TS  "O  "O 'WC3  ■«  "S -O -a  •wo 'T3 'O  "3  "O  "a  "3  •C3  "CS  "C  "WS  "3  TJ.'C  "S  "3 -S '5  •r -3  t; 

4Ai»ti>*!{l!ltli*>ittlitt»l;l»l**i**tiil|| 

o >.•••>•■• , 


r'^oiv«o»At'(OMirt(a^fr-oo--ot'^scffi^^^-^-^?^«cic»o--iotot3^^«i.'^f">>vift 


>3eaoooao3303oooo90300ooooooooeooo3aooccs 

•gj'o -3  "3  r3  "o  ^  "O 'B  "crs '3 -wo '3 -3  "o  "O  IS  "3  "tf 'o  "Wa  "O  "We  T3 -3  "o  "CO  we  "O  "CC  t: -3 -sw 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


199 


?2S 


sss 


^^t5^u3^^^^"^*^^''3^«^^u^^u^Ktn^io^uSn^u^^^oo^^iASuS^^^^^u^SAno 


0  e  o 

•O'OTJ 


cceoooooooooooooeoooooooooooooooecoocooooooooooo 

■S  "CC -O  "O  "O  "O -C  "Ce  "O  T!  ■«  "O  TJ  ■C  "O  ■C'C'C*  "C  "O  "O 'U  "5  "CS  "S  "O 'CO  "O  "a  "S  "O  "C  "Ca  "O  "C  "O  •«  T3  "C -O  "3  "O 


:iseioooooocoooocooeooe>ooccoooooooeoooeoooooooooeis_o 

l'w'CO'Cw'0'0'0'CO'0'0'C'0'0''0'0'0'w'C'w'CC'Ct3'T3'w'S'»*CCO'0'CO'0^'CWw'C'0'0'CCCCO'0'C^ 


all' 

5  -s  : 
-?•=?  • 


1   !  «i  * 


;:cscoeooooooeooooooooosocoooooooooooeooo9 

--•3  — ■0-c>-^'e"C'C'0'3'a'3'S'a'O'O'C'O'S'C'3'S'ST-S'O'S'rr;"=r;'3t5'C'ST;'3'CO 


lOOOOOOOOO 
i-C'O'OIS'C'O'O'S'O 


■o 

a  a 
■2  5 


_3  rt 


51 


a 

"3  « 


&I1 

m 


■■.  c  s  r.  SS 


200  AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


•oaj-nnnBoji 
JO    ^uiiuniy 


!SSe«i-i4tS7tS«nSSP5?»n  —  CT(}^S«weiN^~S»"SnM(NI-^55I^oi«^t^UII 


'   s        , 


o 
o 


»!i 


^ 


a 
t.  o  o 


lOOooooeoooooeeoeoeooeoeeoooooesooeo:: 


>ooeeooooe  =  ooe  o s  eeoeoeooeosooooeooooos: 


O 


ya'S■c•a•va^^'9'9■z'^^9'9'^v^^vc•c•a'S'S'^•9■a^v^'a'S'C^T3•v'C'a^o•^■z■z^3 


»ftMirsc»i*M"*'^«5M»ftrtift'-a»nc**WTD'^cio^'N»ooM(o^comr*«(?i^ntc  —  -Tt^ 


o 


If 

O 


« 

a 


«::::;:;::::;:  I  :::  I  :::  i  ::;:';!:  i  :'::':;;  : 

I'Sosooeoooooeooooeooooeoooeoooeoooooeoeos 

4a     I     J I     I     i ■     *     >     *     •     •     •     •    •     I     I     I     •     t     •     •     •     •     I     I    •    I    i 


So 


HOWafsOa 


SP3S 


■  « 
S'1^ 


P« 


.s 


a  a 


64 


_  .         _     ^         ......  .  e-cc 


2(5 


*  «  -' 

P  u  eg 
B  d  a 


—  5  Sk!! 


Son 


^  'C  «  . 


4^(1, 


(»=  — 


d  a 


c  o 

U  It 


S>5'i2 


J4    . 

S  9 


11 

IS* 


cp"(S«<]c^SowsSw>^^o 


O  S 

s  s 

4c 


-  *  C5 
-     P.-gS 


opes  o  5  s 

-         .»3^  - 


a- J  a 

^V  s 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


201 


v^^i-'oi^^^u^nu^^Atf^^^u^A^o^u^o^^iOu'aS^^^^^Si^^^o^^oO^n^uSA^A^ 


oo::ecoooooc«oooeco  o  o  eoeosoooooosseeoosseoseosoooeooo 


5  5  5  5 


C55550SeOO005e0S3O0O0O00C83030O0000OC0e- -. 

.-—  —  —  —  — -3  — ^a  — -J---— ■c'c-;  — ■O'O'O'o-s'C'C'C'O'C'C'C'e'O-c'O'C'O'C'O'e'C'a'a's-c'e 


s  o  c  e  o  o  o_2 


rti".  ?;r?"^'7»'?»cD•--r«9llftrttocl(J>^c^!r■«rw^w^O(o*f•^••^•«o??•1•?c^rt^•ao^^^"■.'^'^t^l--X'»'xacow^-?c•*•^•'?^ 


.0000 


Ic  o  Ei 


5  5  0 
■■SI'S 


eooooooeocooooooooooooooooooooeoseooeocooooooooo 
■c'C'co'O'c'C'C'CC'O'ctj'C'S'C'S'O'o'O'O'C'S'eiS'co'e'CO'O'e'a'cs'C'S'a'C'e'rTS'B'C'a'a'S'a 


K  3 


5  i  >.||£ 


1:^ 


a 

H 


a 


e  e  a  E^  -  E  Mrtiir 


13  ^2«        ■ 

a  ■ 

JC 

la-s-i     ■ 

t-i 

^i|^     H 

S'i 

^icKi!        ■ 

:  5   .  s  =  o^ 


«  d 
•a  2  a 

ja  B-; 


IBMu 


a 
"St- 


u 


K_5; 

£5.a  a 
g  =.2  S 


3? 


B  es  u 

3  S  b 


■•^St-a2    !    ■      S  S-S5  o  rtrs  ^g  «.=  !«,«>  >>x  >  _fe  «^S'3«,-rH 
>..c£PWrfr   ■  fe   sS-a  a--5-=  =  S3^  2  D  a  «r§3  S   •►-'■2  S.-^Sf^O 


.^  a  ^ 

a   99   S   V 

SM  -  _  e 
r'r;  =  a-3 


'i' .  ..:=s 


=  =  =J  3 


■  >.a  =  2 

■  a  Ch^  Q* 


202 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


'.laj-nonaoit 

JO    ^UIIOUl^ 


aot>iMle)«ti 


.^ 


e 
e 

a 


.a 


I 


a 


§:;;;:::;!:::;:::::::::;:;::::;:;:;::;:;; 

.^ooooo^oeoeooooooooooooo^o^ooeoosooeei_c_i_o 


e .!:  o  o  e  o 


S'oeeeooeeeeoeeeeeeeeeeeooeoeesesoeoossocs 
I' 


me«o«iN*<«'ifl««e»mo«<e»»»  —  <o»«i*ntD»«'NS>n«»mn«5in**«ior:  — 


o 


)  «  vip  OS  -N  to  (51  'a  tr?  CI  in  --  Tj "?»  "J* «  ^  ff.  r^  C5  —  irs  ^'1  HTj  b,  --  cs  (J  ^1 «  o  T"  ©  -<  o  31  c  Ti  ©  'i 


a :'•••::::: :  :  : 

J) 

!:eoooeoooeooooeooeoooeooeeeoooooeo 

■Qi'^  "O  "O  "C  "5  "O  "3  ■«  "O  "O  "a  "O  "O  "O  "O  "O  TS  T?  T3 -o  "CO  "O  "O  "O  "O  "O  "O  "ce -s  "O  "O 


1 


o  o  o  e  ( 


9§^ 


a 

«  o 

•c  *■ 
S» 

g  a  ^ 
.a  o 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHEHT   COMM(S£!ION. 


203 


ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss? 


ei  e 

OS 

-1 

e 

•= 

C 

•i 

c 

c 

e 

e 

c 

4 

^ 

4 

-g 

^ 

_e 

i 

^ 

^ 

_e 

^ 

T 

e 

o  s  o  e 

_e 

0 

c 

4 

o  a 

o 
•a 

'  0 

•§4 

c 

c 

4 

4 

s 

e 

< 

_e 

4 

c 
■5 

c 

4 

e 

^ 

c 

4 

•i 

^ 

c 

c 

c 

e 

c 

c 
■B 

e 
■t 

e 

o  0  e 

e 

o  e  0  e  o  3  c 
'O'C'O'e'C'C'c 

s 

4 

^ 

i;i5;.SiS?}S5S!?5SSg?!!l82?:S3S!SSiSr:SS!2SRSSSJ§SgS5!2SSSSS!!ISS2KS?SS 


S3 
e2 


.5a 

gas2 


.14 

.£§ 

S  3  I 

■■-•  X     '^  < 


'  J'-   •  a 


P  o  a  p  o  a 


ajj,j,j»-.g^^c.~6,ii,"..- 

2  oJ:  80^  S  S  S  1  =  -=  ^i^KSi 
i^i-t-i©,    .ea«rtOfcfc^c    •    •    •    • 


a 


^K 


«2 


K5^ 

da 


.   ..a 


3  ?  ! 


■:|i''.~M 


9  i  ^ 


s  ,    ie  to  S 
®  "S  ■*;     .55 

O  «1  O  O  3 


204 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


•os.f 

-9Blia9|I 


■no) 
J9d  aiOH 


^ 


I*  ^  •»•  m  -r  '^  CJ  ?i  C*  «  I-"  C»  t^  ?.  O  c»  ir:  a;  TP  X  ^  t/^  ©  c»  —  «c  Q  -r  o  Tc  o  ic  M  rt  '^  o  -f  s;  7*  CI 


8 


J:oooooooooooo5ocoeoooocioooocoooeoooooo30 
'&''  'cs'C'C'C'a'C'ca'c'cs'c'S-s'C'O'C'S'CB'C'co'C'cc'O'O'C'B'O'O'O'e'C'C'r 


IZi 


i'oeooooooo3ocasoooocc30ooeoooooe>eoooooso 

■^l-O -C  "C -a  "C -C  "CS  ■«  "C  "7  "CC  •Ct: -C  "C  •:;  "C -CC  "O -O  "O 'C  "O -C -S -3 -O  TS  "B  "S -B  "O  "C -3  "5 -3 


» 


•  i/^wo>©t»osji"i"*'iftr-ift«o«  —  '»^io«-^cS'<r??o>o«T'?3r-c*-^'^pM©i 


it 


B  ^  •^^     • 
O  O  « 


a 


o  o 


4i   « 


a 


fci  t-S  feS 


^^ 


a 


^^. 


3  S*^  «  ?i;  »  S.2  S,£  as  =•;  2"  S  e  £? 


■s 


e 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


205 


§§s 

3 

fi^Ti 

S 

of 

1 

o  o  o 
•e-s-s 


5  o  e  o 


D  flD  •I'  ffJ    1  Ci       I 

9<  m  ;3  o     <-     I 
1  t*     1 


fe     •  >>'r 


=  '=S. 


j'CjSJJ 


~     A  « 


'  a 

'  o 
•  w 
►_  *     '  B 

I  B  B  >< 

•J-S  £ 


0 


ssssgissss 

§ 

1 

•*)j98n8a!i 

5SRSa?l2«SS 

JO   ^unouy 

<» 

91 

iio^jods^HH 

Ut 

:  :  : 

a 

o 

a 

•  ■  1 

o 

"s 

.5  ■  ' 

o 

*■**    !    '. 

« 

u 

ooooooceoe 

2 

fc'3-C-C'O-C'S'C'C'O 

» 

^  i  : 

a    . 

"S 

.2   1 

a 

01   ' 

ce 

a   : 

,* 

« 

o 

o  • 

u 

et   ; 

^ 

>-]  ' 

ps 

1o  = 

■sees 

e  o  3 

1':' 

•^  'O-e-c 

•STJ-C 

a  : 

;  ; 

=>  • 

•  • 

^ 

«   1 

',  \ 

^ 

d 

5;     . 

A 

o 

MOOOOOOOOO                  1 

Oi 

3 

^■vxi-^swo-ay 

ry 

^  M  ■  •  ■  •  M 

« 

SE?:S533SS3    S 

0 

§ 

»« 

H 

X 

M 

> 

■^ 

H4 

P> 

1    1  a   '    ■ 

■^ 

. 

•    .  a  SB    • 

*  '•  _ 

«< 

♦s 

i ; 

:  :s;^  ■ 

a  ;S    • 

0 

S  ; 

i 

u 

i^^^iigiii 

s  : 

•  :|«*«  ;§ 

o   ; 

'                              *      ►■^          C       t-;^                 '      F-5 

5  : 

;  ;sr5#s;?  ;o 

i  i 

■       i    «      I 

a  : 

1 

'  a  '■ 

•    ;  a.   • 

.  b    . 

1 

s 

o    > 

.   4)     . 

B 

■s    • 

i     la    • 

W    ■- 

-C-raoc-raa 

5a5;j'^HiSM2;|s-5 

1 

•  i 

1     *     i       n 

t  1 

N^i 

^r  1 

5 

^  J-s  .5 

;2«    o 

<f, 

Itlllj-^ 

il-^    ^ 

.8ass-5S*-Ss'« 

bw- 

jW-s'i" 

K* 

'J 

1 

44 

o 


IS 

1^ 


^    i 

JB    ! 
S 


a 


a 

3 

o 


a 


'A 


o 


a 


S 


Jl 
*^ 

e 


O 
< 

H 

M 

o 


'? 

ssgs 

s 

M<S 

9i  "^ 

""  31 

o  i 

Si? 

n 

e  B 

e 

S  a 

0^ 

S' 

n* 

-»;= 

u 

S?. 

ss 

»  = 

|2 

<» 

tf 

B  S  O  O 

B-ce-fl 

o 

S 


■T  —  o  sv     ■; 


l» 


•i 


C  «;  =  fi 


I  -a 


d 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


JO  lonomv 


SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS§SSSSSSSiSSSiSSgS 


no;  aad  e^ny 


^ 


SS§3SSSSSSSgSSS§§SSSSSSS§SSSS§SSS3sgi 


■3   ••••••■•••••'■•••■"••'■''■''••''•■■  ■ 

^ooooooooeooooeseoooosoeoeeooooooeses 

i-T  1  1  I  I  !  I  !  I  !  ;  ;  1  !  !  1  1  I  I  •  i  I  I  !  !  !  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  !  !  :  ; 


> 
a 

s» 

o 

ao  e 

t 

c 


ooooeooeooeo  00  oosoocoooeo  00  e  s  e  : 


ussossosoeoceocooeoooooooeoeooeoocss: 


>«! 


eg  «^i5 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


207 


*n  cj  'c  X 


g22g§g?g§i8S§S2S§§§S§glSgSg§Sg§g§sSS8S§S§SS§§S§§SSSS 

^,  i-i  t^  'z  ^  ^  A  '^  n  ui  ^  9  »n  *n  V  ■^  R  ^"i  "^  ^  to  *n  ■^  *n  tn  "v  n  in  u^i  \n  'V  >n  <M^  t*  in  ^  ^ 


3Sii 


SiSSigggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggSggggg 


5  e  s  e  s 


ocas; 


0  ! 

e  e 

e 

_c 

^ 

^ 

^ 

e 

e 

■5 

c 

e 

X 

e 

e 
"5 

e 

e 

e 
1 

4 

e 

■5 

e 

e 

^ 

e 

0 

e 

e 

e 

e 

e  e 

_o  c 

e 

_e 

e 

o  o  o  e 

i  :  i 

m 

e 

o  e 

4 

j 

iii 

e  s 

24 

4 

e 

c 

e 

c 
1 

e 

e 

e 

0 

e 
■5 

0 
"5 

^ 

e 

e 

"5 

0 

£ 

e 

e 

c 

c 

e 

c 

e 
"5 

^ 

ooooooooe 

^ 

o  e 

e 

e  o  e  o  c 
•C'Cri'rS'z 

e 

_e 

^ 

i 

% 

: 

03oecooeeoooooeoooooeooeoooeodooocooocoeeoeocooocoo_o 

f^^  ^f^  f^  ^  '5  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^  fl(5  ^T3  ^  H3  'C  T3  ^  ^^  ^  'W  ^  ^  TU  T5  ^  T3  "O  ^  '^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^  '^  ^  'C  ^  *•  ^  ^  ^ 


TO  Iff  Ci  -C  13 


—  X  Ti  Ji  r;  "M  f  -^  «0 

Li  r;  I-  »r5  *f  o  4ft  :o  n 


5^«OW^rt-*^V50Wlf5^'O»O^lift«OO^tS0Lit*O««0^f-^ffli'^^»ft»ft'»'iftV4ft5l^ 


i  ;i^ : 

w    -S"^    • 

"»   -s 

'•■S  t  2  S 

■ii  .£  -a 

IpJ'E 

cu-jan 

i  :  :  ;  ; 

!  00 

I 
;; 

'. 

2  »^    ■  ? 

"    *   m   '' 

»  „-■"  o 

O   l;  g  O 

55*  ho 


S  !t  b    .:^ 

2  3  '  '3  X 
_:    •  s   1  ^ 


208 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


13 

s 
a 
'■S 
a 
o 
O 

I 

9 


I 


s 

•c 


a 


■8, 
•I 

1 


a 

3 


IB 

s 

I 
I 


JO   t^auoiuy 


SSSiS§8S§SSSSSSSSSSSSSS§SSSSS§SSSSSSSsssg 

into  m9nG<too^t*vninraAn(e^tn^A^^^«inu^A^^inr*«t9^e*io'V£ii^<^^ 


'ao;jada;B}i 


o 


B 

in 


^ 


1^ 


§§SS8§SSSSSSSSSSS§SSiSSSSSSSSS3SSS§S§g£§g 


scoeooesoosese  . 
s'O'O'S'a'S'S'S-s'a'C'O'WS's 


P(%^ 


ooeeeososoooeoesoeoeo: 
'S's-s'S'S'e'S'a'O'O'O'e'S'e'e'S'o-o's's-s-c 


eseoeoooooe9099sss9soeeooeeseoooo! 


; 

1 

; 

; 

J 

^^ 

"  i 

g  ; 

'eto  e 

9 

s 

o  e 

■o-c 

s  : 

e 

c 

•i 

o  e 

•C'S 

_e 

0  o  o  o  = 

•«'=' 

J 

e  e  o  o  0  e 

_e 

_e 

o  o  o  O  0  s 
•s-e-ens-o-:: 

_c 

AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


209 


S8SSSSSSSSSSSSSS8SSS8SSSSSSSSSi8SSSSSSSSSSS§SSSSSSSS 


Sg8SSSSSSSSSS§SSSSSSSSS§§SSSSS§SSSSSSSSSS§SSSSSSSSSS 


eoooeeoooodeoeooooeooeeeeeoeooeooooeoeoooooooooooooo 


r'O'OO'O'O'O'C'O'O'O'c^'O'd 


ooeoooooeoQOPoeoooeoeeoeoeooeeoooooo9ooooo93ooo9oeee 


^^^^TJ  ^  T3  ^S^3  ^^3  ^S  ^3^3^  ^S  ^  ^S  n 


oosoooeoooeooeoooooooeooooooeeooooeoooeocoooodoeeooo 

fC  ^j  ^j  ^j  ^j  ^j  ^5  ^3  ^5  ^Q  n5  ^3  ^3  ^B  ^5  ^3  ^5  ^5  ^5  ^S  ^0  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^fl  ^O  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  T3  ^3  ^f  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^?  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  T3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^S 


*■•  o  in  to  a  00 


"oeoooeooe 
0  ■         -  -   -   ■ 


aS^  o  S  o  o  o  oo  o 


„.a  S  aS.S  o  e  o  eW  g.c5  Jl  o  o  o 
a  a. 5^ 


E  3  S  3 


14  F 


210 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


jo!|anuuiv 


S§S8SSSSS8SSSSSSSSSSSS88SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS 


aot  jed  at«H 


o 

I 


S3SSiSSS§§S8SS§SSSSSS§SSSSSSSSSSSSS§SSS§S 


soeeeaoooooeoooeee 
I'O'O'C'C'e'e'e'O'O'O'O'o'e'B'O'r'e 


1-5 


e 

B 


eeeeeeeeeoe  o 9 9  e  o  o  o  e  o  . 


1^ 

I 


ooecooooeeeooeoeeoooooeoeoooooooooooeoos 


■a« 


leooeeoeoooeeoeeeooeeoooooooooeoeooseseeo 


^^i 

;^ 

1?!- 

:>!: 

'"S? 

.•*1 

lil^li 

II 1 

•2  1 

i"! ;  5  • 

fe  = 

S  3 

"-I'^Scoa 


!  ;  I » 

e.i*s 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


211 


SSSSSSSSSS§SSSSSSSS8S§SSSSSSSSSS8SSSSSSSS8SSS8 


gS§SiSSS8SS8iS8§SS8SS88SSSS8S8SSSS8S8SS8888S88 


a  ■  .  . 

eoooooeoeoooeooeooeoooooeooooeoooooooaace 

i^'^'^^'ti ^S 'O  V  V *9 '9 "O ^ 'O ^S *0 "V 'O ^3 *0 ^S ^S '^ ^S 'O "O "O "O 'O ^ "9 'O *€ "O 'O ^ 9  "^ ^ '9 ^S 

::::::::;.::::;::.::::.::::;::::::::  ifS  ::  : 


cccooosoeseeoeeoeoooooooeeeooeo 

^*  ^j  ^5  'Q  ^5  ^(3  ^j  ^3  ^5  ^g  ^j  ^j  ^5  ^3  ^C  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^O  ^J  '^  ^3  T3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^^ 


C9 
E 

s 

sH  SOS 
Q 


» 


1 


coseosMo  e o  om  e  e 


e  e  e 


iS 


eooooesoeoeeeoooeeeoeoecoeoeoeoooeooe^"tS!S 


^  :  :  ; 


s 
e 

s 

<1 


3 
as 


•C  -•  5 

-  *  5  - 


«  2  =  «  o 

0  —  «  3    • 
o  s  u  c 


■-11 


■  5  ' 


o  o  c 

O  U  ID 

5.5  S' 
>  >  a 


o  o  o  o  jj-'C  S  »"  S  s  o  o  o 

■a'Cts-oZ  *  a  °  u-c-e  — ■« 

•    •    ■    •  ®  o  3'«  a    ■   •   ■   • 

>  o  o  g  o 


S  a  s   ' 

iiJi 


—  *  *  — 


nt  ^  ^  CS   -^  B 


®  Ik ' 


S« 


^  =  l1^|2='J|iit>-J§.2 
I  lis  I  il  Si=^'^  sW  jS^a^!^-3 


5  o  o 
s 


rS 


13 


oia 


S-3     - 

S    !<      ' 


C  "T 


I 'sis 


■  *?  a 


5c 


a'5  5 


a 
6»  ■_.   .  a 

M  :§ 

,'!  a5  M« 


212 


AWABD   OF  THE  FIBHEBT   COMIUSSION. 


? 


1^ 


lii 


Hi 


n 


(3 


I 


S" 


a 

f 

3 

o    • 

a  : 


^ 


^ 


g 


Si 


s 


I 


rl 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


213 


I 


JO  ^auomy 


nof  jad  a)«H 


I 

o 

S 


I 
£ 

e 


•uaH 


8S§SSS8S3S8SSSSSSSSS83SSSS8SSSSSSSS38S 

SSS;iS)$SS«SSSSSSSSS83$?:83S8!i!S83SS?:SS^SSS£S!i 


S8SSSS8888SS8SSSS888S88838SS88SS88S888 


^ 


eeeoeeeeeeeooeeoeeeeeeoeeeeeeeeesa 


I 


5^*^ 
^^^ 

OJ 


Joeeeeeeeee  e o  e  e  e o e  eooeoooeeeeeeeeeeeei 

^j  n3  ^3  ^3  ^J  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^5  ^5  ^3  T3  ^5  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  ^3  T3  ^3  ^3  'O  ^3  ^S  ^S  ^^S  'O  ^3  ^3  'O  ^S  ^3  ^3  * 


tO'«'«cwirt'»9»t-«oo««-<^^oi«^f"Oirt?9^^to«^wei^»^r5ffi«^3^^ 


••aox 


z$ie3s^f3Sii;^!;?s^$;:;$!$ssi$;s;«s;sss!SS$«!;9!S^9S?s 


s 

ri 

1 

■«=, 

« 

<M 

« 

S 

"^ 

1 

:aOSi^M£i 


^MitlsfHoa 


no< 


■§8-'=' 


^^ 


i|l5?^l 


ld| 

.SSWllTia?-  .Jig 


^  2d  Sa-2 


sa^tii-i^-3|i5ll 


a  b  ^S 

-  *  --a. 


.^  ^  a 
.  01  e  o 


&oa 


1 


•M  1 


I 


<u 


,  «  3 


214 


▲WARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1 

a 
o 

4 

I 

«» 
•t 

I 


■Mj  Moeon 
JO   innoinv 


-ao)j«<I»)«n 


o 

I 


i 


•nan 


•saox 


88SS88S8SS8 

SSS:S8£8SSS 


S 


.,55  «5  «  o  a  o 
O'WO'C'd'e'o  g-s 

o 


n 


a. 


<'WO'e'a'«'CjaT3 


;i 


^^«ioSl04/3u^!n?SiO 


I 


s 

a 
O 


o 


i 


O 


o  o  o  o  o  o""  So 

p 

(50 


liell 


$3i 


il- 


-lie--  i.- 


8S8SS8888S8 


a 

s 

9 


^r-<o^wr"^'»»^ii^'5i 


-rT 


I 


H 

pq 
O" 

o 

U 
!Z 

M 
O 

P4 
fe. 

P 
< 


8888888 


8 


8S8S8SS 
e*  at  ai  9*  et  at  a> 


5  o  e.5  s'^  o 


^ 
hj 


3 
1 

I 


.•3 

ceo  9  S 

a  O  «l 


.-§ 


s 


— -oaSI^ 


^ 


ad 


e 


0!z!  'a 


•  m 
K  o  «  C    -Q'S 


1^ 


P  a 


^ 


A 
-0 

a 

Q 
M 

Q 

M 

M 


9 


a 
s 
o 

a 


1.1 

H 

H 

b 

•!! 

<0 

,') 

s 

H 

e:! 

fM 

I 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHBUY   COMMISSION. 


215 


a 
a 
o  „ 


s 


0 

M 

H 

•«! 

b 

H 

u 


§ 


5 
I 


5 


8S!S 

lis 


SS3 

etmat 


BOO 

e 

a 


0 
O 

B 


of 


5g 

9f 


Si!! 


no)  J3<I «)«}{ 


I 


I 


8SSSS8SSS88SSSS8 


8 


ssssgsssssssssss 

e>9ieie«s<ete>e«e>eie<9*cie<eioi 


1 


>  e  e  o  e  o  e  e  e  e  o  e 


i5 


-Ojoejaoooeeeeeooe 


g 

a 


CB   4 


i^ 


•noK 
•Buox 


i 


u?(otoi/)'?io-*<ooo9«nnokoo 


32SP9a!?;s2i!^3nSS3;p; 


ii^iill^iMi 


1-2 


o 


illll51l|i|| 

:  >  3  fe  a  S  A  9  S  aS  3 


jzw  5  5  2  m5'3-3  SeQ  •£  S 


I 


o 
H 


S16 


AWABD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


}o  tunotny 


ao)  lad  »)«H 


88 


! 


I 


88 


3 

I 


•p»K 


••nox 


I 


I 


a 


a 


•s 

« 

I 


ei 


^ 


^i 


b 

O 

H 
P 


8888888 

SSSS8S8 

W4  ^4  vn*  ^  ^ 


88SS8SS 

ei  «  8<  11  91  M  « 


a 


9 


■Q  ^'OTS  'fl^ 


u^^4«^^ 


^ 

I 


wKwn  V 


Q!S9:^?ss; 


s 


I  S  S  e  s  a  e 

i-O  0-0^  Eld 


s  a  s 
.S  i£ 
UU(3 


e 

JO  :  :  :o 


9 
t 

I 


I 
i 


a 


AWASD  OF  TUE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


217 


88g8 

F2S 


S889 

MMOIM 


I 

i 
I 


0 

H 

H 
-0 
hi 
0 
H 

s 

•0 
u 
» 


iS^-S 


a 
o 


^ 


ii 


id 


218 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEST   COMMISSION. 


Becapitulation  of  the  fishing  lioenaea  issued  to  American  vessels  during  the  years  of  Ifi^,  1867^ 
lt)6t^,  and  1869,  in  the  several  provinces  forming  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  with  the  tonnage 
and  amount  of  license-fee. 


Number  of 
vosnels. 

Tonnage. 

Amount  of 
liouKsa  fee. 

1866. 

354 

1 

10 

89 

16,779 
36 
593 
5,50.'-.,% 

19, 3H9  .'iO 
13  00 

New  Pruiiswi^'k 

Quobeo 

3!l(i  00 

f^rluoti  £idward  Island..... 

3,  -Xi'J  ,15 

ISfT. 

454 

94,968;^?, 

13, 037  fb 

1 

Nova  Scotia............... 

969 

13, 9-18 

13,  <m  00 

New  Brunswick 

Quetieo 

f^riuce Edward  lalaiid - - --- 

26 

1,  489^5 

1,78«!K!J 

1868. 

395 

15,  4nrV„ 

15,714  MJ 

Nova  Scotia 

49 

3,  .345 

4,690  00 

New  ISronawick 

Quebec 

I 

363 

524  00 

I'rince  Edward  iBland -- - 

ft  If)  75 

1869. 

HI 

3,  861^^ 

5,  P24  75 

Nova  Scotia 

16 
3 

7 
6 

646 

9 

397 

814  A'i, 

1,393  00 

18  no 

New  Cniutiwick 

Quebec  

794  00 

Friiicu  Edward  Island - 

5i;)  esj 

31 

1.866^ 

3,  tin  »i 

Licenses  issued  1866,  1867,  1868.  and  1869. 


Nova  Sontia 

688 

3 

34 

136 

33,698 
35 

1,  351 
7,  5a3A"o 

39,  29«  50 

New  Bruuswick 

31  00 

Quebec 

l,r)l4  00 

Prince  Edward  Island 

0, 1'i'iO  87 

Total 

841 

44,507ft"„ 

37, 193  3T 

DRPAKTMBNT  I.  F  MARINR  and  FI8IIKRIE8, 

Gltawii,  December  31,  1876. 


W.  F.  WniTCHER, 

Commissioner  q/  iHaheriu. 


VI. 


■^< 


Extract  from  annual  report  of  Pierre  Foriin^  esq,,  in  command  of  La  Cana- 
diennCy  during  the  season  of  1865  {p  61). 

The  most  reliiible  reports  give  not  leas  than  from  1,200  to  1,500  schoon- 
ers as  the  number  of  vessels  belonging  to  the  Dnited  States,  employed 
in  the  mackerel  ftshory  in  the  Gulf,  and  the  produce  is  estimated  to  ex- 
ceed 300,000  barrels  of  fish,  worth  2,000,000  of  dollars,  ^rom  200  to 
300  ft  these  schooners  resort  to  our  fishery-grounds,  either  off  the  IMaj,'- 
dalea  Islands  or  on  the  coast  of  Gasp6,  arid  1  believe  that  the  annual 
take  of  mackerel  by  those  vr^jsels  is  from  li:,000  to  30,000  barrels.  Tlif 
town  of  Gloucester,  in  the  iState  of  Massachusetts,  alone  sends  out  o'li) 
or  GOO  schooners  to  t'lio  fishery,  and  they  are  the  finest  vessels  of  the 
class  which  can  be  Icuud  anywhere. 


AWAKD  OF  THE  FISHEEY  COMMISSION. 


219 


VII. 

Extract  from  a  report  from  Col.  R.  D.  Cutis  to  the  Hon.  W.  H.  Seward^ 
dated  Wanhin{ftony  January  7, 18«J9.  {See  pages  32  and  33  of  Henute  Ex, 
Doc.  No.  3-4,  Forty  second  Congress,  second  session.) 

For  more  than  a  century  after  the  establishment  of  the  American 
Colonies  large  niunbers  of  whales  continued  to  frequent  the  seas  ad- 
joining the  northern  coasts.  The  whale-fishery  was  commenced  by  New 
Enjiland  in  1(»90,  and  for  fifty  years  afterwards  was  prosecuted  by  boats 
fronj  the  shore.  Vessels  were  then  built  and  equipped  for  the  more  dis- 
tant whaling-grounds,  and  in  1778  Massachusetts  is  reported  to  have 
bii(130i  vcvssels,  with  an  aggregate  tonn»igo  of  28,(M)0  tons,  engaged  iu 
the  pursuit.  At  that  period  Nantucket,  Martha's  Vineyard,  and  Cape 
Cotl  nionojtoliaed  the  business.  In  1783  New  Redford  entered  the  arena, 
und,  »oon  taking  the  lead,  advanced  far  ahead  of  her  home  competitors, 
;»n(l  for  the  last  thirty  years  her  whalers,  scattered  on  every  sea,  have 
been  more  numerous  and  more  daring  than  those  of  all  other  nations 
combined.  During  the  war  declared  against  Great  Britain,  in  1812,  the 
wliidetishery  was  gradually  suspended.  In  1817  it  was  recouimeuced 
with  a  tonnage  of  5,()00  tons,  and  increased  gradually  until  1846,  and 
then,  after  consi<lerable  tluctuHtions,  reached  the  height  of  its  prosperity 
In  JSoS,  when  the  registered  tonnage  employed  was  ofiicially  reported 
at  108,593,  equal  to  that  of  the  entire  commercial  marine  of  either  Eus- 
m  or  Denmark.  Between  1858  and  the  breaking  out  of  the  rebellion 
the  Vounage  had  very  sensibly  decreased,  owing  to  the  lessening  de- 
nijuul  tor  oil  for  lighting  purposes;  and  during  the  existence  of  ti.vj 
rebellion  the  decline  was  accelerated,  the  number  of  tons  employed  hav- 
ing fallen  from  145,734  in  1861,  to  84,233  in  1865,  or  to  about  the  same 
tonnagt*  which  was  sin)ilarly  engaged  thirty-five  years  previously. 
Since  1865  ibe  to»>'jage  has  slightly  increased. 

The  falliiig  off  in  the  whaling  business  is  due,  in  a  great  measure,  to 
the  more  general  introduuilon  of  gas,  arul  especially  tu  the  discovery  of 
petroleum.  During  the  year  ending  June  30,  18(»7,  nearly  7«),00(),000 
gallons  of  refined  and  crude  petroleum,  valued  at  $24,0(K),000  currency, 
wereexpc  rted  from  the  Uitited  States,  and  divided  more  generally  among 
the  nati  JUS  of  the  earth  than  any  single  article  which  is  the  subject  of 
comnieice.  In  addition  to  the  decline,  fiom  these  causes,  in  the  demand 
lor  tniin  and  spermaceti  oil,  the  whaling  interests  have  suffered,  on  ac- 
count of  the  rebellion,  from  the  exi)enfc;es  of  outfit,  which  have  trebled, 
from  the  increase  in  the  pay  and  cost  of  subsistence  of  odicers  and  men, 
and  in  the  rate  of  insurance  from  4  to  7  per  cent.  Formerly  vessels 
ranging  in  capacity  from  300  to  400  tons  could  be  readily  obtained  from 
the  merchant-service  after  they  had  been  engaged  three  or  four  years 
in  the  carrying  trade,  and  these,  when  strengthened  ami  recoj)pered, 
made  the  best  of  whalers.  No  such  class  of  vessels  it  is  said  can  now 
be  purchased,  the  tonnage  of  merchantmen  being  greater  than  that 
re(iuire<l  for  the  fisheries,  and  the  buildirjg  of  new  vessels  is  enormously 
expensivb  for  a  mere  adventure.  During  the  rebellion  from  twenty-five 
to  tliiity  whale  ships  were  purchased  by  the  government  for  the  stone 
blockiuie  of  Southern  iK)rts,  and  in  one  week,  between  the  22d  and  29th 
of  June,  18(J5,  twenty  one  of  the  Arctic  whalers  of  the  best  class  wtre 
hmned  by  Waddel  in  the  re1>el  steamship  Shenandoah  in  the  Gulf  of 
Anadyr  and  on  the  Asiatic  side  of  the  entrance  to  Behring  Strait,  be- 
sides those  which  he  had  previously  burned  ia  April  at  the  Island  of 
Ascension  aud  elsewhere  in  the  racitic.    It  may  be  also  added  that  the 


W 


li: '   ^-  ^ 


220 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


whales,  h^.  «ring  been  hotly  pursued  by  nearly  600  whalers  during  each 
of  the  fifteen  years  preceding  1860,  had  become,  and  still  coutinued  to 
be,  wild,  restless  aud  suspicious;  larger  numberp  of  them  seeking  a 
refuge  iu  the  Polar  Basin.  From  this  last  cause  the  time  required  to 
^^flll  up"  has  been  greatly  increased.  A  relaxation  in  the  chase  or 
decrease  in  the  number  of  those  in  pursuit  will  bring  the  whales  back 
to  more  accessible  seas  and  make  them  less  suspicious  at  the  souud  of 
the  oar. 

VIII. 

Extract  of  report  of  Mr.  William  Smith,  controller  of  customs  and  navi- 
gation laws  at  Saint  John,  New  Brunswick,  dated  24t/»  September,  1866 
(p.  13). 

A  practical  person  of  this  city  informs  me  that  he,  along  with  a  part- 
ner, built  a  new  vessel  last  year  expressly  for  the  mackerel  fishery  in 
the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  and  the  Bay  of  Chaleur.  The  vessel  was 
71  tons  register,  and  cost,  ready  for  sea,  $4,800.  During  last  season, 
when  she  was  employed  in  this  trade,  she  took  nearly  600  barrels  of 
mackerel,  which  realized  in  Halifax  and  Boston  $6,000;  after  deducting 
all  the  expenses  of  the  season,  aniountiug  to  $4,8U0,  she  left  to  the 
owners  a  net  profit  of  $1,200,  or  25  per  cent  on  the  investment.  Ho 
states  the  average  catch  of  American  fishermen,  for  the  season,  to  be 
tvbout  10  barrels  of  mackerel  to  the  ton,  and  as  the  license-fee  is  50  cents 
per  ton,  it  subjects  the  American  fishermen,  if  they  take  out  a  license, 
to  a  tax  of  about  5  cents  per  barrel  on  their  fish ;  but  our  fishermen  are 
subjected  to  a  duty  of  $2  per  barrel  on  taking  their  mackerel  into  ports 
in  the  United  States,  giving  an  advantage  to  American  fishermen  over 
our  own  people  of  $1.95  per  barrel,  which  precludes  our  people  from 
competing  with  the  Americans  in  the  mackerel  fishery,  as  the  Stau^s  is 
the  chief  market  for  this  description  of  fish. 

IX. 

Extract  from  a  report  on  the  sea  and  river  fisheries  of  New  Brunswick,  by 
M.  H.  Perlefi,  esq.,  Rer  Majesty^s  emigration  officer  at  St.  John,  New 
Brunswick  {printed  in  1852). 

Page  28-9. — It  was  stated  that  early  in  July  there  were  from  twenty  to 
thirty  sail  of  American  vessels  fishing  in  Miramichi  Bay,  at  the  distance 
of  five  to  ten  miles  from  Portage  Island.,  aud  that  they  all  obtained  full 
fares  of  No.  3  mackereL  One  of  these  schooners  entered  the  Miramiclii 
Biver,  aud  went  up  as  far  as  Oak  Point,  trading  with  the  settlers  for 
salmon.  The  masker  of  this  vessel  exchanged  two  barrels  of  superfine 
flofir  for  each  barrel  of  salmon,  but  he  neither  entered  nor  paid  duties 
on  what  he  landed.  He  took  the  dimensions  of  the  various  nets  in  use, 
aud  told  the  fishermeu  he  would  furnish  them  next  year  with  similar 
nets  at  half  the  prices  they  had  been  accustomed  to  pay.  These  Amer- 
ican fishing  vessels  have,  during  the  last  three  years,  traded  at  Fox 
Island,  on  the  south  side  of  Miramichi  Bay. 

Page  33. — The  harbor  of  little  Shippagan  is  an  exceedingly  good  one, 
and  well  sheltered ;  it  is  much  r'^sorted  to  by  Ameiican  fishing-vessels 
during  heavy  easterly  storms,  and  as  many  as  ninety  sail  of  these  ves- 
sels have  been  observed  iu  this  harbor  at  one  time. 

Pagei^. — Six  or  seven  American  schooners  had  been  cruising  off 
Grande  Auce  the  earlier  part  of  the  season,  mackerel  fishing ;  they  bad 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


221 


all  taken  full  fares  and  left  the  coast.  They  frequently  came  in  close 
to  tbe  shore.  While  tbey  were  using  their  peculiar  mode  of  Ashing,  the 
cod-fishers  could  not  procure  any  mackerel  for  bait,  and  their  fishing 
suffered  in  consequence,  there  being  no  clams  here. 

Pagen  49, 50. — Several  American  vessels  were  off  this  place  during  tbe 
season,  and  obtained  full  fares  of  mackerel ;  tbey  injured  the  cod  fish- 
ing materially  by  depriving  the  fishers  of  their  bait. 

Page  52. — At  one  time  during  the  past  summer  there  were  five  Ameri- 
can Hchooners  at  anchor,  about  a  mile  from  Messrs.  Robins's  establishment. 
Tbey  fished  at  the  distance  of  three  miles  from  the  point  of  the  beach 
for  iuackerel,  and  obtained  full  fares ',  some  of  the  vessels  had  900  bar- 
rels ;  while  they  were  fishing  they  destroyed  the  shore  fishery  for  cod, 
as  the  fishers  could  not  catch  a  sufficiency  of  mackerel  for  bait. 

Page  56. — A  fisherman  from  Prince  Edward  Island,  named  Wolff',  was 
met  at  Kichibucto }  be  had  been  out  fishing  for  five  weeks  in  a  small 
scbooner,  having  on  board  two  men  and  a  boy.  They  had  fished  in  S 
to  30  fathoms  of  water,  and  had  caught  thirty  quintals  of  cod  }  the  fish 
average  one  hn<  I  ltd  to  the  quintal.  Mr.  Greelman,  of  Bichibucto,  who 
bad  Ix**^"  oiii  ashing  with  Wolff,  said  that  on  one  occasion  they  had 
taken  \  ao  hundred  tisb  in  two  hours  about  20  miles  from  Bichibucto. 
I>iiritig  the  first  week  in  September  last  they  Itoarded  three  American 
veiwelH  off  the  west  eH|M-  nt  Prince  Edward  Island.  One  vessel  had 
tbeo  450  barrelM  of  miH^keKl,  chieffy  No.  2,  and  was  on  her  second  trip; 
tbe  other  two  vessels  had  SIM)  barrels  each  f  one  schooner  was  from 
Newbury|)ort,  having  on  board  four  men  and  four  boys ;  in  one  day 
thoy  took  05  barrels  of  mackerel.  The  skipper  of  this  vessel  said  he 
bad  fished  for  mar';^  c^  on  the  same  ground  in  1848,  and  his  share  of 
tbe  profits  that  yt  ii   vjv-  $500. 


I '.'Br 
''M 


222 


AWABD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Z. 


Metum  of  United  State$  moickerel-fishiHg  veaiela  and  their  cotch  in  1873,  as  reckoned  at  Port 
Mulgrave,  Nova  Scotia,  by  the  collector  of  cuttome  at  that  port. 


Date. 


1873. 
June  11 
IS 

13 


17 


19 


1 


«1 


9U 


Name. 


iTamcin  O.  Xarr. . . . . . 

Rattler 

Walilron  Holmes . . . 

Idulla  Small 

General  Urant 

IdaC.  Baker 

Col.  C<Nik 

S.  A.  Parklnirst  .... 

Anner  Lewis 

Electric  Flash 

Witchcraft 

Qeo.  RLoring 

Cadet 

SnwuinK  Day 

Charles  A.  Koper... 

Mary  Frances 

Merriraac 

Nellie  M.  Snow  .... 

Sarah  E.  Smith 

Carrie  Francis 

M.  E.  Torry 

Lnnt 

Ocean  T<odge 

Garibaldi 

H.W.  Fierce 

Carrie  P.  Kich 

HattieB.  West  .... 

lliKhUler 

Iliraiu  Pi'wors 

White  WiH({ 

Yankee  ?iaid 

Fannie  tj.  Noye  . ... 

Pocahcutiis 

Cr>  still  Wave 

Carrie  G.  Crosby  ... 

Cha'iM'lion 

Alb'.a  M.  Heath 

Mnry  Ellen 

E.  A.  Lonilmrd 

John  Sorues 

John  Noye 

(icrtnide  Summers 
Edwurd  H  Norton  . 
El  tie  K.  Sylvester. . 

Miiry  Snow 

Lizzie  W.  Hanpuu. 

G.  M.  Hopkins 

Maria  Webster 

Alpha 

J.  A.  Smith 

Emma  F.  Prindle... 

Tidal  Wave 

U.  H.  Mansfleld 

Rosanna 

Typhoon  

Goli<.en  Horn 

J.  H.  Knnedy 

Ri«ht  Bower 

Harvest  Home 

Harriet  Torrey 

Catulina 

Larraatine 

Helen  M.  Crosby.... 

John  Pew , 

Evanfioline , 

Sarah  U.  Harris  ..... 

Addle  M.Story 

Mussasoit 

B.  H.Cnrliss 

Ardon  Keene 

Til)er 

Cvnnsnre 

I'athlinder 

Wenouah 

Jus.  Hooker 


Plaoe. 


Gloncester 

do    

Province  town. 

Deer  Isle 

Gloucester 

do 

do 

Salem 

Deer  Isle 

Gloucester .... 

do 

do 

do 

de , 

Salem 

Deer  Isle 

Weliieet 

do 

do    

Gloucester 

Sedgwick 

Gloucester 

do 

....  do 

Welllloet 

Provinoetown.. 

Gloucester 

do 

..  ..do 

L  jston 

'^'aniden 

lliugham 

•  Moucester.... 

Beverly 

Boston 

do 

Gloucester 

do 

Triirn 

V.'ellHeet 

Hin^ham 

Wolllieet    

...do  

Provincetown. . 

B«)Ht<)n 

WellUeet 

do 

....  do  

Coba'^set 

do 

Boston 

Provincetown. . 
Glouce8t«r.  ... 

Salem 

Gloucester 

ColiRsset 

Bremen 

Salem 

Gloucester 

Cohasset 

Gloucester 

...  do  

Boston 

Swan's  Island.. 

Gloucester 

Boston 

Gloucester  ..... 

do 

Truro. 


Bremen '    950 

Gloucester 

Booth  Bay  

Gloucester 

Cohasset 

Gloucester.. 


a  i 

t 

££ 

V  u 

h' 

BbU. 

lihU. 

DIU. 

4U5 

Lost. 

405 

400 

300 

700 

m> 

100 

IIOO 

i-M 

9(M) 

Sifl 

380 

S-JO 

6(J0 

365 

900 

4CJ 

3r0 

390 

TOO 

445 

305 

650 

a.'io 

LW 

400 

463 

Lost. 

ira 

iftU 

laa 

3,V) 

iioO 

300 

450 

300 

950 

5,50 

315 

900 

,515 

U3U 

300 

5:to 

330 

900 

430 

310 

170 

410 

30U 

145 

445 

310 

70 

8^ 

344 

3!)0 

7;n 

314 

350 

,5fi4 

300 

200 

460 

900 

IrO 

m 

300 

1.W 

3,50 

350 



3,50 

394 

r!H>8t. 

3'i4 

300 

975 

575 

395 

Lo«r. 

m 

300 

3:10 

m 

33U 

970 

(mo 

950 

950 

300 

140 

44« 

180 

370 

4,50 

107 

13,-. 

■m 

:mo 

300 

195 

900 

3-J5 

945 

sa.") 

570 

340 

90U 

440 

310 

140 

4,50 

9G0 

110 

370 

3f0 

190 

4ii0 

VM 

lliO 

410 

310 

ItO 

■m 

390 

■m 

930 

900 

4:10 

310 

100 

310 

9H0 

195 

405 

970 

a7o 

3;io 

Loot. 

aio 

970 

140 

410 

340 

LoHt. 

*.'!''' 

370 

i:iu 

400 

100 

Lost. 

IfiO 

300 

180 

3H) 

990 

Lost. 

!H0 

180 

ir* 

3:10 

9.-M) 

i:.o 

400 

930 

9!t0 

,540 

310 

990 

,5;w 

100 

1.W 

aio 

330 

LllHt. 

2-itl 

130 

19M 

»o 

330 

350 

,5!-0 

975 

273 

900 

.■M) 

a,vi 

150 

140 

« 

9.50 

990 

470 

410 

300 

610 

300 

ItiO 

,)(iO 

950 

LOHt. 

& 

310 

9(i0 

4? 

380 

8U 

4i'>(; 

350 

270 

m 

ISO 

<J0 

240 
300 

af^ 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


223 


Beiurn  of  United  Slates  mackerel-flaking  veaseh,  <fc. — Continaed. 


140 
IIU 
l\!0 
lliU 
<.H) 


[.imt. 

i:iu 

lOSt. 

IHU 
Lost. 
l.-)0 
l.'iO 
sill) 

a-j(> 
ir>o 

.,()8t. 

aM 


50 
140 
iWO 
200 
ItiO 

jOHt. 

2»>0 
«0 

870 
'.Hi 


S 


AMI. 

405 
■W) 

;too 

6(X) 
4iiJ 
70(1 
650 
400 

4ti:t 
ario 

450 
550 
515 

5:io 
4:io 

410 
445 
380 
TM 

%i 

m 
;t50 

350 
3t>4 
575 
Sii5 
490 
liflO 
1150 
441 
450 
■M 
300 
i-S 
570 
440 

4:>o 

370 

4110 
410 

m 

3-.H) 

4:io 

310 
405 
!i70 
210 
410 
■•10 
400 
lliO 
31-0 
1«0 
3:10 
40O 
5«) 
MO 

a:iO 

>o 
!i:5 

l!5(l 
SKlO 
470 
610 
,IM 
S50 

r.* 

3M 
300 


Datp. 


1(173. 
Juue  36 


38 


99 


Name. 


July    1 


14 


ViBlon 

Camilla 

Fortwt  Queen 

Pilinettr    

Kiiima  lirown 

K«r  West 

Queen  of  the  Cape  .. 

Colloctnr 

Ilia  R  Freeninu 

Kr<'<l  P.  Frye 

McLeo*!   

Wit<h  of  the  Wave . 

Golthm  Eagle 

Wild  Fire 

Gettisbiii'); 

Elleu  Frances 

Excbanue  

David  .f,  Adams  .... 

Col.  ElUwurth 

Tyro 

Ernest  F.  Norwood. 
Lizzie  Williams  ....< 

I'.U  Whit«.n    

Lydia  A.  Harvey  ... 
•JoMephine  Swanton. 
Edwurd  Evcn^tt.... 

Marv  E.  Wharf 

L.  C.Smith 

Wm.  H.  Thnrston  .. 

Ciohluu  Kule 

Ueo.S.  Boutwoll.... 

Governor 

Freedom    

Gleaner 

Clytie 

Otis  D.Dana 

Aamn  Perkins 

Fleetwood 

Nevada 

J.  O.  Friend,  Jnn 

Joseph  0 

Alioe  M.Gould 

Constitution  

IVerlesa 

Wyoming 

IliitlleS.  Clark 

Sariiht;.  Wharf 

Snow  Sipmll 

Kate  McClintock... 

TiKi-r 

Kohert  Emmitt 

Nuvada 

James  Pool 

I.nokoilt 

Diplonm 

Lnncet 

Merriiiiao 

KU.Sllll)r|lt 

Wni.  II.  Uavmond  . 

EtlaGolt  ." , 

Samuel  Crowell  .... 
1).  E.  Woodliury ... 

Plupuix 

("iirleton 

West  I'oint 

Kdniund  Hurke 

Julii'tt 

Finance  

E.  L.  K<>w.. 

UtUe  Kal^  , 

Oliver  Eldri<I|{e 

An^ie  S.  I'Vieiid  ... 
Star  of  the  East... 

Abhie  Dndi^ 

W.  K.  Terry 

Alice  

Snmh  E.  KalMOU... 

LottI*  E.Cook 

A.. I.  Franklin 

Sea  Spray 


Place. 


Hingham 

Cohasset 

Gloucester 

....  do 

Deer  Isle , 

Gloucester 

KostflU  , 

Deer  Isle 

Well  fleet 

Itostxm 

Cohasset 

Uoston 

Deer  Isle 

Gloucester 

do 

do 

Hingham 

Salem 

Gloucester 

Newhuryport .. 

(ilouoester 

Camden  

Hingham 

Gloucester 

Itooth  Itay 

(iloucester 

Wellfleet 

do 

Gloucester 

Swan's  Island.. 

Gloucester 

Deer  Isle 

(iloucester 

do 

do 

....  do 

Salem 

North  Haven  .. 

Gloucester 

do 

do 

Portland 

Gloucester 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Deer  Isle    

lUmth  Bay  .... 

Portland 

GloucoHter 

North  Haven  . 
Itciolh  liny  .... 

(lioncester 

Hoot  h  Hay 

Gloucester 

Wellfleet 

Gloucester  — 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Newhuryport. 

do  

Gloucesl.er.... 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

dn  

do 

'alera . 


SbU. 
IWI 
135 
335 
310 
S40 
SOO 
150 
Si^O 

:»o 

330 


330 
340 


340 
350 


340 
400 
10:t 
365 


g.S- 
I- 


BbU. 
go 

175 
ftliO 
350 


Lost. 
130 
160 
850 
3»0 


Lost 


360 
300 


180 
350 
335 


390 
SSO 
350 
330 


193 
975 
335 
300 
300 
330 
300 
300 
300 
300 
110 


9.W 

300 

73 

400 


330 
300 
930 


Lost. 
ISO 


410 


970 
330 
950 


995 

100 


930 
950 
930 
350 


175 
995 
335 
300 
950 
160 
970 
975 

aao 

90 


350 
IWO 

s:io 


Lost. 
60 


150 


160 
Lost 


950 
940 
870 
300 
370 
S.'iO 

aio 
a.M) 

180 
950 
960 
140 
950 
350 
975 
'i.V) 
310 
960 


■^rewlmryport '  180 

do    390 

Gloucester 940 

Newhuryport 170 


800 

aoo 

IjOSt. 

170 

•jao  ' 

930 
liOSt.  I 

Lost. 

aao 

150  ' 

60  I 

I,ost  i 
835  ' 
175  j 
800 
380 
140 
180 
160 
ISO 


BbU. 
980 
300 
535 
660 
340 
900 
380 
440 
600 
600 
950 
9-.!0 

« 
700 
450 
9-i0 
590 
600 
175 
765 
370 
980 
4(10 
450 
445 
330 
930 
400 
950 
740 
985 
370 
500 
560 
SOO 
450 
380 
570 
575 
530 
585 
900 
300 
680 
500 
480 
3:i0 
935 
160 
870 
370 
350 
380 
950 
440 
g.'iO 
380 
450 
440 
870 
470 
4<I0 
470 
880 
850 
IHO 
470 
410 
300 
850 

500 
485 
510 
480 
330 
500 
400 
390 


224 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


Eetum  of  United  States  nuukerel-JUhing  veeaelt,  ^-o.— Continned. 


Daw. 


1673. 
July  14 


18 


Name. 


H.J.Elliott 

Harry  BInff 

BelleoftbeBay 

Belle  Oilmore 

Cora  Greenwood 

Uorporal  Trim 

Howard  Steele 

AlferatU 

George  P.  Rnst 

George  F.  Keane 

Matilda 

Charger 

Annie  C.  Norwood  ... 

Royal  Arch , 

Arigonia 

AUuira 

Oasis 

Good  Templar 

J.J.Clarke 

Wni.  Fl»her   

ElihuBurritt 

George  W.  Brown  . ... 

Sarah  Ellwell 

Rebecca  S.  Warren  . . 
Charles  R.  Hildreth . . 
Madawaska  Maid  . ... 

Laura  A.Dodd 

J.F.Allan 

Eliza  Jane 

Eunice  Rich 

Game  Cook 

Centurion 

Joseph  Chandler 

Onward 

Eliza  K.  Parker 

Fanny  R  

A.  H.  Wbitniore 

Janet  Middleton 

Annie  Harris 

H.B.StBnwood 

Samniie  S.  McKeown . 

Ellsha  Crowell 

Vanguard 

PluDghBoy 

Abigail 

Janius  G.  Craig 

SeddieCPyle 

Hnmbolt 

W.O.DaisIey 

Alice  M.  Lewis 

George  S.  Low 

Laurma  . 


Georgia  na 

Raoer 

Charles  H.  Price 

Annie  Lin  wood 

Andrew  W.  Dodd  . .. 

Challenge 

Mary  Buniham 

Delia  Hartwell 

Florence  Reed 

Hattie  E.  Smith 

C.  C.  Pettingall 

Romeo 

Frank  Skilllng 

Abbie  Morse  

Rebecca  J.  Evans  . .. 
Lillian  M.  Warren... 

Beauty 

Mary  E.  Daniels 

J.W.Talbot 

George  B.  MoLellau . 

Emma  L.  Rich 

R.R.Higgins 

Martha  xTl'lke 

Crown  Point 

David  Bumham 

Willie  Smith  . 


Place. 


Charles  C.  Dame Gloucester 


Wellfleet 

Salem 

Gloucester.... 

Gloncester 

Portland 

Orleans 

Gloucester 

do 

do 

Bremen  

Newbaryport . 

Gloucester 

do 

do 

Booth  Bay 

Gloucester.... 
North  Haven  . 
Gloticester .... 

do 

Portland 

Gloucester 

Nowburyport. 

GlouceHter 

Deer  Isle 

Gloncester 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Boston 

Hingham 

Gloucester.... 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Deer  Isle 

Gloucester 

Bremen 

Gloucester.... 

Booth  itay 

Gloucester 

Southport 

Gloucester.... 

...  .  do 

Portland 

Gloucester 

Southport 

Boston 

Gloucester 

do 

do 

......do 

do 

Salem 

Gloucester 

do 

do , 

do 

do 

do 

Newbnryport. . 

Salem  

New  bury  port.. 

Portland 

Vinalhaven .  . . 
Newbnryport . . 
Door  Isle  ...... 

Portland 

Gloucester 

Pmiland 

Bremen 

Wellflobt 

Boston 

Newbnryport . . 

do 

Gloucester 

Portland . 


Bblt. 
iUO 
890 
SIO 
300 
IH) 
175 
870 
300 
350 
930 
130 
330 
330 
300 
3'.i0 
350 
330 
335 
360 
350 
It'O 
'.'•20 
150 
3.'i0 
300 
375 
SliU 
3H) 
330 
450 
300 
300 


360 


Lost 
380 

Lost. 
300 


150 
3.'i0 
330 
300 
360 
100 
375 
130 
300 
350 
130 


Lost 


libU 

330 
140 


800 

'sso' 
iso' 

180 
60 


Lost. 


150 
75 
340 
330 
160 
160 


Lnst 
350 
350 

180 
180 


90 


160 

"ieo 


350 


Lost 
Lost 


0 


Mil. 
350 
510 
3,V) 
300 

m 

175 
4<I0 
iiiO 
40O 
410 
1^ 
.TO 

m 

Lost. 

m 

350 
3i<0 
300 
500 
470 
340 
3S0 
150 
Lost 
550 
5il5 
5«0 
4,'>0 
400 
450 
380 
tiOO 
3.')0 
350 
S-JO 
375 
3i0 
875 

■■■"440 


4C0 
30O 

60 
300 
830 
860 
IfO 
370 
8^0 
180 
3M 
180 
300 
160 
850 

80 
130 

3:10 

17.1 
830 
875 
360 
150 
850 
880 
300 
860 
100 
585 
180 
300 
850 
180 

3m 

330 
550 
130 
Lost 


'Lost  apart. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


225 


Return  of  United  States  mackerel-Jiihing  vessels,  ^c. — Continued. 


I 


Bblt. 
3S0 
510 

300 
3«) 
175 
4!tO 
i!«0 
400 
410 
180 
370 
230 

Lost. 
330 
350 
3S0 
300 
500 
470 
340 
31-0 
150 

Lost 
550 


535 
5l'i0 

4r>o 

400 
450 
380 
200 
3.>0 
350 
330 
875 
310 
275 


440 

"ico 

30O 

eo 

200 
230 
300 
bO 
270 
820 

im 

230 
1'20 
3IKI 
160 
250 
80 
120 
330 
175 
230 
275 
260 
150 
350 
230 
300 
260 
100 
535 
130 
300 
350 
120 
350 
330 
550 
120 
LosU 


Date. 

Kame. 

Place. 

•If 

Second 
trip. 

« 

g 

187X 
Jnly  IH 

Kinr(»HS 

GloiiceAter 

BbU 

mi». 

BbU 
235 

Hiulilitiid  Chief        

RoMtt>ll       ..          .....      ..... 

S20 

l<:iMil»  C 

275 
Lost. 

3(i0 
Lost. 

no 
l'J-> 

LOHt. 

aao 

Lout. 
87(( 
300 

320 

405 

Tallv  Ho 

ilo 

Kf'tUlfAUA    ............................. 

do 

Lost 

360 

Tifiiirn  T.  Cheater  ..-- 

Tpuro 

LoBt. 

I  TO 

(si'iit^rnl  Gruut 

SnutlifXirt. 

125 

('»*vh*w       ....-.•••,..••-.-.-.... 

(.^iinHloQ 

K  R  NirkerHon 

(f  loUCPHtl*!*     ................... 

320 

Ht'leii  M.  WoiMluiau 

150 

370 

.r    r     HlllltrCA8 

do 

450 

do 

3110 

U.  R  Wi'bh 

A ini'rif '.ATI  Kftffle .  ...................... 

320 

(ilu(iceHt4;r 

850 

2.'iO 

(;  (!  \Vi>rroii      

do      

3!I0 

Si'ImyltT  Colfax 

do 

350 

H  11 'iiniitli 

do 

820 

WilUaiu  A.  Pen    

do 

320 

Total 

88,019 

XoTK— 3.')"  J  inerican  mnckerclratchers,  nvpriiao  por  veHSt'I,  :)4()  ImrrolH;  20  Nova  Scotia  voaaelH, 
4.0(1')  IuitvIk.  ..-'.irHKo  p<<r  vbHSul,  200  barrela.  IJluiicoHtiT  lias  4()0  tUliiiiK  vusHela.  Averugu  eaclk  .year, 
l.W.OOO  IihiiiIh,  for  t8H4-'t>5. 

Mi'iiioniiiiiiiiii  of  price  per  barrel:  iiqlifax,  tlO;  Boston,  $16  ;  nveragp,  tl3.  Total  value,  86,012  bar- 
rels, at  $13,  «1, 144, 156. 

Uetuni  of  United  States  mavkeirl-Jlshing  rexHrJH  and  their  catch,  in  1874,  ait  reckoned  at  For 
Mulijrare,  Sora  Scotia,  by  tke  collector  of  customs  at  that  port. 


Dnte. 


1»W. 

.lliilB  ti 

■hllv  34 

All;;.  II 

'lllIIC  li 

\ui:.  3 1 

(l(!t.  17 

July  7 

Sept.  M 

■lime  II 

Sc|it.  II) 

Oot.  3(1 

.fiinc  — 

St'iit.  10 

Juiiu  111 

Sept.  -J'.l 

Oct,  33 

•I  HUB  13 

()<!t.  33 

JilUO  14 

Oct.  30 

Jiioe  II 

0<:l.  1!) 

June  14 

ooi.  I'.l 

Juiii-  II 

(Vt.  3l) 
Juoe  M 

Oct.  30 
June  1,1 

Au)?.  ti 

June  l."i 

Oct.  3-. 
Juuit  15 


Name. 


From  wliat  port. 


•r  m 

X  a. 


a 


Game  Cock HinBhiiin,  Mass 

do I do 

do '   do 

I'ovaliontaa GloiiuoMter,  Mass 

do I do 

do do 

Urevlio'iind i do 

'.do I do 

Laiit I do 

do ! do 

do ; do 

A.  Paine Provincetown,  Mass.. 

<lo do 

Cadet Glou(',i>8t«'r,  Mass 

do do 

do I do 

Victor do 

do i do 

Col.  Cook do 

do do , 

Mary  Kllim do 

do do 

Klt^etric  Flasli do 

do : do 

OiMMKii  ().  Uovey do 

do do 

Ida  K.  Darker do 

do do 

Alico  Cory IJrtltiinoro,  Muss 

do do 

Carl  Schuns i  Gloucester,  Mass 

do do 

Dawning  Day do 

15  F 


Ist.. 
2d  .. 
3d  .. 
Ist.. 
2d  .. 
3d  .. 
1st.. 
2d  .. 
1st.. 
2d  .. 
:id  .. 
Ist.. 
2d  . . 
Ist.. 
2d  .. 
3d  .. 


eiS 


Date. 


Landed  . 


1874. 
Jnly  19 


Rcillted..  '  July     6 


Landed  . 


Lauded . 


Aug.  11 


Aug.  13 


Lauded  ...    Jnly   16 


Landed  . 


Aug.    6 


iHt. 

2d  . 
Ist. 
2d  . 
1st. 
2d  . 
Ist. 
2d  . 
Ist. 
3d  . 
1st. 
2d  . 
Int. 
2d  . 

iHt. 

3d  . 
ist. 


Home 

Landed  . . .  | 


Aiij;.  19 
Sept.    i 


Lauded  . . 


Landed  . 
Lauded . 


Home... 
R()fltted". 


Aug.  13 


Aug.  22 


Aug.  22 


Aug.  11 


July   34 


Uonie... 
Lauded . 


Aug.  11 


Is 

!?4 


Aug.  13 


50 
14i< 

50 

None. 

IKO 

60 
250 
2-,'0 
205 
190 

80 
300 
140 
2.'>0 
100 

tiO 
312 
2.50 
3f<0 
81)0 
250 
200 
430 
270 
260 
190 
315 
2.'i0 

65 
145 
420 
3110 
200 


226 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Beiurn  of  United  States  mackerelJUhing  veiueU,  ^o.— Continned. 


Date. 


1874. 
Sept.  10 
(>ot.  US 
June  Itt 
Oct.  U 
Juue  IH 
Oct.  80 
June  IH 
Oct.  SO 
Juiiu  18 
Oct.  18 
June  33 
Oct.  18 
Juno  23 
Xng.  93 
Oct.  1.5 
June  S3 
Out.  l(i 
June  S4 
Sept.  30 
Oct.  St 
Juno  S4 
Oct.  19 
June  'ii 
Out.  I» 
June  84 
Oct.  15 
Juue  84 
Oct.  IS 
June  84 
Oct.  1.5 
June  84 
Oct.  2U 
Juue  8.5 
Oct.  30 
June  8o 
Oct.  SO 
June  85 
Oct.  18 
Juue  8.5 
Oct.  15 
Juue  85 
Oct.  lU 
June  8(i 
Aug.  85 
Oct,  5 
Juno  80 
Oct.  10 
June  80 
Sept,  14 
Oct.  10 
June  30 
Sept,  13 
June  SO 
Oct  9 
June  8t> 
Oct.  10 
Juue  80 
A  UK.  80 
Juno  36 
Sttpt.  5 
Juue  87 
Oct  15 
June  88 
88 
88 
Oct  30 
Jnne  88 
Oct  SO 
June  38 
Oct  80 
June  39 
Oct.  8'" 
June  30 
Sept.  10 
July  1 
Oct     5 


Name. 


From  what  port. 


if 

s 
'A 


Gloucester,  Mass. 

do 

Salem,  Mass 

do 

Gloucester,  Mass. 
«»o 


do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

, do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Salem,  Mass 

do 

Gloucester,  Mass. 
do 


Dawning  Day 

do 

S.A.Parkhur8t.... 

do 

Otis  D.Dana 

do 

Christie  Campbell  . 

do 

Ida  May 

do 

Addle  M. Story  .... 
do 

Areqnippa 

du 

do 

T.L.Mayo , 

do 

Clytie , 

do 

do 

Charles  A.  Ropes  . . 
do 

Schuvler  Colfax  . . . 
do 

E.  L.  Kowe 

do 

Finance 

do 

Wm.  A.  Pew 

do , 

Carrie  E.  Say  ward  . 
do ". 

M.  E.  Torrev 

do...: 

Alfaretta 

do 

Eldorado 

do 

Mary  Louise 

do 

Webster j  Cape  Porpoise,  Me.. 

do I do 

Sea  Spray [  Newhuryport,  Mass 

do I do 

do j do 

Elihii  Burrett i  Gloucester,  Mass  . . . 

do j do 

HirAPi  Powers do 

do do 

do do 

Wiufleld  Scott |  Truro,  Mass  . 

do 

Anner  Lewis 

do 

James  Bliss 

do 

Mary  J.Elliot 

do 

Market  Boat  J.  ^tory,  Jun. 
do 


do 

do 

, do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Sedgwick,  Maine. 

.     ."^do.... 

Gloucester,  Mass. 

do 

Boston,  Mass 

, do 

Gloucester,  Mass. 
do 


Sd.. 
3d. 
Ist.. 

sa . 

ist.. 
Sd  . 
1st. 
3d. 
1st. 

ad. 

Ist.. 
2d. 
1st. 
3d  . 
3<I  . 
1st. 
8<l. 
Ist. 
2d. 
3d  . 
1st. 
3d  . 
1st. 
8d  . 
ist. 
8d. 
Ist. 
3d  . 

l8t. 

Sd. 
Ist. 
2d  . 
Ist. 
Sd  . 
Ist. 
Sd  . 
1st. 
S<l  . 
Ist. 
Sd  . 
Ist. 
Sd  . 

iHt. 

2<1  . 
3d  . 


Ist. 
8d  . 

iHt. 

S<1. 
3ti  . 


do 
Deer  Isle,  Me . . . . . 

do 

Gloucester,  Mass  . 

do 

Booth  Bay,  Me 

do.. 

Gloucester,  Mass 
do 


Joseph  O' ! do 

do i do 

Cynosure j  Booth  Bay,  Me 

W.  E.  TeiTy i  G  loucester.  Mass 

Dictation do 

do do 

Oliver  Eldridge do 

do do , 

Freedom do 

do do 

EuolaC I do 

..do .| do 

Barward | do 

do I do 

Clara  B.  Waren ; do 

do ....| do 


iHt.. 

8d  . 
Ist. 
3d  . 
1st. 
ad  . 
1st. 
3d  . 
Ist. 
Sd  . 
1st. 
Sd  . 
1st. 
1st. 
1st. 
2d  . 
Ist. 
Sd  . 
Ist. 
Sd  . 
1st. 
2d. 

iHt. 

Sd  . 
Ist. 
Sd. 


4 

n 


Laude<l . 


Landed . 
Home... 


Home... 
Lauded . 


Landed  . 
Keflttod . 


Home... 
Home... 
Kcfltted. 
Landed . 


Landed . 
Landed . 


Home... 
Home  .. 


Home. 
Home. 


Home... 
Landed . 


Lauded . 
Home. .. 


Landed . 
Lauded . 


Home. 


Landed . 


Landed . 


Landed . 


Home... 
Landed . 


T<andod . 


Home. 


Home... 
Home  .. 
Lauded . 


Home... 
Lauded . 


Date. 


1874. 


Aug.  36 
Aug.  i3 


Auk.  13 
Aug.  in 


Aug.  19 


Aug.  1!) 
Aug.    4 


Aug.  19 
Aug.  19 
Sept.    3 


Aug.  83 


Sept  11 
Aug'iit 
Aug.  is 


Aug.  14 
Aug.  19 
Aug.    6 


Sopt    I 
Aug.  87 


Aug.  19 
Aug.  34 


July  30 


Ang.  13 
Aug!  ii 


Aug.  17 


Aug.  88 
Aug.  27 


Aug.    8 
Aug.  18 


Aug.  13 


Seining 
Aug.  37 
Aug.  37 


Aug.  83 
Aug.  3:) 


Landed . 
Landed . 
Landed . 


Ang.  30 
Aug.  14 
Alljs!  87 


HO 
1-JO 

zm 
aiio 
;)07 
noo 

2i?0 

auo 

815 
17,') 
312 
1611 
220 
100 
i!00 
3:10 
23U 
2110 
l.W 
1.10 
3110 

nil 

8lH) 
1,V) 

;«]u 

275 
200 

:i(i;t 

S-IO 
27.1 

IP.1 

3(10 

2;(0 
2:10 

170 
2C0 
200 
300 
215 
l-.l 
125 
320 
lUO 
150 
2:10 
170 

aito 
100 

200 
170 
l.V) 
2li0 
104 
290 
2.10 
205 
120 
f5 
40 
275 
1A> 
400 
330 

;i:to 

220 
340 
2.10 
220 
120 
800 
220 
210 
,10 

120 


Oct.    S 
July 
Sept.  8 
July 

Ocf.    S! 

Julv    . 

Sept.  2! 

Oct.    1! 

July    ti 

Oct.    Si 

l,(i(it. 

July    7 

Oct.      5 
20 

July    7 

Oct.      5 

July    7 

Oct. 

July 

Oct. 

July 

Oct! 

July 

.Sept. 

July 

Oct; 

July 


Oct. 

July 

Oct. 

July 

Oct. 

July 

Sept. 

July 

(Vt 

July 

(»ct. 

July 


19  I 
10 
I2  I 
lU 
19 
10  i 
4 

10  '. 
21 
lu 

24  ' 

10 

10 


Oct.     (i 

July  II 
^cpt.  4 
July  II 

Sejit.  Ill 

July  11 
11 
It 
18 

Sept.  li 
July  li 
■Sept.  18 
July  i:) 
Sept.  22 
July   I:) 

Oct,  15 
July  l.i 

Oct.  la  ; 

July  13 
"Ct.  Is 
July  II 
15 
Oct.    l(j 

July  15 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


227 


Return  of  United  States  mackerel-ftehiHg  veeaeh,  ^c— Continned. 


o 
i 

■It 

0 

'A 


36 
1» 

ia 

'is  I 

19 


.  19 
.    4 

;.  i» 

I.  1« 
U    3 


83 


t  n 
K-'ia 
B-'is 
iR.ii 


I'JO 

•i« 
:io7 

300 
300 

two 
y,i 

Wi 
160 

220 
100 
200 

»:to 

230 
2110 
l.V) 
KiO 
2m0 

mi 

8il0 
l.V) 
3UU 
200 
275 
200 


w 

-  1 

6 


pt.     I 


97 

'is 


24 


ly  30 


JS-  »:» 


UK- 


12 


n 


■,«vi 

250 
27.". 
lf"> 
3U0 

2;(0 
2;io 

170 

2i?0 

200 

300 

215 

175 

l-.!5 

;t-JO 

100 

150 

2;w 

170 
200 
100 
200 
170 


82 


IB- 


ag.  la 


13 


■ill  in  i: 
Vg.  27 


30 


Bg.l4 


m- 


27 


150 

2«0 

104 

290 

2:10 

205 

120 
C5 
40 
275 
1H5 
400 
:130 
;i:tO 
2-20 
340 
250 
2'W 
120 
200 
220 
210 
51) 
2«) 
120 


Name. 


From  what  port. 


fa  a 

It 

a 


o    . 

il 

tn 


Date. 


Oct. 
.Illlv 
Sept.  Sf* 
July  4 
Oct.  22 
Jlilv  4 
Sept.  2!* 
Oct.  !!• 
July  ti 
IKt.  22 
I.imt. 
July  7 
Oct.      5 


July 

Ott. 

Jiilv 

Oct. 

July 

Oct. 

July 

(Id. 

Jiilv 

Si'iit. 

J  lily 

Oct. 

July 


20 

H 
20 

!) 
20 

!t 
1!» 

II 
If 

M 

!t 

Oct.  I'.l 
July  10 
ihC  10 
July  10 
Oct.  Ill 
July 
I  Id. 
July 
Oct. 
J  Illy 
Sept 
J  Illy 

Ov't. 

July 
Oct. 
July 


(let.  (i 
July  11 
Sept.  4 
July  II 
S..pt.  l!l 
July  11 
11 
11 
12 
Sept.  ti 
July  12 
Sfpt.  It* 
July  13 
Sept.  22 
July  13 
II 
Oct,  15 
July  13 
Oct.  12 
July  13 
(let.  1(< 
July  M 
15 
Oct.  1« 
July  15 


Ilarrint  Torrfly '  Oloucoster,  Masa 

ilo i do 

Marjiarot <lo 

WiiiKud  Arrow | do 

do I do 

(ieueral  Scutt j  Proviiicotowii,  Maia  . . 

do \ do 

£peg  Tarr 1  Gloucester,  Mass 

do do 

Abby  Dodge j do 

du j  do 

, do 1 do    

ILasUuwood ! do 

do I  do 

(.'nrrle  FraDcis { do 

Nortberner do 

do I do 

do do 

B.  F.  Somes ' do 

do ;. do 

Madawaskii  Maid i do 

do ' do 

Soa  QueoD ] do 

do I do 

UuorKoS.  Boutwell | do 

(Ui I  do 

lluat  Matilda Newbury  port,  Mass  . . 

do '  do    

I'iuiieiT Uloiicester,  Mass  . . . . . 

do .1 do 

\Vm.  11.  Raymond ' tlo 

Ulivu  il.  Itobiuson Portland,  Iklo 

do do 

Wm.  H.  Tburstou GlouotHter,  Mass 

do '  du 

l!eo.  I*.  Uust I do 

do ., do 

Joshua  Saudborn do 

do ■  do 

Peter  D.  Smith i do 

do do 

Abbie  Morse !  Viiiulliiiven,  Mo 

do !  do 

Sarah  C.  AVharf 1  Glimoestcr,  Mass 

do \ do 

Uucle  Joe I  Uooth  Bay,  Me 

do I  do    

Arizona. '  Gloucester,  Mass 

Vaukee  Maid ;  Ciiiiiduii,  Mo 

Klyiuu  Cloud |  Boston,  Mads 

<m I do ... 

C'arleton ;  Gloucester,  Mass 

do I tlo 

Joliu  Gerard 1  Newburyport,  Mass  . . 

do do 

Cruwu  Point do 

C'unimerue do 

J.  U.  Friend, ,jun Gloucester,  Mass 


laandod . 


1st., 
ad  .. 

Ist i  Homo...., 

1st I  Homo. ... 

3d  ... 


t874. 
Auk.  31 


Auk.  91 
Aug.  31 


1st {  Landed  . 

3<l 


1st I  Landed  . .. 

3d 


Auk.  13 


Sept    1 


1st i  Home Aug.  16 

Sd 
3d 


1st i  Home. 

3d 


Ist 'Lost 

Ist I  Lauded  . . 

3d I 


3d 

Ist Home. 

3d 


Aug.  17 


Aug.  S3 


Auk.  33 


1st Home Aug.  34 

3d 

1st Lauded...    Aug.  10 

Sd ....... 

iHt Landed...,  Aug.  33 

3d I  ........ 

Ist Landed Aug.  18 

3d 


Ist Home. 

3d ; 

Ist Home. 


AuK.  31 
Sept.  "" 


Ch»ilesU.lUldreth. 

do 

Kosaua 

do 

Snbiue  

do 

Vi-nilia 

William  Keaue 

do 

Catalina 

do 

Veterau 

do 

William  Fisber 

Mary  E.  Daniels.... 

.....do 

Trenton 


do 

do 

Salrrii,  Mass 

do 

Gloucester,  Mass. 

do 

Portland,  Me 

Bremen,  Me 

do 

Gloucester,  Moss. 

do 

do 

do 

Portland,  Me  .  . . . 
Gloucester,  Mass. 

do 

do 


>  All  of  the  flab  loati  crew 


iHt I  Oct.     9 

iHt ; I  Oct      9 

1st i  Oct,     9 

let ,  Landed...!  Aug.  14 

3d I 

1st Lauded...!  Aug.  14 

3d I 

1st Lauded  ...  I  Aug.  31 

3d I 

Ist I  Aug.  31 

Ist Landed...    Sept.    3 

3d 

1st :  Lauded.. 

8d 

1st >  Landed  .. 

3d 

1st Lauded.. 

Ist Lauded  ...  I  Sept    1 

3d 

Ist I  Landed...)  Aug.  18 

saved. 


»t Landed  ...  i  Sept.    8 

8d 1 

1st Landed   .. I  Aug.  83 

3d I  

1st Hume ,  Aug.  36 

3d I....  ..... 

Ist Landed... {  Sept  10 

2d I 

1st Landed... I  Aug.  37 

2d I 

1st Lauded...    Aug.  19 

ad 

Ist Landed...    Aug.  30 

ad I 

Ist Landed...!  Aug.  35 

3d ...!'..... 

1st Home I  Aug.  18 

1st Home |  Aug.  18 

Ist Lauded. ..{  Aug.  33 

ad i 

Ist Lauded...    Aug.  30 

ad ' ....:..... 

1st. Landed ...    Sept    8 


Sept  7 
Sept  0 
Sept"  "4 


V5 


315 
800 

a-a 

860 
170 

9711 

140 
360 
360 
8S0 
330 

to 

330 
970 
330 
311 

310} 

aeu 

370 

8:10 

370 
84(1 
300 
320 
363 
310 
185 

85 
330 
30<l 
315 
380 
ItiO 
803 
£UU 
300 
185 
860 
180 
340 
180 
800 

till 
870 
800 
300 

au* 

850 
360 
341) 
160 
330 
160 
840 
ItiO 
473 
4.-)0 
400 
3110 
1611 
140 
80 
8.i0 
120 
870 
810 
300 
840 
160 
350 
805 
810 
330 
347 
ti40 


228  AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 

Beturn  of  United  Statea  mackerel-JisMtig  ve»$el».  <|-c. — Continned. 


m 


Date. 


1674. 

July  15 

(kst.    IH 

July  10 

()<:t.      i 

Jily  IB 

N.  V.    3 

July  Ifi 

16 

in 

Oct.    15 

July  1« 

Oct..     .5 

July  17 

18 

18 
18 
Oct,  5 
July  18 
Oct,  17 
July  19 
19 
Oct.  17 
July  19 
Oct.  17 
July  SO 
Oct.  17 
July  31 
Oct.  17 
Julv  S-2 
Si*pt.  3 
July  22 
Oct.  1 
July  33 
S3 
S.'i 
Oct.  10 
July  27 
!Sei>t.  30 
July  27 
88 
Oct.  5 
July  S!) 
Oct,  20 
July  .10 
Oct.  20 
July  31 
Sept.  30 
Oct.  19 
Aug.  3 
Oct.  16 
Aug.  3 
Oct.  16 
Aug.    3 


Name. 


Trenton 

Uavid  J.  Adams  . 
do 

O.  W.  Brown  . . . . 
do 

Rattler 

do. 


From  what  port 


GlonccMor,  Mas* .... 

Saleiu,  Muss 

, do 

Newburypitrt,  Maas. 

do 

0  louceator,  Mass .... 
do 


Martha  A.  Hrewer \  Belfast,  Mo 

Lottie  V.  BubKuu i  Uloucesttr,  Mass. 


do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Deer  Inle,  Me 
Newburyport,  Moss. . . 

do 

Gloucester,  Afass 

do 


Aug. 

No" 
Aug. 


6 
5 

7 
9 
II 
15 
18 
18 
1» 
19 
23 
3-2 

sa 

82 
82 
23 
Nov.  fi 
Aug.  S3 
35 
36 


Gettysburg 

do    , 

Waverly , 

do 

Annie  K.  Lane 

Mary  M 

A.  il.  Whitemorc 

Sarah  E.  Bubson. 

do 

Alh)iinl)ra 

do 

Flora  Temple j do 

Howard  Steele do 

do I do 

Edmund  Iturlce |  Xewburyport,  Mass. 

I do 1 do 

i  Grace  L.  Fears |  Gloucester,  Mass 

do 1 do 

I  Wyoming I do 

j do I do 

'  George  B.  McClellan !  Portland,  Me 

! do j do 

Starof  the  East Gloucester,  Maas 

I do do 

SiUafiawa do 

i  General  Grunt do 

i  Col.  Ellsworth  .. 

! do 

I  Mary  Francis  ... 

I do 

j  Martha  F.  Pike. 

Fleetwood 

I do 

Lottie  K.  Cook... 

I do 

i  Ocean  Ledge 

; do 

I  Abden  Keeue  .. 

do 

do 

EttoGott 

do 

George  F.  Keene 

, do 

Deborali  B.  Webb j  Deer  Isle,  Me 

Leaping  Water |  Vinnlliuvon,  Me.. 

Knight  Templar !  Glou(H>Hter,  Mass. 

do i do 

Vision I  HiDgl)nm,  Ma^a  . 

j  Alice I  Salem,  Muss 

i  Moro  CHstle  (new) i  Oloncptilnr.  Mass. 

I  TiiokBli'ta Portland,  Me 

I  Kate  McClinttH'k Bmilh  Buy,  Ale... 

I  Vangtiurd do 

i  E.  F.  Willard : do 

Gertie  Lewis j do 

'  Arizona j do 

j  James  Pool i do 

■  Ilannnh  EUdiidge .1 do 

Kttn  E.  Tanner !  Glonrcster,  Alass. 

i  WaterFsll i  Sonlli|>«rt.  Me 

'  Alice  M.Gould Portland,  Mo 

do    do 

I  Regalia do    

I  Nellie  n Eastport,  Me 

I  General  Grant Booth  Buy,  Me... 


s 


3d  . 
1st. 
3d  . 
1st. 
Sd  . 
1st. 
3d. 


do 

do 

Deer  Isle,  Me 

do 

Newbnrv|K)rt,  Maxs. . . 
North  llaveu.  Mass. . . 

do 

Newburyi)ort,  Mass. . . 

do    

do 

do 

Bremen,  Me 

do 

do 

Gloucester,  Mass 

do 

Bremen,  Me 

do 


1st 

1st 

ad.... 

1st 

3d.... 

1st 

Ist 

1st.... 

iHt 

Sd  .... 

1st 

Sd  .... 

1st 

1st.... 
8d  .... 

Iht 

8d  .... 
Ist.... 
8d  .... 
1st 

ad  .... 

Ist.... 

»i .... 

1st.... 
Sd  .... 
Ist.... 
1st.... 
Ist.... 
2d  .... 
1st.... 
8d  .... 
1st.... 
1st.... 
8<l  .... 
1st.... 
Sd.... 
1st.... 
Sd  .... 
Ist.... 
ad  .... 
3d.... 
Ist.... 
Sd  .... 
1st.... 
3d  .... 
1st.... 
1st.... 
1st.... 
3d  .... 
1st.... 
Ist.... 

iHt.... 

1st.... 

Ist.... 

1st.... 

1st.... 
,  1st.... 
I  Ist... 

1st.... 

Ist.... 

1st 

1st.... 
1st.... 
3d.... 
Ist.... 
Ist.... 
Ist.... 


n 


Home. 


Lauded 
Landed . 


Home  .. 
Landed . 


Landed . . 


Home... 
'Home... 
Home. .. 
Landed  . 


Landed . 


Home.. 
Home  . 


Laiuled . . 


Landed  . 


Landed . . . 


Landed . 


Landed . . 


Home. .. 
Homo... 
Retitted . 


Landed . 


Home... 
Landed . 


Lauded . . . 


Landed . . 


Landed . 


Laiuled . . . 


Lauded . . 


Hirme... 
Home. .. 
Landed . 


Home 

Home.... 

Home 

Home 

Home 

Home 

Home 

Home 

Home 

Home 

Home.... 

Home 

Home 

Landed . . 


Home. 
Home. 
Home 


Date. 


1874. 


Aug.  18 


Aug.  85 
Oct.  5 
Oct.  10 
Aug.  18 


Aug.  18 


A\ig.  83 
Ang.'n 
Aug.  33 


8 


Sept 
Sept'  i 
Aug.  33 


Sept    1 
Sept.  io 


Aug.  81 
Aug.  81 
Sept    8 


Oct    13 


Sept.    0 
Sept    8 


Sept  4 

Oct  l.'i 

Oct  l.'i 

Oct  15 

0«!t  l.'i 

Oct  8."> 

Oct.  a.-) 

Oct  8.1 


Oct. 
Oct 
Oct 
Oct 
f>ct 
Oct 


Sept  36 
Aug.  88 


Aug.  88 


Sept.  10 


Oct  1 
Oct  1 
Sept    5 


Aug.  30 


Oct.      5 
Aug.  80 


()<!t        « 

S«-pt    6 
Oct.      5 


Oct    10 

Oct  an 

Oct    80 


ISO 

:);w 
8:10 
'm 

H) 

4<!0 

Cfl 

4m 
aw 
3sn 

840 

870 
9)0 
87.1 
4(M) 
3«.-| 

ini; 
lit 

'Ml) 

175 
IW 
380 

8211 
l.-iO 
110 

:m\ 
a:io 

300 
8.10 

1IMI 

,3(10 

ino 

400 
4l'0 
.370 

no 
ai."i 

3i..') 

am 

lA'i 
3INI 
17.-. 

Itifl 

130 
S.-.0 
l:K) 
1110 
210 
800 
87,5 
835 
330 
IHO 
340 
ICO 
SIO 
275 
4i!0 

8:to 

240 
2'.'.5 
S>0 
280 
lilO 
210 
iiO 
275 
290 

1211 
17.-. 

220 


*  Sent  flah  home  by  railroad ;  Shediac  toek  load  potatoes  homo. 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


229 


Return  of  United  Statet  mackerel-flshing  veweU,  <f-c. — Continaed. 


''I 


...!        ISO 

91  ;      :i3o 

ai       tiiio 

a       tion 

....            H) 

...  1      4fin 

19  1         Ml 

....       im 

9        ;iiin 

.  a       3vit 

240 

.  19          iiV) 

ail) 

.  9.'5       'j:.> 

5          4(W 

10  ,       3rt.-> 

;.  Id  1       Wi 

....  1        144 

{.  18  1        1!40 

....  1        175 

t  9fi  i      rifi 

{.  aa       3;!(i 

:      aati 

u.  aa        iri« 

....  1      no 

t.  10  ,        3l'ti 

i      8:in 

a.  aa       300 

'      a;io 

p.  n  1     ■.!..» 

i         10" 

a.  92  '        301) 

7....  '        IM 

t       1  1        400 

r,      1  1       4iiO 

)t    5  1        370 

1        11" 

a.  30  ,        ai."> 

...1       !ir> 

r.     :>  ,      3ij 

jr.  aO             SKI 

.....        U-. 

)t.    2  1        3IH) 

.1.   1        I'^n 

l-.'O 

i;.  aa       s.'io 

.  i        1.10 

....  1        10" 

)t  1  <     21" 

aDo 

,t.  10          27.1 

a.i.'i 

•,.       «  i        3-Jfl 

)t   <i  !      i^n 

r        5  !        310 

...  1       li" 

.t.    4  ;       210 

t,     15  1        'i''' 

t.     15  '        4M 

(      15  1        230 

.     15  ;        210 

t.    95  ,        2'J.. 

t     95  '        2-0 

t     a5           2-.H) 

t'.     25           1!"' 

t      25          210 

I.    «5           2-Jl 

t.    2fl!        27.-. 

aw 

10 

iMO 

12" 

r  10 

17.-. 

i.    20  ;        2H) 

t    90 

22U 

Date. 

N«me. 

From  what  port. 

Number    of 
trips.        ! 

Date. 

'A 

1674. 
AiiK.  26 

an 
Sept.    1 

1 

1 
:i 

Knr.kport,  Mass 

I'ort  land,  .M  i» 

1st* 

iHt 

l»t 

1st 

Ut 

Ist 

1st 

1st 

Ist 

1st 

1st 

iHt 

iHt 

rinnin. .... 
Landed . . 

Home 

Home 

Home 

Home  

Heining . . 

Ifl74. 
Oct     9 
Oct     IM 
Ih-t.     IS 
Oct     18 
(Kit     IH 
Oct     IH 
Oct     If^ 

70 

A.  Mcl>i)nal<l 

sao 

Nellie  May 

Salcni,  MoflH 

2.10 

Twilight  

T-ctllc  S.  Kcod 

South  port,  Mo 

do 

290 
IhO 

do 

900 

Kranklin  Schenka 

Kockport,  MflHS 

Gloucester,  Mans 

do 

920 

('.(;.  Wiirroii 

,17.^ 

3 

C'liHrger  

Sarah  K.  Nlclitlnjtale 

Anron  liuriih»m,  and 

Mnr.v  Burnham 

Satiiiiel  WniiHon 

9a.'> 

3 

KnMport,  Mc 

O  litucester,  Mass 

(In 

Home. . . . 

9u0 

S 

Home. .. 

iH.t 

5 

9.50 

t] 

do 

Nov. 
No%'. 
Nov. 
Nov. 

« 
6 
A 
0 

240 

f, 

do 

Ist 

920 

!l 

John  \V.  Dodge 

Klvin)!  Scnil 

K  A.  Hortoii 

do 

1st 

100 

13 

iHt 

g.'iO 

14 

do    

1st 

175 

Kllen  KrancU 

C  It.  Manning 

PciirlcHa 

Alaska 

do 

do 

Ist 

145 

Sept  80 

ai 

1st 

iHt 

275 

do 

100 

CKt      3 

do 

1st 

125 

Total 

63.0784 

*  Sold  at  auction  for  debt. 


t  Retttted  for  herring. 


Tniearrounl—TnM  number  American  vessels,  164.  Seventeen  Nova  .Siiotia  vessels  average  aliont 
m  1)41  relK  cacli ;  the  actual  haul  of  the  cutuh  of  Nova  Scotia  vessels  with  hook,  5,2U0,  one  vessel  with 
ui't<, 210  =  5,.'i00,  or  383  bairals  per  vehHcl. 

TliiH  U  Hea-packtid  barrels;  tbe.v  fall  short  about  15  pound*  per  barrel. 

Tbo  most  of  those  niiujkeri'l  were  <;au);ht  alxtut  I'riuce  Edwani  Island,  small-sizo  mackerel ;  the  best 
am)  Uriicst  were  caught  at  Masdali-n  Islsnd. 

Tliis  nia.v  nut  bo  a  true  numlMtrof  barrels ;  onl,v  feathered  this  from  the  vessel  men;  tbe.v  call  them 
tbat  i|iiantity ;  it  is  not  out  of  tlie  wav  niuch  either  way. 

Tlie  dates  alMtve  are  correct,  anil  all  of  those  vi  ^w\i  passed  through  the  Gut  of  (^ansn,  except  one ; 
iliiit  one  lished  at  Sydne.v,  C.  It.— the  C.  0.  Warren     Tlie  most  of  the  bay  mackerel  were  caught 
bflween  Kiist  Point,  P.  E.I.,  and  Georgetown,  P.  £.  I.,  close  inshore. 
Yours,  trulj-, 

DAVin  MtmRAT, 

CulUotor  0/  I'ort  Mulgrave. 

FRSKCAltv  9,  1875. 

XI. 

Extracts  of  a  report  on  the  condition  of  the  sea-fisheri€n  of  the  south  coast  of 
Xew  England  in  1871  and  1872,  by  Spencer  F.  Baird,  Commisaio  mr. 

I'afje  7. — As  migbt  have  reasonably  been  inferred,  the  snpply,  ^hich 
formerly  greatly  exceeded  the  demand,  now,  to  a  certain  extent  at  least, 
and  in  certain  localities,  has  failed ;  and  tbe  impression  has  become 
prevalent  tbat  the  iish  themselves  are  diminishing,  and  that  in  time 
Home  kinds  at  least  will  be  almost  or  quite  exterminated.  This  asser- 
tion is  made  with  reference  to  several  species  that  formerly  constituted 
an  important  part  of  the  food  supply,  and  the  blame  has  been  alter- 
nately laid  upon  one  or  another  of  the  causes  to  which  this  result  is 
iis(;ribed,  the  fact  of  the  decrease  being  generally  considered  as  estab- 
lished. 

Page  19. — In  view  of  the  facts  adduced  in  reference  to  the  shore 
tisbes,  there  can  be  no  hesitation  in  accepting  the  statement  that  there 
lias  been  an  enormous  diminution  in  their  number,  although  this  had 
already  occurred  to  a  considerable  degree  with  some  species  by  the 
beginiiiner  of  the  present  century. 

Page  30.— The  testimony  everywhere,  with  scarcely  an  exception, 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


vQ 


<^ 


/a 


/y 


y 


/A 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


=  50 


ilM 

IIIIM 
illlM 

JilUO 


M 

2.2 

m 

U    111.6 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


\ 


h   me 


Q.r 


i 


230 


AWARD   OF    THE   FISHERY   CO».iMISSION. 


both  from  linemen  and  trappers,  was  that  the  whole  business  of  flsliing 
was  pretty  nearly  at  an  end,  and  that  it  would  scarcely  [)ay  parties  to 
attempt  to  continue  the  worlt  on  a  large  scale  in  1873. 


GENEEAI.  SUMMARY  OF  RESULTS. 


exercise 


wt 


\,^    M^ 


Pages  38,  39, 40. — The  general  conclusions  at  which  I  have  arrived  as 
the  result  of  my  investigations  of  the  waters  on  the  south  side  of  New 
England  during  1871  and  1872  may  be  b'-ifley  summed  up  as  follows: 

1.  The  alleged  decrease  in  the  number  of  food  fishes  in  these  tenters  icithin 
the  past  few  years  has  been  fully  substantiated. 

2.  The  shore  fishes  ha  ve  been  decreasing  during  the  past  twenty  years,  grad- 
ually at  first,  but  made  more  abruptly  from  about  the  year  1805,  ihe  reduc- 
tion by  the  year  1871  being  so  great  as  entirely  to  prevent  any  suecessful 
summer  fishing  with  the  hook  and  line,  and  leaving  to  tlie  traps  and  poniids 
the  burthen  of  supplying  tlie  maricets.  Tiiis  statement  applies  also, 
but  perhaps  to  a  certain  extent,  to  the  blue-flsh.  The  decrease  in  their 
numbers  tirst  manifested  itself  about  ten  years  ago,  and  is  going  on 
quite  rapidly  until  now. 

3.  This  period  of  decrease  represents  the  time  during  which  the  traps 
and  pounds  have  been  well  established,  their  operations  increasing  year 
by  year,  and  their  catch,  especially  in  the  early  8i)ring,  being  always 
very  great. 

4.  In  1871  and  1872  the  decrease  in  the  number  of  fish  has  been  so 
great  as  to  reduce,  very  largely,  the  profit  formerly  derived  by  tbe 
traps. 

5.  The  appearance  in  1871  of  an  unusual  large  number  of  young  fish 
spawned  in  1870,  is  a  phenomenon  only  to  be  explained  by  the  probable 
escape  of  a  larger  number  of  breeding  tish  than  usual  during  the  previous 
season,  an  abrupt  decrease  in  the  ravages  of  blue-fish  and  other  species, 
or  else  by  a  spontaneous  movement  northward  of  newly-hatched  fisii 
that  ordinarily  would  have  remained  on  a  more  southern  coast.  While 
these  fish  will  probably,  for  several  years,  constitute  a  marked  feature 
in  the  fisheries,  there  is  no  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a  second  crop 
of  young  fish  corresponding  to  the  one  in  question. 

G.  The  decrease  of  the  fish  may  be  considered  as  due  to  the  combined 
action  of  the  fish  pounds  or  weirs  and  the  blue  fish,  the  former  destroy- 
ing a  very  large  percentage  of  the  spawning  tish  before  th(y  have  de- 
posited their  eggs,  and  the  latter  devouring  immense  numbers  of  yoiiug 
tish  after  they  have  passed  the  ordinary  perils  of  immaturity. 

7.  There  are  no  measures  at  our  command  for  destroying  the  blue- 
flsh,  nor  would  it  be  desirable  to  do  this,  in  view  of  their  value  as  an 
article  of  food.  The  alternative  is  to  regulate  the  action  of  the  pounds 
80  as  to  prevent  the  destruction  of  tish  during  the  spiawning  season. 

8.  The  quickest  remedy  would  be  the  absolute  abolition  of  the  traps 
and  pounds.  This,  however,  would  be  a  harsh  measure,  and  their  proi)er 
regulation  will  probably  answer  the  purpose  of  restoring  the  supply, 
although  a  greater  number  of  years  will  be  required.  Such  regulation 
may  consist  either  in  prohibiting  the  use  of  traps  or  pounds  during  the 
entire  season  of  the  spawning  of  tish,  or  for  a  certain  number  of  days 
in  each  week  during  that  season. 

9.  As  the  principal  profit  of  the  pounds  is  derived  from  the  catch  of 
fish  during  the  spawning  season,  it  will  probably  be  sulllcient  to  try  the 
experiment  of  prohibition  of  the  use  of  nets  from  Friday  night  until 
Monday  morning  of  each  week  of  the  spawning  season,  and  alter  that 
uo  reHtrictiou  need  be  imposed. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


231 


10.  It  is  desirable  that  the  reprulation  for  a  close  time  dnrinpf  each 
week  be  passed  by  the  several  States;  and  if  this  caimot  be  effected, 
then  the  General  iGrovernment  should  enact  absolute  prohibition,  or  at 
least  during  the  spawning  season,  as  it  possesses  no  officers  who  conld 
exercise  the  supervision  required  to  enforce  the  partial  closure,  or  before 
wiioin  coniidaints  could  be  entered  and  the  penalty  exacted. 

11.  Any  marked  increase  in  the  n.'.mber  of  shore  fishes,  resulting 
from  their  protection  during  the  spawning  season,  will  probaljly  tend  to 
restore  the  blue-fish  to  their  original  numbers. 

IL*.  As  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  scup,  and  to  a  less  degree  other 
sliore  tishes,  as  well  as  blue-fish,  have  several  times  disappeared  at  in- 
tervals to  a  greater  or  less  extent  within  the  historic  period  of  New 
Eiighuul,  we  cannot  be  certain  that  the  use  of  traps  and  pounds  within 
the  last  ten  years  has  actually  produced  the  scarcity  complained  of. 
The  fact,  however,  that  tiiese  engines  »lo  destroy  the  spawning-ttsii  in 
so  great  numbers  renders  it  very  probable  that  they  exercise  a  decideil 
influence.  No  vested  interest  or  right  will  suffer  by  the  experiment  of 
regulating  the  period  of  their  use,  as  we  have  attempted  to  show  that  a 
better  price  will  be  obtained  from  a  smaller  number  of  fish,  by  prevent- 
ing the  glutting  of  the  market,  and  the  consequent  waste  of  so  perish- 
able an  article  as  fresh  fish. 

13.  A  feeling  of  bitterness  entertained  by  the  line-fishermen  and  the 
general  public  against  traps  and  pounds,  and  those  who  own  and  profit 
by  them,  will,  in  a  measure,  be  allayed  it  the  experiment  of  regulation 
and  restriction  be  tried,  at  least  for  a  few  years. 

XII. 

Extract  froyn  eighth  report  of  the  Commissioners  of  lisheries  of  the  State  of 
Maine  for  the  year  1874  {page  7.) 

Washington,  D.  C,  November  16,  1872. 

My  Dear  Sir:  I  am  in  receipt  of  your  letter  asking  my  opinion  as 
to  the  probable  cause  of  the  rapid  diminution  of  the  supply  of  fooil 
lialies  on  the  coast  of  New  E  igland,  and  especially  of  Maine.  The  fact, 
as  stated,  needs  no  question  ■.  "t  is  too  patent  to  the  experience  of  every 
man  who  has  been  interested  in  the  fisheries,  whether  as  a  matter  of 
business  or  as  an  amateur.  An  examination  of  the  early  records  of  the 
country  in  which  the  subject  is  referred  to,  cannot  fail  to  convince  the 
most  skeptical. 

We  are  all  very  well  aware  that  fifty  or  more  years  ago  the  streams 
and  rivers  of  New  England  emptying  into  the  ocean  were  crowded,  ami 
almost  blockaded  at  certain  seasons,  by  the  numbers  of  shad,  salmon, 
and  alewives  seeking  to  ascend,  for  the  purpose  of  depositing  their 
spawn,  and  that  even  atter  these  parent  fish  had  returned  to  the  ocean, 
their  progeny  swarmed  to  an  almost  inconceivable  extent  in  the  same 
localities,  and  later  in  the  year  descended  to  the  sea  in  immense  schools. 
It  was  during  this  period  that  the  deep-sea  fisheries  of  the  coast  were 
also  of  great  extent  and  value.  Cod,  haddock,  halibut,  and  the  line-fish 
generally,  occupied  the  fishing  grounds  close  to  the  shore,  and  could  be 
caught  from  smiill  open  boats,  ample  fares  being  readdy  taken  within  a 
sbort  distance  of  the  fishermen's  abodes,  without  the  necessity  of  resort- 
ing to  distant  seas.  Now,  however,  the  state  of  things  is  entirely 
(lifierent.  The  erection  of  impassable  dams  upon  the  waters  of  the  New 
Kngland  States,  and  especially  of  the  State  of  Maine,  has  prevented 
the  upward  course  of  the  auadromoas  fishes  referred  to,  and  their  uum- 


k^l 


232 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


m 


bers  bare  dwindled  away,  until  at  present  tbey  are  almost  unknown  in 
many,  otherwise,  moat  favorable  localities. 

Tbe  fact  has  been  observed,  too,  that  with  the  decrease  of  these  fish 
there  has  been  a  correspondinpf  diminution  in  the  numbers  of  the  cod 
and  other  deep-sea  species  near  our  coast;  but  it  was  not  until  (|nite 
recently  that  the  relationship  between  the  two  series  of  phenomena 
was  appreciated  as  those  of  cause  and  effect.  Ilalibnt,  it  is  believed, 
can  be  reduced  in  abundance  by  overfishing  with  the  hook  and  line,  but 
experiences  in  Europe  ano  America  coincide  in  the  confirmation  of  tbe 
o))inion  that  none  of  the  methods  now  in  vogue  for  the  capture  of  fish 
of  tbe  cod  family  (including  the  cod,  haddock,  pollock,  bake,  ling,  ^S:c.), 
can  seriously  affect  their  numbers.  Fish,  the  females  of  which  dejjosit 
from  one  to  two  millions  of  eggs  every  year,  are  not  easily  exterminated 
unless  they  are  interfered  with  during  the  spawning  season,  and  as  tliis 
takes  place  in  tbe  winter  and  in  the  oi)en  sea  (the  spawn  fioating  near 
tbe  surface  of  tbe  water),  there  is  no  possibility  of  any  human  interfer- 
ence with  tbe  process.  iStill,  however,  these  fish  have  become  compara- 
tively very  scarce  on  our  coast,  so  that  our  people  are  forced  to  resort 
to  far  distant  regions  to  obtain  tbe  supply  which  formerly  could  be 
secured  almost  within  sight  of  their  homes. 

It  is  now  a  well-established  fact  that  the  movements  of  tbe  fishes  of 
the  cod  family  are  determined,  first,  by  tbe  search  after  suitable  jdaces 
for  tbe  deposit  of  their  eggs;  second,  by  their  quest  for  food.  Thus, 
the  cod,  as  a  summer  fish,  is  comparatively  little  known  on  the  coast  of 
Northern  Europe  ;  but  as  winter  approaches,  the  schools  begin  to  make 
their  appearance  on  tbe  northwestern  coast  of  Norway,  especially 
around  tbe  Loltoden  Islands,  arriving  there  finally  in  so  great  ninubers 
that  tbe  fishermen  are  said  to  determine  their  presence  by  feeling  the 
sounding  lead  strike  on  the  backs  of  the  fish. 

Here  thej-  spend  several  months  in  tbe  process  of  reproduction,  tlie 
eggs  being  deposited  in  January,  and  tbe  fishery  being  prosecuted  at 
the  same  time.  Twenty-five  to  thirty  thousand  men  are  eujjdoyed  iti 
this  business  for  several  months;  at  the  end  of  which  the  fish  disappear, 
and  the  fishermen  return  to  their  alternate  occupations  as  farmers  and 
mechanics.  The  fish  are  supposed  to  move  off"  in  a  body  to  the  Grand 
Banks,  which  they  reach  in  early  summer,  and  where  they  fatten  up 
and  feed  until  it  is  time  for  them  to  return  again  to  the  northeast.  It 
is  believed  that  tbe  great  attraction  to  the  cod  on  the  Banks,  consists 
in  great  part  of  the  immense  schools  of  herring  or  other  wandering  fish, 
that  come  in  from  the  region  of  the  Labrador  and  Newfoun«lland  seas, 
and  which  they  follow  frequently  close  in  to  the  shore,  so  that  they  are 
easily  cai)tured. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  presence  or  absence  of  herring  determines 
the  abundance  of  hake  and  cod  on  the  Grand  Manan  Fishing  Banks, 
the  fishes  of  tbe  first  mentioned  family  having  a  peculiar  attraction  to 
carnivorous  fish  of  all  kinds.  It  is,  however,  the  anadromous  fishes  of 
tbe  coast  which  bring  tue  cod  and  other  fishes  of  that  family  close  in 
upon  our  shores.  The  sea  herring  is  but  little  known,  outside  of  the 
region  of  tbe  Bay  of  Fundy,  excepting  in  September  and  October,  when 
tbey  visit  the  entire  coast  from  Grand  Manan  to  Scituate,  for  tbe  |)ur- 
l)08e  of  depositing  their  spawn  ;  this  act  depending  upon  their  finding 
water  sufficiently  cold  for  their  purposes,  a  condition  which  of  course 
occurs  later  and  later  in  the  season,  in  going  south. 

In  early  spring,  the  alewives  formerly  made  their  appearance  on  the 
coast,  crowding  along  our  shores  and  ascending  the  rivers  in  order  to 
deposit  their  spawn,  being  followed  later  in  the  season  by  the  shad  and 


J  .  ,.;!■ 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


233 


salmon.  Keturning  when  their  eggs  are  laid,  these  fish  speml  the  sum- 
mer along  the  coast;  and  in  the  course  of  a  few  mouths  were  joined  by 
their  young,  which  formed  immense  schools  in  every  direction,  extend- 
ing oiitward,  in  some  instances,  for  many  miles.  It  was  in  pursuit  of 
these  and  other  summer  flsh  that  the  cod  and  other  species  referred  to 
came  in  to  the  shores ;  but  with  the  decrease  of  the  former  in  number, 
the  attraction  became  less  and  less,  and  the  deep-sea  Jishes  have  now,  tee 
may  say,  almost  disappeared  along  the  coast. 

It  is  tlierefore  perfectly  safe  to  assume  that  the  improvement  of  the 
liue  fishing  along  the  coast  of  Maine  is  closely  connected  with  the  in- 
crease in  number  of  alewives,  shad,  and  salmon,  and  that  whatever 
measures  are  taken  to  facilitate  the  restoration  of  these  last  mentioned 
fish  to  their  pristine  abundance,  will  act,  in  an  equal  ratio,  upon  the 
lirsMiientioned  interest.  The  most  important  of  the  steps  in  question 
are  the  proper  protection  of  these  spring  fish,  and  the  giving  to  them 
every  facility  needed  for  passing  up  the  streams  to  their  original  spawu- 
iiig  grounds.  This  is  to  be  done,  of  course,  by  the  construction  of  suit- 
able fishways  and  ladders.  The  real  question  at  issue  in  regard  to  the 
construction  of  these  fishways  is,  therefore,  after  all,  not  whether  salmon 
shall  become  more  plentiful,  so  that  the  sportsman  can  capture  them 
with  the  fiy,  or  the  man  of  means  be  able  to  procure  a  coveted  delicacy 
ill  large  quantities  and  at  moderate  expense.  This  is  simply  an  inci- 
dent. The  more  important  consideration  is  really  whether  the  alewife 
and  shad  shall  be  made  us  abundant  as  before,  and  whether  the  cod  or 
other  equally  desirable  sea-fish  shall  be  brought  back  to  our  coast,  so 
that  any  one  who  may  be  so  inclined  can  readily  capture  several  hun- 
dred weight  in  a  day. 

The  value  of  the  alewife  is  not  fully  appreciated  iu  our  country.  It 
is  in  many  respects  superior  to  the  sea  herring  as  an  article  of  food  ;  is, 
if  anything,  more  valuable  for  export,  and  can  be  captured  with  vastly 
less  trouble,  and  under  circumstances  and  at  a  season  much  more  con- 
venient for  most  persons  engaged  in  the  fisheries. 

I  have  already  extended  this  letter  to  an  unreasonable  length,  and 
must  therefore  bring  it  to  a  close,  with  the  assurance,  however,  that  all 
the  propositions  I  have  thrown  out  can  be  amply  substantiated. 
Very  truly,  yours, 

SPENCER  F.  BAIRD, 
United  States  Commissioner  of  Fish  and  Fisheries. 

E.  M.  Stillwell,  Esq.,  Bangor,  Maine. 

Note. — This  letter  has  been  once  before  given  to  the  public  in  the 
columns  of  our  report,  but  we  deem  it  of  sufficient  importance  to  repub- 
lish, until  its  plain,  simple,  uncontrovertible  truths  have  stamped  them- 
selves upon  the  minds  of  every  citizen  of  our  State. 

XIII. 

ClIARLOTTETOWN,  TrINCE  EdWARD   ISLAND, 

Idtk  February,  1873. 
Sir:  Herewith  inclosed  I  beg  to  forward  you  the  statistics  of  the  ex- 
port and  value  of  island-caught  fish  from  1850  to  date,  as  well  as  the  de- 
scription, quantity,  and  value  of  the  shipments  to  the  United  States 
during  the  same  period.  As  you  will  perceive,  up  to  18.57  the  returns 
laid  before  our  legislature  were  not  sufficiently  detailed  to  enable  me  to 
{TO  beyond  the  classifications  thereto  given.  The  values  in  Table  A  some- 
times vary  considerably,  but  this  arises  more  from  a  fluctuation  in  the 
quantities  of  the  various  kinds  of  fish  exported  than  from  a  change  iu 
li  rices. 


';i 


^  m 


I 


ili^ 


234 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


m 


Tae  number  of  British  and  American  vessels  engraved  in  the  fisheries 
around  onr  shores  varies  from  year  to  year.  In  1852  and  1853,  wiieii  the 
local  government  gave  bounties  to  flshermen,  the  tonnage  employed  in 
this  industry  ranged  as  high  as  1,G00  tons,  while  it  does  not  now  proti- 
ably  exceed  1,000  tons.  Last  season  I  understand  the  number  of  island 
vessels  engaged  in  the  fisheries  did  not  amount  to  more  than  15.  Tlieir 
value  would  be  about  $60,000,  including  outfit,  provisions,  &o.  Tiie 
magnitude  and  catch  of  the  Nova  Scotia  and  New  Brunswick  fleet  is  a 
matter  within  your  own  imme<liate  cognizance,  and  therefore  one  upon 
which  I  need  not  venture  to  express  an  opinion.  Of  the  Americjan  tisli- 
ermen  the  annual  average  since  1852  will  not  exceed  450  sail.  This  is 
Mr.  Hall's  estimate ;  the  Hon.  Mr.  Holan  thinks  600  will  be  nearer  the 
mark,  and  in  this  the  Hon.  A.  A.  McDonald  concurs.  Some  seasons  as 
many  as  800  have  visited  the  Gulf.  Mr.  Hall  reckons  the  catch  at  400 
barrels  of  mackerel  per  vessel,  and  the  number  of  hands  at  from  8,000  to 
10,000.  According  to  this  gentleman's  figures,  the  capital  embarked  by 
the  United  States  ranges  from  $3,500,000  to  $5,000,000  in  tonnage,  to 
which  may  be  added  25  per  cent,  more  for  salt,  barrels,  bait,  provisions, 
&c.  It  is  proper  to  observe  the  American  fleet  visiting  our  shores  has 
fallen  off  within  the  last  two  or  three  years. 

As  to  the  fish  taken,  the  codfish  may  be  considered  as  outside  the 
marine  league.  Alewives  and  salmon  are  stream  and  river  fish.  The 
halibut,  of  which  considerable  quantity  is  being  caught  of  late  years, 
frequent  Anticosti  and  the  Dominion  coast.  For  the  United  States, 
mackerel  is  the  principal  fish  to  be  had  in  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrenf"^ 
Of  their  total  catch  Mr.  Hall  estimates  that  one-third  of  it  is  inside  tLe 
the  three-mile  line.  Bait  is  chiefly  imported  from  the  United  States. 
Island  herring  and  clams  are  used  by  fishermen  to  a  small  extent.  Ex- 
cept pogies,  no  fish  is  imported  hero  from  the  neighboring  republic. 

Assuming  the  catch  per  vessel  to  be  400  barrels,  and  I  think  it  is  a 
moderate  figure,  it  gives  from  180,000  to  240.000  barrels  as  the  quantity 
taken  on  our  coasts,  repreaenting,  at  $12  per  barrel,  a  value  of  nearly 
$3,000,000. 

Around  our  shores  probably  500  ^  oats  are  employed  in  the  fishing 
industry.  Their  "  take"  is  nearly  all  inside  the  marine  league.  Average 
men  per  boat,  four;  catch  in  1871,  20,000  barrels,  besides  say  10  per 
cent,  sold  to  United  States  vessels  on  the  fishing  grounds,  and  of  which 
we  have  no  returns. 

As  to  the  fishing  trade  generally,  as  enjoyed  by  the  Americans,  I 
feel  that  you  can,  with  the  statistics  before  you,  form  a  more  correct 
opinion  of  its  importance  and  extent  than  I  can  presume  to  do.  The 
advantage  of  doing  away  with  the  three  mile  limit  is  to  them  very 
great.  Fishing  is,  at  best,  a  precarious  business,  and  the  exclusion  of 
the  United  States  from  the  shore  fisheries  increases  its  hazards  and 
lessens  its  profits.  It  operates  against  their  fishermen  constantly,  for 
the  boundary  being  in  one  sense  undefined,  foreign  vessels  trespassing, 
or  even  in  suspicious  proximity  to  the  three-mile  line,  are  disturbed  by 
the  appearance  of  every  cutter,  and  compelled  to  move  off,  no  matter 
how  plenty  the  fish  may  be.  If  mackerel  is  abundant  inside  the  marine 
league,  and  scarce  outside  it,  the  privilege  of  following  the  fish  renders 
the  chances  of  a  successful  voyage  pretty  certain.  To  remove  the 
present  restrictions  will,  I  am  assured,  add  25  per  cent,  to  the  value  of 
the  Gulf  fisheries  to  the  United  States.  Of  equal  importance  to  them 
is  the  privilege  of  lauding,  refitting,  reshipping,  and  procuring  salt, 
barrels,  provisions,  &c.,  in  colonial  ports  adjacent  to  the  fishing  grounds. 
This  Mr.  Hall  estimates  as  worth  aa  additional  25  per  cent,  to  the 


AWARD   OP   THE   PT8HERY    COMMISSION. 


235 


American  6siiing  industry.  The  removal  of  restrictions  under  the 
tbree-niile-line  boundary,  and  allowing  the  United  States  fleet  to  fol- 
low the  mackerel  inside  its  limits,  gives  them  two  chances  to  one  in 
favor  of  a  good  catch.  It  also  places  milk,  vegetables,  butter,  fresh 
int'at,  &c.,  within  easy  reach  of  those  in  want  of  such  supplies,  thereby 
saving  time,  and  contributing  to  the  health  and  comfort  of  the  men. 
Tiie  reshipment  privilege  is  about  equivalent  to  an  extra  trip.  If  the 
lisli  is  sent  home  in  the  bottoms  in  which  it  is  caught,  between  three 
hihI  four  weeks'  time  will  be  lost  to  the  vessels  and  crew.  Their  tirst 
fare  is  completed  about  the  1st  of  August,  and  if  they  must  return  with 
it  to  their  respective  ports,  they  cannot  well  get  back  to  the  gulf  again 
before  the  beginning  of  September.  Here  is  nearly  a  month  lost,  at  a 
time  when  the  fishing  is  good.  Assuming  the  catch  in  August  to  be 
101)  barrels  per  vessel,  and  reckoning  it  as  worth  $12  a  barrel,  it  repre- 
sents an  amount  ranging  from  half  to  three  quarters  of  a  million  dollars. 

1  am  not  in  a  position  to  construct  a  general  argument  upon  the 
respective  values  of  the  lishing-grounds  proposed  to  be  exchanged ;  but 
one  fact  should  not  be  overlooked,  namely,  that  the  gulf  fisheries  are 
as  yet  only  partially  developed,  while  those  on  the  American  coast 
have  been  prosecuted  to  their  fullest  extent  for  many  years.  Thousands 
of  United  States  fishermen  leave  their  own  shores  and  visit  oursj 
scarcely  any  colonial  vessels  go  to  fish  in  American  waters. 

The  question  of  a  refund  of  duties  paid  on  British-caught  fish  in  the 
United  States  during  the  past  two  years  (1871  and  1872)  is  one  which, 
1  am  of  opinion,  might  be  urged  upon  the  Commission  to  be  appointed 
under  the  Treaty  of  Washington.  The  sum  due  or  claimed  by  this 
island  is  about  $30,000. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  sir,  your  obedient  servant, 

D.  CUERIE. 

Hon.  Peter  Mitchell, 

Minister  of  Marine  and  Fisheries,  Ottaica. 

Quantity  and  value  of  Jish  exported  from  Prince  Edward  Island,  from  1350  to  1872,  inc?M- 

eive,  to  all  countries. 


Tear. 


I? 
Q 


mi* 

lf53t 
1?J4  . 
1S55. 

1*30  . 

im. 

IS')!)  . 

\m . 
I. -Ill . 

b6-J  . 
Ul)3  . 

ieii4 . 

ISliS  . 

Isfiti . 

ISO-. 

im . 

Irtilt . 

un. 

Mi. 


Quintals. 
55,  770 

7,867 
11,517 
13,471 

8,496 
II,  249 
10,977 
14, 004 
15,  953 
18,7*1 
15.35fi 
13,  574 

10,  4.'>5 
15, 0|S6 

9,  7.iO 

9,  373 

11,391 

11,  74S 
10,819 
13,  3S8 

9, 094 
17, 976 
19,  434 


.a 

to 

rS 

9 

<u 

o 

a 

M 

3 

u 

"a 

> 

Ph 

> 

Barrels. 

$10,716 

738 

ta,  868 

16,  025 

3, 624 

1.5,  795 

a.-),  403 

.5, 1 10 

23, 048 

81,  968 

.5,413 

26,  883 

SJj,  348 

3,147 

17, 863 

29,139 

5,r67 

33,861 

35,  590 

5,684 

34, 990 

39,  925 

10, 196 

54,  357 

36,  695 

11, 1.52 

61,445 

49,  945 

7,761 

51,800 

40, 050 

23,  996 

9r,  685 

32, 065 

9,  427 

39,  .571 

2;j,  135 

4,  723 

89,  440 

43,  490 

7,  ,587 

46, 065 

38, 175 

8,917 

.52,  760 

88,  992 

20,  488 

203, 363 

33,865 

16,  064 

93, 1.55 

31,  585 

16,  843 

138, 030 

32,  7.50 

17,308 

185, 313 

35,  508 

15,  481 

1.12,619 

2<,  720 

19,854 

196,  927 

58,  740 

24, 989 

17.5, 965 

66,  416 

11,416 

106,  432 

f4 


914,  .584 

31,  820 

48,  445 

51,845 

40, 205 

63,  400 

70, 580 

85,  283 

9K,  140 

101, 145 

138,  735 

71, 636 

52,  575 

89,555 

84,  935 

232, 628 

197, 020 

169,615 

218, 063 

168, 127 

221,717 

934, 705 

178,  848 


^'1 


*  ifl'fi  ])Hi(l  iu ;  ill  1H52, 93  TOBRels  employed,  tonaago  1 .162. 
1 3,267  paid  ill ;  in  1853, 28  veasoU  euiployed,  tonnage  1,611. 


236 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Quantity  and  value  offish  exported  from  Prince  Edward  Island  to  rll  countries,  from  1873 

to  187<!,  inclusire. 


<a 

i 

2 

Year. 

.a 

o 

% 

6 

e3 

!■ 

^ 

■s 

? 

& 

« 

n 

> 

p< 

> 

o 

Qiiintaln. 

ItarreU. 

37." 

$30,  554 

4  084 

(l!20,  8.10 

t%  197 

Jt(74 

2.1,  a(W 

i),  i;u 

85,  404 

26,  ti2v! 

1875 

5,497 

SI,  410 

33. 7K0 

afi5,  3li4 

Sl,2ti1 

MO",  (M7 
If  1,2^6 

1876 

5,  ysi) 

14,  sa>i 

199,  no 

37, 825 

Quantity  and  value  offish  exported  from  Prince  Edward  Island  to  the  United  States,  from 

1850  to  1876,  inclusive. 

[All  island-ranght] 


Quantity. !    Value. 


1850. 


Drv  flsh 

tickled  llsb. 


•I,  .185 
fl,3l5  I 

Total '      10,800  i 


1651. 


Drv  fish  .... 
I'ickled  fish. 


1, 586 

10,  845  il 


Total 


1852. 


Drv  fish  .... 
Pickled  fl.b. 


12. 4:<1 


10,  376 
17,565 


Total i      27,941 


1853. 


Dryflsh 

Pickled  fish. 


6,956 
13,  512 


Total 


1854. 


Dryflsh 

Pickled  fish. 


Total , 


1855. 


Dryflsh  .... 
Pickled  fish. 


Total, 


1856. 


Dry  flsh 

Pickled  flsh. 


Total. 


1857. 


Codfish ntls..  2,319 

Hake do...  I  1,802 

Herring bhls..,  1,324 

Mackerel do  .1  3,048 

Alewives do...  8,063 

Salmon do...i  10 

Total ; 


20,  468 


3,360 
10, 254 


13,614 


9,300 
16,  586 


S5,  886 


9,785 
19, 770 


29, 945 


6,000 
4,  490 
3,  990 
a.5,000 
6,815 
150 

46,  445 


Quantity.  \   Valne. 


1858. 

Codfish  

Hake 

Alewives 

Herring 

Mackerel 

....qtls.. 

do  .. 

hbls.. 

do...! 

do... 

3,589  ' 
1,068 
2,445 
8,  72.-> 
4,078 

80,  m) 

i!,  dOll 

7,  ;)i;(j 

H.  lidO 
38,  44D 

Total 

66  'M 

....qtls.. 

do... 

....bbls.. 

do... 

do... 

6,680 

1,549 : 

2,  013  ! 
2,787 
3, 243 

1859. 

Codfish  

Hal;e 

Alewives 

Herring 

Mackerel 

20, 750 
'.J.f'lO 
fi,  !t-.iO 
9, 140 

3:i,  m 

Total 

73.  Til  0 

1860. 

Codfish  

Hako 

Alewives 

Herring 

Mackerel 

Total 

qtls.. 

do... 

....bbls.. 

do... 

do... 

""■■•""■"" 

4,784 
I,3:t2 
1,853 
6,0:)8 
3,471 

12,fi90 

a,  770 

U,  HOG 

19,110 

3fi.7ti0 

77,  a;io 

1861. 

Codfish  

Hake 

Alewives . 

Herring 

Mackerel 

Total 

qtls.. 

do... 

....bills.. 

do... 

do... 

■  ■■  • 

2,398 
1,917 
684 
8,242 
1,143 

7,025 
2. 850 
2, 950 
6, 455 
11,525 

29, 905 

1863. 

Codfish 

Hake 

Alewives 

....bbls.. 
do  .. 

2.079 

1, 221 

447 

590 

2,321 

4,700 
1,705 
1, 1.15 
2, 550 

Mackerel 

Total 

do... 

19, 320 
29, 410 

1863. 

Codfish 

Hake 

'  Alewives 

,  Horring 

j  Mackerel 

Total 

qtls.. 

do... 

....bbls.. 

do... 

do... 

2,868 
8,734 
718 
l,6.i4 
3,402 

8,770 
6, 055 
2, 375 
51,  l»0 
27,045 

49, 455 

AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION.  237 

Qiianiity  and  value  offish  exported  from  Prince  Edward  Island,  .fc. — Contioued. 


1864. 

Codfish qtls.. 

Alt'wivi'S bl)l». . 

lIciriiiK tjo... 

Mackciel do... 


Total . 


180"). 
(■(.(llish ntls.. 

Hal"' ,<'';  ■• 

Alfttivis Ulila.. 

HMiinc    ilo.. 

JIacki-iil    do.. 


Quantity. 


760 

l.Olfi 

215 

6,583 


Value. 


(3,615 

a,  810 

1, 175 
41,  775 

50, 375 


'  Quantity. 


1871— Cuntinueil. 

Alpwives bills. . 

Soiiiidn do. .. 

HuukiTc-l do... 


Total . 


1873. 


Total . 


73-2 

ftCS 

2,188 

l.Otg 

16,  530 


3,  695 
2,  675 
8,  600 
5,  8J0 
181,  675 

202,-115 


Codfish qtls. 

Haltfi ilo.. 

Ali'wivt>8 11)Ih. 

,  Ht'iiing , do. . 

Mafkeiel.... do. . 

I  Sounds  


18C6. 

Cmmsh qtls. 

llak« do... 

il.iriiiK libls... 

Mackerel do... 


Total . 


1,  li'O 
36U 
32!l 
13,418  ! 


9,945 

600 

675 

79, 990 

84,  210 


Total 


1667. 

C'(i(m.-li qtls.. 

ilcwivea bl)l8..| 

IlfrriiiK do... I 

Maclit'i  el do. . .  j 


1,2?6  1  3,665 

1,315  :  3,945 

l.i8  '  5-.'5 

12,  302  119, 195 


1873. 

Codfish qtls. 

llttko   (1(1  . 

Ale  wives bbls. 

Herring do... 

Mackerel do. . . 

Sounds  

Salmon boxes. . 

Total 


1874. 


Total 


1868. 

Mfihli qtls. 

lliike do.. 

Alt'wi  ves bbls. 

lliriiim .do  . 

llackcrel do. . 


127,  330 


Total . 


1869. 

Mfish qtls.. 

Hake ;  do... 

Alcwives bbls.. 

Ileniiip do. .. 

Mackerel do... 


Total 


Codfish  

il^ke 
All-wives 
lli'miiB  . 
Mackerel 


Codfish  

Ilerriiitr,  iiiokled bbls. 

Mackerel,  piekled do  . 

Salmon,  pickled do.. 

Salmon,  canned lbs. 

L.ibstera.  canned do. . 

Fish,  all  other 

Fish,  products  of 


9,004 
1,  204 
1,017 
1,005 
10, 243 


7,015 
3,000 
2,705 
2,685 
109,625 

125,030 


Total 


Codfiph  . 


II  Total . 


5,985 

173 

17, 216 


Value. 


$15,965 

2,  360 

146,  925 

19.5,  606 


4,  696 

1,  Hli6 

142 

67 

9,126 


15,998 

5,319 

416 

201 

111,512 

4,300 


Total 


1875. 

Codfish,  dry cwt..  1,934 

Mackerel,  pickled bids.  '  31,466 

Ilerrinc  pickled do  ..  1,263 

Lobsters,  preserved lbs..!  9, ('00 

Salmon,  canned do. ..  19,  500 

Fish,  all  other 

Fish  oil,  cod galls..  3,275 


106,  376 


4,782 
951,  232 
3,  542 
1,600 
I,  2r,3 
8,  396 
l,."i20 

2:2,  340 


1870. 


Codfish,  &c.,  dry cwt..         2,107:  6,4*^7 

Codfish,  itc,  W(^t, do..          1,179;  4,421 

Mackerel,  iiickled bliLs. .        13,  ^76  1  108,  .332 

llerrintr,  pickled do.           1,037  I  4,  .592 

l,obsteis,  preserved lbs..;      11,404  1  .5,7116 

Fish,  all  other '  774 

Fish,  productsof |  7,692 


'oiinpti (itl: 

Halibut do 


Total , 


138,  064 


M 


ii^|,i|;v' 


238 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


XIV. 


Extract  from  the  Sixth  Annual  Rqtort  of  the  CommisHioners  of  Inland 
Fisheries  of  Massachusetts  for  the  year  ending  January  1, 187i*. 

Page  27. — Indeed,  it  takes  many  hands,  working  in  many  ways,  to 
catch  bait  enough  for  onr  fishing-fleet,  which  may  easily  be  understood 
when  it  is  remembered  that  each  George's  man  takes  fifteen  or  twenty 
barrels  for  a  trip,  and  makes  two  or  three  trips;  and  tliat  eacli  nmok- 
ereler  lays  in  from  seventy-five  to  one  hundred  and  twenty  barrels,  or 
even  more  than  that. 

XV. 

Extract  from  the  Instructions  to  Her  Majesty's  High  CommisHioners  and 
Protocols  of  Conferences  held  at  Washington  between  February  '11  and 
May  G,  18f  I. 

1.  The  fisheries. 

On  the  termination  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  the  5th  of  Jnne,  1854, 
by  the  United  States  Government,  the  discussions  respecting  the  rij,dits 
of  American  fishermen  under  Article  I  of  the  Convention  of  the  2(>tli  of 
October,  1818,  which  had  been  set  at  rest  by  the  Keciprocity  Treaty, 
were  revived,  and,  although  temporary  measures  were  taken  to  avoid 
pressing  with  severity  upon  American  fishermen  by  the  adoption  of  a 
system  of  licenses,  it  has  been  found  impracticable  to  continue  tliis  sys- 
tem indefinitely ;  and,  on  its  withdrawal,  much  excitement  has  been 
occasioned  among  the  coast  population  of  the  Eastern  States  of  the  Union 
by  the  capture  of  boats  engaged  in  illegal  flsliing,  contrary  to  the  Con- 
vention of  1818. 

The  corresi)ondence  will  put  you  in  possession  of  the  facts  of  the  sev- 
eral captures,  and  enable  you  to  judge,  and  explain,  if  necessary,  liow 
far  the  pretensions  of  the  American  fisherujen  are  exaggerated  and  tlio 
leniency  with  which  they  have  been  treated,  under  the  directions  of  Her 
Majesty's  Government  and  of  the  Government  of  the  Dominion,  by  tlie 
officers  charged  with  the  protection  of  the  Britisii  fisheries. 

Irrespective,  however,  of  the  captures  and  confiscations  of  boats  dur- 
ing the  recent  fishing-season,  there  are,  and  have  been  for  many  years, 
differences  of  interpretation  put  upon  the  Convention  of  1818  l)y  tlie 
respective  governments,  which  might,  at  any  time,  rise  into  serious  im- 
portance. 

The  two  chief  questions  are:  As  to  whether  the  expression  'tliree 
marine  miles  of  any  of  the  coasts,  bays,  creeks,  or  harbors  of  Ills 
Britannic  Majesty's  dominions''  should  be  taken  to  mean  a  limit  of 
three  miles  from  the  coast  line  or  a  limit  of  three  miles  from  a  line  drawn 
from  Ileadlaud  to  Headland  ;  and  whether  the  proviso  that  "  the  Ameri- 
can fishermen  shall  be  admitted  to  enter  such  bays  or  harbors  for  the 
purpose  of  shelter,  and  of  repairing  damages  therein,  of  purchasing 
wood,  and  of  obtaining  water,  and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever,"  is 
intended  to  exclude  American  vessels  from  coming  inshore  to  traffic, 
tranship  fish,  purchase  stores,  hire  seamen,  &c. 

Her  Majesty's  Government  would  be  glad  to  learn  that  you  were  able 
to  arrive  at  a  conclusive  understanding  with  the  Commissioners  of  the 
United  States  upon  the  disputed  interpretation  of  the  Convention  of 
1818 ;  but  they  fear  that  you  will  find  it  expedient  that  a  settlement 
should  be  arrived  at  by  some  other  means,  in  which  case  they  will  be 
prepared  for  the  whole  questiou  of  the  relations  between  the  United 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


239 


States  and  the  British  Possessions  in  North  America,  as  regards  the 
tifilieiies,  being  referred  for  connideration  and  inquiry  to  an  Inter- 
national Coiuuiission,  on  which  two  Gonunissioners  to  be  liereafter  ap- 
])oiiited,  in  consultation  with  the  Government  of  the  Dominion,  should 
be  tlio  British  representatives. 

Should  the  Government  of  the  United  States  concur  in  this,  it  would 
be  advisable  that  no  time  should  be  lost  in  appointing  Commisslouers 
on  tlieir  side,  and  in  the  Commission  commen(;iiig  its  labors;  and,  as  it 
is  scarcely  probable  that  the  Commissioners  will  be  able  to  report,  and  a 
treaty  be  framed,  before  the  commencement  of  the  next  tishing-season, 
it  would  be  also  desirable  that  you  should  agree  upon  some  nuans,  by 
license  or  otherwise,  by  which  disputes  may  be  avoided  in  the  mean- 
while. 

ARTICLES  XVIII  TO  XXV. 

At  the  conference  on  the  0th  of  March  the  British  Commissioners 
stated  that  they  were  prepared  to  discuss  the  question  of  the  tisherles, 
either  in  detail  or  generally,  so  as  either  to  enter  itito  an  examination  of 
the  respective  rights  of  the  two  countries  under  the  treaty  of  1818  and 
the  general  law  of  nations,  or  to  approach  at  once  the  settlement  of  the 
(iuestion  on  a  comprehensive  basis. 

The  American  Commissioners  said,  that,  with  a  view  of  avoiding  the 
discussion  of  matters  which  subsequent  negotiation  might  render  it  un- 
necessary to  enter  into,  they  thought  it  would  be  preferable  to  adopt  the 
latter  course,  and  inquired  what,  in  that  case,  would  be  the  basis  which 
the  British  Commissioners  desired  to  propose. 

The  British  Counnissioners  replied,  that  they  considered  that  the  lle- 
cipi'ocity  Treaty  of  5th  June,  1831,  should  be  restored  in  principle. 

The  American  Commissioners  declined  to  assent  to  a  renewal  of  the 
former  lieciprocity  Treaty. 

The  Biitish  Commissioners  then  suggested  that  if  any  considerable 
modilication  were  ma«le  in  the  tariff  arrangements  of  that  treaty,  the 
coasting  tra<le  of  the  United  States  and  of  tier  Britannic  Majesty's  Pos- 
sessions in  North  America  should  be  reciprocally  thrown  open,  and  that 
the  navigation  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence  and  of  the  Canadian  Canals 
should  be  also  thrown  open  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  on  terms 
of  equality  with  British  subjects. 

The  American  Commissioners  declined  this  proposal,  and  objected  to 
a  negotiation  on  the  basis  of  the  Beciprocifcy  Treaty.  They  said  that 
that  treaty  had  proved  unsatisfactory  to  the  |)eopIe  of  the  United  States, 
iind  consequently  had  been  terminated  by  notice  from  the  Government 
of  the  United  States,  in  pursuance  of  its  provisions.  Its  renewal  was 
not  in  their  interest,  and  would  not  be  in  accordance  with  the  sentiments 
of  their  people.  They  further  said  that  they  were  not  at  liberty  to  treat 
of  the  opening  of  the  coasting  trade  of  the  United  States  to  the  subjects 
of  Her  Majesty  residing  in  her  possessions  in  North  America. 

It  was  agreed  that  the  questions  relating  to  the  navigation  of  the  river 
St.  Lawrence,  and  of  the  Canadian  Canals,  and  to  other  commercial  ques- 
tions attecting  Canada,  should  be  treated  by  themselves. 

Tlie  subject  of  the  fisheries  was  further  discussed  at  the  conferences 
of  the  7th,  20th,  22d,  and  25th  of  March. 

The  American  Commissioners  stated  that  if  the  value  of  the  inshore 
fisheries  could  be  ascertained,  the  United  States  might  prefer  to  pur- 
cliase,  for  a  sum  of  money,  the  right  to  enjoy,  in  perpetuity,  the  use  of 
these  inshore  tisheries  in  common  with  British  tishermen,  and  mentioned 
$1,000,000  as  the  sum  they  were  prepared  to  otter. 


240 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


The  British  Cornmissioners  replied  that  this  offer  was,  they  thonisrht, 
wholly  inadequate,  and  that  no  arraiif^einent  would  be  acceptable  of 
which  the  admission  into  the  United  States,  free  of  duty,  of  fish  the  pro- 
duce of  the  British  fisheries  did  not  form  a  part ;  addiuf?  that  any  arnui^e- 
ment  for  the  acquisition  by  purchase  of  the  inshore  fisheries  in  perpe- 
tuity was  open  to  grave  objection. 

The  American  Commissioners  inquired  whether  it  would  be  neces^sary 
to  refer  any  arrangement  for  purchase  to  the  colonial  or  provincial  Par- 
liaments. 

The  British  Commissioners  explained  that  the  fisheries  within  the 
limits  of  maritime  jurisdiction  were  the  property  of  the  several  British 
Colonies,  and  that  it  would  be  necessary  to  refer  any  arrangement 
which  mififht  attect  colonial  property  or  rights,  to  the  colonial  or  pro- 
vincial Parliament;  and  that  legislation  would  also  be  required  on 
the  part  of  the  Imperial  Parliament.  During  these  discussions  the 
British  Commissioners  contended  that  these  inshore  fisheries  were 
of  great  value,  and  that  the  most  satisfactory  arrangement  fur  their 
use  would  be  a  reciprocal  tariff  arrangement,  and  reciprocity  in  the 
coasting-trade ;  and  the  American  Commissioners  replied  that  their 
value  was  over  estimated ;  that  the  United  States  desired  to  secure  their 
enjoyment,  not  for  their  commercial  or  intrinsic  value,  but  for  the  pur- 
pose of  removing  a  source  of  irritation,  and  that  they  could  hold  out  no 
hope  that  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  would  give  its  consent  to 
such  a  tariff'  arrangement  as  was  proposed,  or  to  any  extended  plan 
of  reciprocal  free  free  admission  of  the  products  of  the  two  countries; 
but  that,  inasmu(!h  as  one  branch  of  Congress  had  recently,  more  than 
once,  expressed  itself  in  favor  of  the  abolition  of  duties  on  coal  and  suit, 
they  would  propose  that  coal,  salt,  and  fish  bo  reciprocally  admitted  tree; 
and  that,  inasmuch  as  Congress  had  removed  the  duty  from  a  portion  of 
the  lumber  heretofore  subject  to  duty,  and  as  the  tendency  of  legislation 
in  the  United  States  was  towards  the  reduction  of  taxation  and  of  duties 
in  proportion  to  the  reduction  of  the  public  debt  and  expenses,  they  would 
further  propose  that  lumber  be  admitted  free  from  duty  from  and  after 
the  let  of  July,  1874,  subject  to  the  approval  of  Congress,  which  was 
necessary  on  all  questions  affecting  import  duties. 

The  British  Commissioners,  at  the  conference  on  the  17th  of  April, 
stated  tiiat  they  had  referred  this  offer  to  their  government,  and  were 
instructed  to  inform  the  American  Commissioners  that  it  was  regarded 
as  inadequate,  and  that  Her  Majesty's  Government  considered  that  free 
lumber  should  be  granted  at  once,  and  that  the  proposed  tariff'  conces- 
sions should  be  supplemented  by  a  money  payment. 

The  American  Commissioners  then  stated  that  they  withdrew  the 
proposal  which  they  had  previously  made  of  the  reciprocal  free  admis- 
sion of  coal,  salt,  and  fish,  and  of  lumber  after  July  1, 1874 ;  that  that 
proposal  had  been  made  entirely  in  the  interest  of  a  peaceful  settle- 
ment, and  for  the  purpose  of  removing  a  source  of  irritation  and  of 
anxiety;  that  its  value  had  been  beyond  the  commercial  or  intrinsic 
value  of  the  rights  to  have  been  acquired  in  return ;  and  that  they 
could  not  consent  to  an  arrangement  on  the  basis  now  proposed  by  the 
British  Commissioners;  and  they  renewed  their  proposal  to  pny  a 
money  equivalent  for  the  use  of  the  inshore  fisheries.  They  further 
proposed  that,  in  case  the  two  governments  should  not  be  able  to  as^ree 
upon  the  sum  to  be  paid  as  such  an  equivalent,  the  matter  should  be 
referred  to  an  impartial  Commission  for  determination. 

The  British  Commissioners  replied  that  this  proposal  was  one  on 
which  they  had  no  instructions,  and  that  it  would  not  bo  possible  for 


▲WARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


241 


them  to  come  to  any  arrangement  except  one  for  a  term  of  years  and 
iuvulving  the  concession  of  free  flsh  and  flshoil  by  the  American  Gom- 
missiouers ;  but  that  if  free  flsli  and  fish-oil  were  conceded,  they  would 
inquire  of  their  government  whether  they  were  prepared  to  assent  to  a 
reference  to  arbitration  as  to  money  payment. 

Ttie  American  Commissioners  replied  that  they  were  willing,  sujbtject 
to  the  action  of  Congress,  to  concede  free  fish  and  fishoil  as  an  equiva- 
lent  for  the  use  of  the  inshore  fisheries,  and  to  make  the  arrangement 
for  a  term  of  years ;  that  they  were  of  opinion  that  free  fish  and  fish-oil 
would  be  more  than  an  equivalent  for  those  fisheries,  but  that  they 
were  also  willing  to  agree  to  a  reference  to  determine  that  question  and 
the  amount  of  any  money  payment  that  might  be  found  necessary  to 
complete  an  equivalent,  it  being  understood  that  legislation  would  be 
ueeded  before  any  payment  could  be  made. 

The  subject  was  further  discussed  in  the  conferences  of  April  18  and 
19,  »nd  the  British  Commissioners  having  referred  the  last  proposal  to 
tlieir  government  and  received  instructions  to  accept  it,  the  Treaty  Ar* 
tides  XVIII  to  XXV  were  agreed  to  at  the  conference  on  the  22ud 
April. 

16  P 


WMi, 


Tlie  con 

Captain 

Edward  h 

auuic  Maj 

By 

Qiiestioi 
fisherman 
proseut  se 

Q.  As  a 

Q.  VVIie 
A.  No.  I 
I  liave  prii 

Q.  WUe 
St.  LawreiJ 

Q.  In  w 

().  And  I 
season  in  t 

Q.  And  I 
Yes.  Thei 
anotber  sol 

Q.  Wiial 
Three  liuni 

Q.  Ai  d  1 

(I  Speal 
would  you 
general  run 
ijoae  as  hi{i 

Q.  But  (] 
what  was  i 
one  bundre 

Q.  But  M 
to  eighty  tc 

Q.  What 

Q.  And  ' 
this?— A.  ' 

Q.  Will  : 
between  thi 

Q.  Speak 
tished  from 
we  caught  I 
very  close  t 
season. 

Q.  You  a 


A.I:>I>ENr)IX    F. 


BRITISH  EVIDENCE. 

No.  1. 

Tuesday,  July  31, 1877. 
The  conference  met. 

Captain  Simon  Chivarib,  forty-five  years  of  age,  of  Souris,  Prince 
Edward  Island,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Brit- 
atiuic  Majesty,  sworn,  and  examined : 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  For  how  many  .>ear8  have  you  followed  the  business  of  a 
fisherman  I — Answer.  I  have  pursued  it  from  the  ^  ear  1848  up  to  the 
present  season. 

Q.  As  a  business? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  have  you  followed  it;  solely  in  British  American  waters  ? — 
A.  No.  During  part  of  this  time  I  have  fished  on  the  American  coast. 
I  liave  principally  fished,  however,  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Where  did  you  begin  the  business  ? — A.  I  began  it  in  the  Gulf  of 
St.  Lawrence,  in  an  American  schooner  called  the  Josephine. 

Q.  In  what  year?— A.  In  1848. 

Q.  And  «iid  you  so  pursue  it  continuously  ? — A.  W^e  made  one  trip  that 
season  in  tliis  bay. 

Q.  And  that  was  in  British  Canadian  waters— in  our  own  waters  1 — A. 
Yes.  Then  I  went  back  to  the  States,  and  came  down  next  season  in 
another  schooner. 

Q.  What  was  your  catch  during  the  trip  you  have  mentioned  ? — A. 
Three  hundred  barrels.     We  only  went  one  trip  that  season. 

Q.  Aid  that  was  in  the  year  1848? — A.  Yes. 

(}.  Speaking  with  reference  to  the  tonnage  of  the  fishing  schooners, 
would  you  tell  us  whether  there  was  much  difference  in  them  ? — A.  The 
general  run  of  vessels  was  about  sixty-five  tons.  Some,  however,  have 
^'oue  as  high  as  one  hundred  and  thirty  tons  of  late  years. 

Q.  But  during  this  year,  1848,  and  during  the  yi-ars  1850, '55,  and  'GO, 
what  was  it? — A.  There  were  a  tew  large  vessels  having  a  tonnage  of 
one  hundred  and  forty. 

Q.  But  what  was  the  general  average  ? — A.  It  was  from  seventy-five 
to  eighty  tons. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  the  Josephine  ? — A.  It  was  seventy-five  tons. 

Q.  And  you  caught  three  hundred  barrels  in  one  trip ;  where  was 
this  f — A.  Yes.    At  the  bend  of  the  island. 

Q.  Will  you  explain  what  is  the  bend  of  the  island? — A.  It  lies 
between  the  East  Point  and  the  North  Cape  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Speaking  with  reference  to  distance,  will  you  tell  us  how  far  you 
llshed  from  the  shore  in  the  bend  of  the  island  ? — A.  During  that  trip 
we  caught  fish  principally  within  three  miles  of  the  shore.  We  were 
very  close  to  it,  because  it  was  in  October,  the  latter  part  of  the  fishing 
season. 

Q.  You  are  quite  sure  of  that  f — A.  Yes. 


244 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  It  was  well  within  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  Yes. 

Q-  And  you  caught  all  your  fish  during  that  trip  inside  of  three  miles 
from  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  were  you  next  season,  captain  ? — A.  I  was  then,  also,  iu  the 
Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  And  in  what  vessel? — A.  In  the  schooner  Hezron. 

Q.  Where  did  you  sail  from  ? — A.  From  Newburyport,  in  the  United 
States. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  this  vessel  1 — A.  I  think  it  was  about  eighty 
tons. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  to  fish  ? — A.  We  fished  principally  on  what  is 
called  the  West  Shore. 

Q.  What  is  the  West  Shore? — A.  It  is  on  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  That  is  up  at  the  north  end  of  New  Brunswick  ? — A.  It  stretches 
from  Miscou  down  to  Miramichi.  We  always  call  this  part  the  West 
Shore. 

Q.  Miscou  is  an  island,  lying  at  the  mouth  of  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  ?— 
A.  Yes ;  ir.  lies  on  the  southwest  side. 

Q.  And  what  was  your  catch  ? — A.  We  caught  there  during  part  of 
the  trip.  I  remained  there  during  the  whole  season  in  that  vessel.  We 
came  down  in  July  and  remained  the  whole  of  the  season.  The  vessel 
was  large,  and  was  fitted  out  for  one  trip.  The  catch  for  the  whole  trip 
was,  I  think,  about  five  hundred  barrels.  We  fished  during  the  flrst 
part  of  the  season — July— on  that  coast;  and  iu  September  we  cnuie 
down  and  fished  along  the  bend  of  the  island  until  October.  We  fished 
as  we  came  down  from  the  north ;  that  is  the  general  course  followed 
by  the  fishermen. 

Q.  At  this  stage  will  you  describe  to  the  Commission,  what  course 
the  fish  take? — A.  The  mackerel  make  their  first  appearance  oil'  Capo 
May  and  Cape  Hatteras,  on  the  American  coast,  and  those  who  fish  for 
mackerel  make  it  a  point  to  go  there  first  for  them.  The  fish  afterward 
come  up  to  the  Gulf. 

Q.  At  what  time  of  the  year  is  this? — A.  In  May.  They  appear 
sometimes  off  these  points  as  early  as  April — about  the  20th,  perhaps. 
They  are  followed  down  the  coast  off  Cape  Cod  and  Block  Island,  and 
caught.  The  great  body  of  them  go  in  this  direction.  When  tbe 
mackerel  are  off"  the  banks  of  the  Georges,  on  the  coast  of  the  United 
States  they  disappear,  and  for  the  next  week  or  ten  days  the  vessels  iu 
this  part  are  packing  off*. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  packing  off? — A.  Repacking,  inspecting, 
and  branding,  and  getting  the  fish  ready  for  market. 

Q.  You  land  for  that  purpose  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  then  start  afresh.  The 
next  trip  we  call  the  bay  trip.    We  come  down  to  the  bay  in  June. 

Q.  What  do  you  call  the  bay  ?— A.  The  Gulf  of  the  St.  Lawrence. 
We  then  tit  up  for  what  we  call  the  trip  for  poor  mackerel.  We  leave 
the  different  ports  in  the  United  States  about  the  10th  or  the  I5th  of 
June,  and  follow  the  mackerel  down  the  coast.  We  generally  find  them 
first  on  the  Bank  Bradley.  We  come  up  north  and  very  often  we  may 
meet  the  mackerel  also  coming  up  along  the  coast.  We  make  it  a  point 
to  strike  Bradley  Bank  and  Orphan  Bank,  as  we  hit  the  first  mackerel 
there.    This  bank  is  situated  on  the  north  end  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  This  is  right  off  Cape  North,  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  Yes ; 
we  find  the  mackerel  there  iu  large  quantities.  Why  we  look  for  them 
there  is,  because  it  is  customary  to  follow  them  up  in  that  way,  as  tbey 
come  to  spawn  on  these  banks.  The  mother  fish  make  for  these  banks, 
and  we  always  make  it  a  point  to  meet  them  and  catch  them  with  tlie 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


245 


hook.  They  generally  bite  well  a  few  days  before  apawninpr.  We  catch 
them  losing  the  spawn  ;  and  we  secnre  large  and  heavy  decks  of  them. 
We  then  take  from  fifty  to  sixty  barrels  a  day.  In  a  few  days  the  fish 
disappear,  and  then  all  over  the  banks  there  are  no  fish  for  ten  or  twelve 
days  afterwards. 

Q.  The  fish  are  then  spawning? — A.  Yes;  we  then  leave  these 
grounds,  and  strike  the  fish  off  Bay  Chaleurs  on  the  west  shore.  We 
meet  the  mackerel  then  after  spawning.  We  follow  them  as  it  were 
from  Bank  Bradley  and  Orphan  Bank,  after  they  spawn  and  strike  them 
oflf  the  west  shore,  where  they  go  to  get  food.  Then  we  fish  along  the 
shore  of  the  west  coast  on  Bay  Chaleurs,  and  go  down  the  Gulf  of  the 
St.  Lawrence,  sometimes  to  Gaspe,  and  even  as  far  as  Seven  Islands  and 
Bic  Island.    I  have  been  as  far  as  Bic  Island. 

Q.  What  did  I  understand  you  to  say — that  the  mackerel  strike  off 
shore  after  spawning? — A.  We  find  that  after  spawning  they  seek 
food.  They  feed  from  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  down  this  the  southern  part 
of  the  gulf.  Their  food  consists  of  a  small  shrimp  which  is  found  in 
these  waters.    It  gathers  in  the  eddies. 

Q.  Are  they  found  close  to  the  shore? — A.  Yes,  they  keep  in  the  ed- 
dies near  the  shore,  where  the  mackerel  make  for  them. 

Q.  And  the  mackerel  follow  after  this  food. — A.  Yes. 

Q.  On  what  other  food  do  they  live  ? — A.  They  live  principally  on  this 
food. 

Q.  On  these  shrimps? — A.  Yes;  except  up  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Law- 
rence, near  Gaspe,  where  they  feed  on  the  lants,  a  small  fish  about  three 
inches  long. 

Q.  The  sandlants ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  is  from  Gaspe  farther  north  ? — A.  From  Gaspe  to  Bic  Island 
and  across,  on  the  Labrador  shore ;  in  all  that  part  of  the  coast. 

Q.  And  down  from  Gaspe  south  they  feed  on  the  shrimp  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  are  the  shrirnp  found  ? — A.  From  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and 
around  that  part  of  the  west  shore,  and  down  the  coast  of  the  islatid. 

Q.  Are  these  shrimps  found  in  the  open  water  in  the  gulf? — A.  No; 
chiefly  not.  We  do  not  notice  them  in  the  open  gulf.  They  are  mostly 
found  in  bays  and  in  eddies  along  the  coast.  They  are  a  small  fish 
which  you  would  hardly  notice.  If  you  draw  up  a  bucket  of  water 
where  they  are  you  could  see  them  in  it. 

Q.  Coming  back  to  the  trip  in  the  Hezron,  during  your  second  season, 
in  what  year  did  you  make  it  ? — A.  I  think  it  was  in  the  year  1849. 

Q.  About  what  time  did  you  say  mackerel  spawn  ? — A.  Along  about 
the  first  of  July. 

Q.  And  for  some  days  they  remain  hidden ;  they  strike  off  shore ; 
Low  long  do  they  remain  in  the  grounds  of  the  bay  ? — A.  We  generally 
allow  them  a  week  to  spawn.  We  then  come  up  to  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs, 
and  we  there  meet  the  same  mackerel. 

Q.  And  how  long  do  you  remain  there  waiting  for  them  ? — A.  For  a 
week  or  ten  days. 

Q.  And  where  do  they  go  then  ? — A.  They  keep  along  the  coast. 

Q.  Until  when? — A.  They  so  keep  on  till  coming  on  the  first  of  Sep- 
tember. Along  about  the  tenth  of  September  the  mackerel  begin  to 
move  down  the  gulf. 

Q.  And  where  do  they  go  ?— A.  They  strike  down  the  coast  of  Prince 
Edward  Island. 

Q.  And  how  long  do  they  remain  along  the  coast  of  Prince  Edward 
Isliind  ?— A.  Until  the  last  of  October. 

Q.  And  then  they  strike  for — where  ?— A.  They  strike  along  the  north 


246 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


side  of  Capo  Breton  at  Margere  Island,  Port  Hood,  and  Cbeticamp; 
and  tlien  we  follow  them  down  to  Sidney.  We  lose  them  there.  Tliey 
disappear.  They  take  to  the  Nova  Scotian  shore,  but  the  mackerel  fleet 
does  not  follow  them  farther  than  Cape  North  and  Scatari,  at  the  south 
end  of  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  They  stop  following  them  at  Scatari  ? — A.  Yes ;  the  mackerel  then 
stop  biting. 

Q.  They  return  along  Nova  Scotia  down  to  American  waters?— 
A.  Yes.  Then  we  make  it  a  point  to  get  home  as  quickly  as  possible. 
We  next  strike  the  same  school  of  mackerel  about  Cape  Cod. 

Q.  You  get  home  with  your  bay  catch  and  you  start  again  and  pick 
them  up  above  Cape  Cod  in  American  waters? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  what  time  of  the  year  is  thisf — A.  In  November  or  in  the  last 
of  October. 

Q.  From  July  to  November  yon  follow  them  in  the  bay  ? — A.  Yes, 
we  follow  them  in  the  bay  until  the  Ist  or  the  10th  of  November. 

Q.  From  what  date  ? — A.  We  make  it  a  point  to  leave  on  the  first  trip 
about  the  15th  ot  June. 

Q.  I  understand  that  the  fleet  flsh  in  the  bay  from  about  the  15th  of 
June  until  somewhere  about  the  Ist  of  November  ? — A.  Yes.  Sometimes 
some  few  vessels  may  remain,  hanging  around  to  see  if  there  are  any 
left,  along  up  to  the  10th  of  November,  at  Scatari  and  in  these  places. 

Q.  But  the  main  fleet  leave  about  the  1st  of  November? — A.  Yes.  It 
is  a  settled  point  that  the  fleet  leave  off  mackerel  Ashing  in  the  gulf  on 
the  1st  of  November.  Then  these  flsh  are  caught  from  that  time  up  to 
December  on  the  American  coast,  off  Block  Island,  Cape  Cod,  and  these 
jdaces.  Ihey  then  disappear  and  go  off;  I  suppose  down  the  Gulf 
Stream.  We  do  not  see  them  again  until  the  next  spring  off  Capes  Cod, 
May,  and  Hatteras. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  where  they  go  then  1 — A.  I  never  follow  them 
any  farther — after  they  disappear. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  Is  there  any  niackerel  fishing  during  the  summer  off  the  American 
coast  ?  Do  we  understand  that  they  are  all  gone  north  at  this  season  ?— 
A.  Yes,  there  is.  Some  seasons  mackerel  remain  scattered  all  along  the 
shore,  but  the  main  body  of  the  mackerel  strike  down  this  bay.  The 
mackerel  that  remain  on  the  American  shore  are  of  smaller  size.  They 
are  caught  off'  Cape  Cod  and  along  the  island. 

By  Mr.  Davies: 

Q.  You  said  something  about  the  size  of  these  mackerel  ? — A.  They 
are  of  smaller  size  thuii  those  of  the  nmiu  body  which  comes  to  the  bay. 

Q.  The  small  flsh  remain  on  the  American  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  the  flsh  are  large  does  it  follow  that  they  come  north  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  you  explain  that? — A.  I  have  followed  the  business  up  as 
a  fisherman  pretty  closely,  and  my  experience  has  been  this :  We  tind 
the  Banks  in  the  Gulf  in  the  fall  of  the  year,  after  spawning,  tilled  up 
with  small  mackerel,  about  three  or  four  inches  long,  and  we  take  them 
to  be  the  results  of  the  spawn  of  that  season ;  and  next  year  we  liud 
these  mackerel  in  these  waters  about  six  inches  long. 

Q.  What  do  you  call  them  then  ? — A.  Tinkers.  That  is  the  term  we 
gi\e  them  at  this  time.  And  these  mackerel  are  known  on  the  third 
year  to  remain  principally  on  the  American  coast.  They  are  then  what 
they  call  medium  mackerel,  and  they  are  about  ten  inches  in  length  at 
this  period. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


247 


Q.  What  do  you  call  them  if  packed  in  barrels  ? — A.  Mediam  two 
short  two ;  when  they  are  fat  enongh  we  call  them  middling  two.  We 
find  that  there  are  seasons  when  these  mediam  mackerel  are  scarce  on 
our  coasts,  while  in  the  northern  part  of  the  gulf  there  is  a  heavy  body 
of  large  mackerel  at  Seven  Islands ;  and  from  Gaspe  Bay  ap  the  gulf. 
In  fact,  they  strike  up  the  whole  coast.  I  have  seen  them  as  far  as  the 
Straits  of  Belle  Isle,  and  Belle  Isle  Island. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  have  seen  them  all  along  the  north  coast  and, 
at  times,  as  far  as  the  Strait  of  Belle  Isle  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  the  haunt  of  the  mackerel  as  well  as  the  south  shore? — A. 
Yes ;  but  up  there  we  can  never  get  them  to  take  hook.  This  is  the 
case  when  they  are  up  on  that  coast. 

By  Mr.  Dana: 
Q.  This  is  off  Labrador  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Davies: 

Q.  You  can  never  get  them  to  take  the  hook  there  ? — A.  No.  I  have 
never  known  mackerel  to  take  the  hook  off  the  west  end  of  Auticosti  and 
up  the  Labrador  coast ;  but  up  the  St.  Lawrence,  from  there  to  Bic 
Island,  we  have  always  caught  large  quantities  with  hooks.  They  are 
found  on  both  sides  of  the  gulf. 

Q.  You  say  that  from  the  west  end  of  Anticosti  Island  to  Bic  is  a  good 
fishingf-ground  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  reference  to  the  shore  line,  will  you  be  kind  enough  to  de- 
scribe to  the  Commission — looking  at  the  map  and  starting  from  the 
west  end  of  Auticosti  and  the  Mingan  Islands,  and  proceeding  to  Seven 
Islands  Bay — how  far  are  they  found  from  the  shore  ? — A.  These  mack- 
erel are  found  right  into  the  shore,  where  the  go  to  feed  on  lauts.  The 
large  mackerel  follow  them.  The  lants  are  shaped  like  a  tape-worm. 
The  fish  follow  the  line  of  the  shore. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  the  fish  going  "  right  into  the  shore,"  what  do 
yoQ  mean  ?  I  want  something  definite.  How  far  are  they  then  from 
the  shore? — A.  I  have  gone  there  and  found  bodies  of  mackerel  and 
lants  right  in  the  harbor,  and  there  are  two  or  three  days,  about  the  fif- 
teenth and  sixteenth  of  July,  when  this  is  the  case  on  that  coast.  I 
have  gone  to  Seven  Islands  and  laid  there  and  seen  the  mackerel  com- 
ing in  like  a  tidal  wave  from  the  outside  following  their  bait;  they  even 
land  right  on  the  shore,  and  have  known  them  follow  the  lants  on  shore, 
80  that  you  could  run  up  and  kick  them  out.  I  have  observed  this  sev- 
eral times.  Lots  of  the  fish  run  in  with  the  tide.  The  water  there  is 
very  bold  with  rocks,  and  the  mackerel  come  up  with  a  rush  right 
against  the  shore  in  pursuit  of  the  lants,  who  will  often  jump  out  of  the 
water  with  the  mackerel  after  them. 

Q.  How  far  will  they  be  off  from  shore  ?  I  am  speaking  particu- 
larly with  reference  to  this  shore  from  Mingan  Island  to  Seven  Islands 
Bay,  and  along  there.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  are  the  mack- 
erel generally  taken  by  the  vessels  engaged  in  this  fishery  f — A.  In 
this  port  these  fish  are  generally  taken  right  in  close  to  the  shore.  It 
is  customary  in  the  gulf  for  vessels  to  drift  mackerel,  but  in  that  part 
of  the  gulf  from  Gaspe  and  the  west  end  of  the  island  of  Anticosti  up 
the  gulf,  the  vessels  do  not  lay  to,  as  there  is  a  very  strong  current  out- 
side coining  down.  It  is  about  a  four  or  five  knot  current,  and  as  the 
mackerel  pursue  the  lants,  which  keep  in  the  eddies,  the  vessels  have 
to  go  in  to  the  shore  and  anchor  cross- ways  with  the  tide. 

Q-  lu  this  locality  they  flsh  in  a  peculiar  manner? — A.  Yes;  there 
are  here  no  flsh  outside ;  they  are  found  inshore. 


ill 

i 


i 


248 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  With  reference  to  yards — the  vessela  would  be  about  two  hun- 
dred yards  from  the  shore  t — A.  A  range  of  boats  would  even  have  Hues 
fast  to  the  shore.    They  would  sling  the  boats  in  one  string. 

Q.  There  is  no  drift  fishing  done  along  this  coast  T — A.  No ;  and  there 
is  no  mackerel  fishing  outside  at  all.  I  would  say  that  half  a  mile  or  a 
mile  and  a  half  out  we  would  never  think  of  heaving  a  vessel  to.  We 
place  the  vessel,  when  fishing,  across  the  tide  where  it  is  running.  We 
have  to  move  the  vessels  close  in  to  the  shore. 

Q.  Comparatively  speaking,  comparing  this  part  of  the  shore  with 
the  Bay  of  Gaspe  and  the  Bay  of  Ghalenrs,  is  it  a  good  fishing  ground  ? 
— A.  It  is.  It  and  Seven  Islands  are  considered  good  fishing  places. 
So  is  Gaspe  and  Bay  de  Chaleurs,  and  Mingan  River,  and  Fox  River, 
and  all  these  places.  The  vessels  came  in  looking  for  large  mackerel. 
These  fish  are  very  large  and  fat  on  that  part  of  the  coast.  They  are 
found  along  the  coast  up  to  the  10th  of  September,  and  they  leave  there 
pretty  early.  They  first  make  for  the  shore  and  stay  round  the  coiist 
and  work  their  way  down.    These  are  the  big  mackerel. 

Q.  While  on  that  branch  of  the  subject,  will  you  tell  us  what  is  the 
style  of  fishing  on  the  south  side — crossing  over  from  Mingan  Island 
and  Seven  Islands'  Bay  to  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  on  the  other  side  of  the 
Gulf?    Is  it  the  same  ? — A.  No.    There  we  fish  altogether  while  drifting. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  will  describe  it  to  the  Commission  ! — A.  These  mack- 
erel go  up  and  around  that  part  of  the  Gulf,  and  when  the  water  is  be- 
ginning to  get  cold  we  say  that  they  are  about  to  leave  and  strike  down 
the  coast  and  to  Prince  Edward  Island  waters  on  their  way  back.  They 
come  up  in  July  and  August  and  keep  on  in  their  course  up  the  Gulf 
until  about  the  1st  of  September,  when  they  turn  to  leave  these  waters. 
We  follow  them  round  and  down.  They  cross  in  their  passage  from 
headland  to  headland,  making  a  straight  course  and  striking  throngli 
bays,  staying  in  certain  parts  to  feed.  We  strike  on  what  we  call  the 
Seven  Islands  school  of  macke  el  on  the  south  side  of  the  Gulf  about 
Gaspe.  Part  of  them  make  i^  straight  course  down  to  the  Magdalen 
Islands  and  across  Bank  Bradley  and  Ridges,  and  they  are  caught  en 
route.  These  are  mostly  known  to  belong  to  a  different  body  of  mack- 
erel from  that  which  strikes  the  southern  coast.  They  go  up  in  a  differ- 
ent course  and  they  come  down  by  a  different  course,  striking  near  the 
Magdalen  Islands,  and  being  caught  about  Cape  North  on  their  return. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  Seven  Island  school  strike  across 
the  Gaspe — shooting  right  across! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  whether  they  remain  in  the  open  Gulf,  or  is  their 
stay  merely  temporary? — A.  They  do  not  stay  at  Seven  Islands,  or  in 
the  bays  on  that  side  of  the  coast,  over  ten  days  or  a  fortnight.  Tliey 
keep  moving  along  and  a«  ross.  They  seem  to  cross  over  to  the  south 
side  and  come  down  in  a  jody.  We  follow  them  from  harbor  to  harbor 
and  creek  to  creek,  right  along,  from  Seven  Islands  as  far  las  Point  des 
Monts,  due  north.  We  seldom  look  for  them  above  Point  Demon.  They 
seem  to  leave  fresh  water  there  and  turn  across. 

Q.  To  the  south? — A.  To  Gaspe,  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  and  down  these 
shores. 

Q.  How  do  you  fish  for  them  there  ? — A.  Altogether  by  laying  to. 

Q.  Will  you  describe  it? — A.  Inshore  winds  prevail;  and  we  always 
watch  in  order  to  get  under  the  lee  of  land  and  to  fish  drifting;  laying 
to  where  the  vessel  drifts  slowest.  If  we  get  in  where  it  is  rough  and 
heavy  ,ve  will  lose  a  great  deal  of  bait,  which  is  very  expensive,  and 
then  we  cannot  catch  the  fish  so  fast  under  these  as  under  the  other  cir- 
cumstances.   We  always  try  to  get  under  the  land  as  close  as  possible, 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


249 


where  the  water  is  smooth  and  mackerel  are  alongside.  We  flah  along 
both  sides  of  the  Bay  of  Chalenrs,  but  the  middle  part  of  the  bay  is  not 
considered  fishing-ground  of  any  account. 

Q.  This  is  the  middle  of  the  Baie  de  Chaleurs  ? — A.  This  portion  of  it 
is  not  considered  much  of  a  hshing  ground ;  but  the  mackerel  play  in  on 
both  sides  of  the  bay,  from  Perce  along  the  shore  on  one  side  to  Pas- 
p^biac  and  Carlton,  and  Maria,  and  as  far  as  Campbellton  and  Heron 
Island  on  tlie  other  side.    Wo  get  them  along  Heron  Island. 

Q,  Heron  Island  is  well  up  to  the  head  of  the  bay  ? — A.  Yes;  it  is 
opposite  Carlton. 

Q.  How  wide  is  the  bay  at  Heron  Island  ? — A.  It  is  about  five  miles 
across  over  to  Carlton. 

Q.  To  Carlton  Point!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  you  follow  the  fish  to  that  point  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  get  fish  up  to  that? — A.  Yes;  Heron  Island  is  consid- 
ered a  good  fishing-ground. 

Q.  Then  what  is  it  on  the  south  side? — A.  From  there  down  to  Bath- 
urst  is  considered  good  fishing  ground;  also  near  the  island  between 
Batburst  and  Big  Shippegan. 

Q.  At  Big  Shippe^'an  ?  Along  that  shore  from  Bathurst  down  ? 
Wliere  is  Bathurst  ? — A.  It  ia  above  Caraquette,  in  a  bay. 

Q,  Is  the  fishing  as  good  along  the  south  shore  as  on  the  north 
shore  ? — A.  It  is  considered  better  on  the  south  side. 

(J.  And  you  fish  there  in  the  manner  you  have  described  ? — A.  Yes. 
We  (ish  altogether  by  laying  to.  The  mackerel  play  out  in  the  water 
on  tlie  vsouth  j^ide  of  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  among  the  flats,  and  in  the 
rivers  which  open  up  on  the  shore.  Many  rivers  so  open  up,  and  here 
salmon  and  other  fish  and  herrings  spawn.  The  mackerel  play  among 
these  shoals  in  schools. 

Q.  And  leaving  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  coming  farther  down  to 
Miseoii  and  Shippegan  Islands  ? — A.  We  fish  around  this  island,  straight 
over  from  Paspebistc. 

Q.  Do  many  rivers  enter  into  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  on  the  south  side, 
the  Bathurst  side,  and  along  that  coast? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  Give  their  names. — A.  There  are  Caraquette  and  Little  Caraquette, 
and  Little  Shippegan  and  Big  Shippegan.  The  fish  play  about  these 
rivers.  Big  Shippegan  cuts  Miscou  Point  right  ofif.  Above  that  is  Cara- 
quette Island  and  Caraquette  Harbor.  It  is  a  bay.  The  fish  play  along 
the  fiats  outside,  and  the  bays  inside.  Caraquette  Bay  is  quite  a  long 
one. 

Q.  Are  there  any  rivers  above  that? — A.  There  is  Bathurst.  It  is  a 
large  river. 

Q.  And  Nipisquit  ? — A.  We  call  it  Bathurst. 

Q.  And  above  that  ? — A.  There  are  one  or  two  rivers,  two  or  three 
small  rivers,  but  we  never  take  much  notice  of  them.  We  k«?ep  around 
most  of  the  places  I  have  mentioned,  as  the  mackerel  find  the  lants 
there — at  Shippegan,  Little  Shippegan,  and  Caraquette  and  Pasp6biao; 
the  fleet  go  to  these  places  mostly. 

Q.  Is  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  much  frequented  by  the  fleet  ? — A.  Yes ; 
there  is  hardly  a  vessel  that  goes  on  the  trip  that  does  not  go  there ; 
they  reach  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  strike  Bank  Bradley  on  the  first 
trip.    The  vessels  enter  the  bay  on  their  first  trip. 

Q.  It  is  one  of  the  points  you  consider  it  necessary  to  go  to  ? — A. 
Yes.  There  we  expect  to  hear  the  news  of  the  bay  and  about  other 
vessels.  We  get  all  the  news  there.  We  run  for  Bradley  aud  Point 
Miscou. 


li 


250 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Can  you  find  any  reason  for  your  statement  that  the  shore-s  of  thi.<> 
bay  abound  in  mackerel,  while  this  is  not  the  case  with  the  center  of 
it? — A.  Well,  the  water  is  deep  in  the  center  of  the  bay,  and  there  is 
a  pretty  strong  current.  On  the  south^side  there  is  a  shoal  Hat  and 
banks,  where  are  to  be  found  the  shrimps  and  bait,  and  the  mackerel 
play  in  them  and  look  after  bait  for  food ;  and  on  the  north  side  there 
are  more  or  less  lants  and  some  other  small  fish.  The  mackerel  during 
the  first  part  of  the  season  look  in  for  this  bait. 

Q.  In  the  center  of  the  bay  there  is  a  deep  and  strong  current? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Now,  along  from  Miscou  and  Shippegan  down  the  west  coast  of 
Now  Brunswick  ? — A.  Along  that  coast  there  are  many  bays  and  rivers 
and  creeks,  and  the  fish  likewise  strike  in  there  and  pass  along  the  shore. 
The  mackerel  come  from  the  north.  We  follow  the  bodies  of  ma<!kerel 
coming  down ;  we  make  a  business  of  keeping  the  run  of  the  scliools  of 
mackerel  in  the  Gulf.  Most  successful  fishermen  do  so.  Some  do  not, 
but  they  are  not  very  successful.  Men  who  have  the  most  experience, 
however,  keep  the  run  of  these  schools,  and  as  long  as  they  do  that  they 
are  not  apt  to  lose  mackerel. 

Q.  The  fish  keep  in  the  bays  and  harbors  along  here? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  fish  along  the  east  coast  of  New  Brunswick — what  you  call 
the  west  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  is  it  from  the  shore  that  you  catch  the  fish  ? — A.  We  flsh 
here  very  often  in  the  spring.  When  tlie  prevailing  winds  are  from  the 
northwest  and  west  we  find  that  we  have  to  anchor  close  in  to  the  shore  to 
secure  mackerel.  This  is  while  the  fish  are  staying  in  this  quarter;  but 
as  soon  as  they  haul  ott^"  the  shore,  bound  north  to  some  point  toward 
home,  working  down  the  coast  about  the  1st  of  September,  when  the 
water  commences  to  get  cold,  we  follow  them.  They  gather  in  bodies, 
and  move  along  together,  and  when  they  reach  a  point  or  headland  they 
seem  to  make  straight  across  to  another  headland.  Down  the  Gulf 
we  find  large  bodies  of  them  coming  down  the  coast  near  Miscou  in 
September.  They  fall  ofi:'  shore,  bound  for  the  Banks  and  get  here,  re- 
maining for  some  days  or  a  week  outside.  We  secure  some  good  tish 
there.  There  are  very  often  from  three  to  four  hundred  sail  in  the  tleet, 
and  when  they  lose  the  fish  off  shore  they  look  out  for  them  on  the 
Banks,  and  there  is  a  race  to  see  who  will  be  there  first,  for  the  fastest 
vessel  and  the  first  there  gets  the  biggest  catch.  The  fleet  does  not  re- 
main together,  but  spreads  over  a  ver}'  large  extent  of  ground,  and  if 
any  mackerel  are  to  be  found  within  a  limit  of  four  or  five  or  ten  miles 
it  is  known  in  a  very  short  time.  With  a  spy-glass  we  watch  to  see 
who  first  rises  mackerel,  and  when  this  is  discovered  we  make  for  the 
spot  at  once,  and  then  up  come  the  mackerel.  We  find  them  here. 
When  we  see  the  mackerel  leaving  the  shore,  bound  down  the  coast  to 
Prince  Edward  Island,  we  may  get  two  or  three  days  of  fair  fishing,  and 
all  at  once  there  may  be  no  mackerel  to  be  found  playing  around  tliere. 
Some  captains  then  make  up  their  minds  to  get  ahead  of  the  school  and 
strike  down  to  North  Cape. 

Q.  That  is  on  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  Yes.  They  sheer  off  this 
way,  and  when  they  do  so  perhaps  the  whole  fleet  will  leave  the  spot 
that  night.  The  fleet  race  after  the  mackerel,  bnt  they  do  not  want  to 
keep  together  if  they  can  avoid  it.  The  most  experienced  fishermen 
want  to  be  ahead  of  the  others,  and  to  do  so  they  will  steal  off  at  night. 
I  have  run  from  Miscou,  sixty-odd  miles,  to  North  Cape  without  stop- 
ping. We  would  lay  about  there  at  night,  and  next  morning  we  would 
strike  the  same  school  of  mackerel — I  suppose  it  would  be  the  same 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   C0MMI8SI0N. 


251 


school.  We  would  beat  them  there,  as  they  go  into  these  headlands, 
iiiul  tliey  seem  to  stop  and  feed  in  the  eddies.  We  get  a  big  catch  of 
mackorel  when  we  strike  into  the  eddies.  Tlieir  bent  then  being  to  take 
tbe  bnit  and  hook,  we  secure  big  decks  of  them. 

Q.  You  then  strike  North  Cape  ? — A.  When  we  lose  them  there,  we 
come  down  off  Malpeque. 

Q.  On  the  north  side  of  the  island  ? — A.  Yes;  and  in  the  bend  of  the 
islaiul.    We  get  some  fish  there. 

Q.  Tliis  is  on  the  east  of  the  island  f—A.  Yes ;  off  Prince  Edward 
Island. 

Q.  Speaking  of  Prince  Edward  Island  fishing,  including  North  Cape, 
Cascumpeque,  and  liustico,  down  to  East  Point,  the  whole  run  of  the 
islaiul,  will  you  tell  us  how  far  off  from  the  shore  are  mackerel  to 
be  found  ? — A.  Well,  in  my  thirty  years'  experience  of  fishing  there, 
I  would  say  that  two  thinls  of  the  mackerel  caught  by  the  fleet  were 
caught  inside  the  three  mile  limit. 

Q.  In  your  thirty  years'  experience,  two-thirds  of  the  catch  have  been 
obtained  inside  of  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  Yes,  fully  that.  During 
some  seasons  you  could  not  get  mackerel  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit 
or  outside  of  two  miles  from  the  shore. 

Q.  During  the  whole  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why?  Have  you  formed  any  reason  in  your  mind  accounting  for 
tills  fact? — A.  We  came  to  the  conclusion  that  when  mackerel  are  scarce 
tlie  Itij;  ttsh  come  inshore  in  search  of  their  bait,  small  shrimps,  while  the 
small  mackerel  are  very  plentiful  outside.  When  the  mother  fish  are  about 
to  spawn,  they  strike  in  close  to  the  shore  for  food,  and  there  we  find 
them.  I  have  followed  the  business  pretty  closely,  and  I  find  that  the 
fish  come  down  Prince  Edward  Island.  The  movements  of  the  schools 
depend  on  the  prevailing  winds.  As  to  their  passing  down  the  head  of 
tbe  island  to  the  north  and  east,  a  certain  body  of  the  fish  is  very  apt 
to  come  down  through  the  gulf,  but  two-thirds  of  them  como  to  North 
Cape,  as  a  general  thing.  If  we  find  a  body  of  mackerel  caught  to- 
gether here,  the  whole  fleet  comes  to  this  point.  I  have  watched  their 
movements  pretty  closely.  On  short  trips  we  have  to  work  pretty  hard 
to  make  them  up.  When  a  heavy  gale  from  the  northeast  prevails  and 
tbe  mackerel  are  here,  we  are  sure,  after  we  have  an  eastward  wind, 
to  get  close  to  the  shore,  and,  remaining  along  the  bend  of  the  island, 
we  catch  them  there  on  this  coast.  When  the  wind  is  off  shore  we  se- 
cure fish  for  this  reason.  In  the  fall  of  the  year  it  is  very  stormy,  and 
the  fleet  cannot  fish  inshore,  while  the  mackerel  seem  to  settle  to  the 
bottom  and  lay  there.  On  this  part  of  the  coast  the  vessels  lay,  when 
flshinjj,  under  the  lee  of  the  land.  We  then  make  down  the  island  and 
come  to  Saint  Peter's  and  East  Point.  Many  vessels  which  make  large 
trips  fish  altogether  at  Malpeque. 

Q.  Staying  in  at  night,  you  mean  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  remain  in  the  harbor  at  night  and  go  out  in  the  morning?— 
A.  Yes;  when  there  is  a  heavy  on-shore  wind  they  remain  there,  and  as 
soon  as  it  is  calm  they  go  out. 

Q.  They  only  fish  with  an  off  shore  wind  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  what  you  call  drift-fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  these  remarks  apply  to  Cape  Breton  fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  go  down  the  coast  to  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Suppose,  captain,  you  were  not  allowed  to  fish  inside  the  three- 
mile  limit  at  all,  what  is  your  opinion  of  the  results  that  w^ould  follow 

with  regard  to  the  catch  ?— A.  From  the  experience  I  have  had  in  the 


i 


252 


AWARD  OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


fishing  bnsineRS,  I  do  not  think  that  I  woald  be  inclined  to  fit  out  a  ves- 
sel for  the  mackerel  flHhing  bnsiness  at  all. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  that  you  would  go  into  the  business  at  all  under 
those  circumstances  T — A.  No. 

Q.  What  are  the  names  of  the  masters  of  the  vessels  in  which  you 
were? — A.  The  Josephine  was  in  charge  of  Bob  Rogers,  of  Nowhiiry- 
port,  Massachusetts.  The  Hezron  was  from  Newburyport,  and  Newman 
was  the  master. 

Q.  What  was  her  catch  1 — A.  Three  hundred  and  ninety  barrels. 

Q.  And  in  what  vessel  did  you  ship  the  third  year — in  1850, 1  think  ?— 
A.  In  the  Fanny.    Kogers  was  her  master. 

Q.  What  catch  did  you  make  in  the  Fanny? — A.  We  made  two  trips 
in  the  bay  with  her.  On  the  first  trip  we  caught  two  hundred  and  sixty 
barrels,  and  on  the  second  three  hundred  and  ten  or  thirty  barrels. 

Q.  You  caught  some  five  hundred  barrels  during  both  trips  ? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  next  vessel  in  which  you  were? — A.  Tiie 
next  was  the  Herald. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  master's  name  ? — A.  I  think  it  was  Zeke 
Evans.    This  was  in  1851. 

Q.  That  was  the  year  of  the  great  American  gale? — A.  Yes;  I  was 
in  the  Herald  that  season.    She  wsis  also  owned  in  Newburyport. 

Q.  What  catch  did  you  make  that  year? — A.  We  made  but  one  trip 
to  the  bay,  and  that  was  in  July.  We  caught  four  hundred  and  odd 
barrels,  and  we  came  down  the  bay  about  the  middle  of  October.  We 
went  out  of  the  bay  directly  after  the  gale. 

Q.  A  great  many  vessels  were  lost  that  year? — A.  Yes;  in  fiict  it 
almost  destroyed  the  fishing  season ;  but  still  a  large  quantity  of  mack- 
erel was  caught  after  most  of  the  vessels  left  for  home. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  ? — A.  About  four  hundred  barrels.  I 
could  not  give  the  amount  exactly. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  your  next  vessel,  captain  ? — A.  In  1852 1 
was  in  the  Rio  del  Norte.  We  made  one  trip  on  the  American  coas\ 
We  then  left  that  coast  and  came  down  the  Gulf  of  the  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  And  who  was  her  captain  ? — A.  Andrew  Leighton,  of  Gloucester. 

Q.  A  very  experienced  fisherman  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  came  down  to  the  bay  to  fish  ? — A.  We  went  out  on  the  Amer- 
ican coast.  The  vessel  was  of  rather  small  size;  she  was  about  sixty 
tons,  I  think,  and  this  is  the  reason  why  we  went  out  on  the  Americau 
coast.  We  found  the  fish  to  be  very  small,  though  there  were  a  great 
many  in  that  quarter.  In  about  four  weeks  we  caught  one  hundred  and 
ten  barrels,  and  having  landed  them,  we  had  repairs  made,  and,  fitting 
out,  came  down  the  bay,  where  most  of  the  fleet  was.  We  fished 
between  Port  Hood  and  Cheticamp.  We  made  all  our  trip  there,  and 
were  about  fourteen  or  fifteen  days  on  that  part  of  the  coast.  When 
we  first  came  to  Port  Hood  we  found  a  cutter  in  the  bay.  A  large  fleet 
was  there,  but  we  did  not  mind  the  cutter  or  anything  else.  TLe  cap- 
tain says,  "  I  am  going  to  have  mackerel,"  and  we  got  them,  anyhow; 
and  we  succeeded.  In  a  fortnight  we  had  caught  two  hundred  and 
thirty  or  forty  barrels.  We  saw  the  cutter  for  a  few  days  several  times, 
and  we  kept  out  of  Port  Hood  harbor.  It  seemed  to  be  in  the  harbor 
of  Port  Hood  almost  every  night.  We  anchored  under  Margaret  Island 
and  Cheticamp,  and  made  that  a  harbor.  We  lay  under  the  lee  of  these 
places.  We  caught  the  fish  all  inshore.  There  were  no  mackerel  out- 
side the  three-mile  limit.  I  would  say  that  five  hundred  barrels  of  mack- 
erel were  not  caught  by  the  whole  fleet  outside.  There  were  not  five 
hundred  barrels  so  caught. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


253 


Q.  Outside  the  three-iuile  limit? — A.  Outside  two  miles. 

Q.  That  was  in  the  year  1852  ? — A.  Yes.  The  big  mackerel  struck 
into  the  shore,  though  there  were  many  small  mackerel  outside,  but  noth* 
ing  save  small  mackerel,  about  seven  inches  in  length.  We  heaved  to, 
and  we  kept  out  of  the  way  of  the  cutter.  When  we  threw  bait  and 
there  was  oil  about  the  vessel,  the  mackerel  followed  her  outside.  There 
were  kcIiuoIs  of  small  mackerel  in  this  part,  but  of  big  mackerel  we 
could  not  get  one  outside.  In  order  to  catch  any  fish  we  had  to  get  in- 
shore against  the  bank,  very  close  to  Cape  Breton.  We  had  to  watch 
our  clianue  to  get  in  when  the  cutter  was  out  of  the  way,  in  order  to 
catch  our  mackerel.  We  crossed  to  the  island.  We  made  230  barrels. 
lu  1852  we  got  shipwrecked  running  ashore  at  Souris.  Our  main  objeci 
was  to  charter  a  British  vessel  and  put  some  of  our  experienced  fisher- 
men on  her,  so  as  to  fish  without  any  fear  of  the  cutters. 

Q.  You  had  sutt'ered  interference  from  the  cutters? — A.  Yes.  The 
idea  of  a  cutter  chasing  around  after  you  was  not  pleasant.  We  had 
to  keep  out  of  the  way  of  the  cutter  sometimes  when  she  came  along. 

Q.  Did  you  get  an  English  vessel  ? — A.  No ;  there  was  no  vessel  for 
the  purpose. 

Q.  And  you  continued  fishing  in  an  American  vessel  ? — A.  In  the 
attempt  we  got  shipwrecked  at  Souris,  and  the  vessel  ran  ashore.  We 
finished  our  trip  there.    Twenty-two  vessels  were  shipwrecked  there. 

Q.  IIow  many  barrels  did  you  catch  ? — A.  Two  hundred  odd  barrels. 

Q.  Did  that  end  the  season  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  What  vessel  did  you  go  in  next  season  ? — A.  I  went  in  a  vessel 
ffhicli  was  wrecked  in  1851  ;  in  1853  I  took  charge  of  her.  She  was 
owned  in  Prince  Edward  Island.    Her  name  is  Montana. 

Q.  That  was  the  first  year  you  were  captain  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  1853. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  ? — A.  From  Bale  de  Chaleurs  up  to  Gaspe, 
crossing  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  once  or  twice. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  of  the  fishing? — A.  Something  like  140  bar- 
rels caught  on  one  trip.  Mackerel  was  scarce  that  year  on  the  coast  of 
the  island.  There  were  plenty  of  small  mackerel ;  there  were  big  fish 
up  at  Gaspe,  but  we  got  there  a  little  too  late ;  some  vessels  had  got 
big  catches. 

Q.  On  what  vessel  did  you  go  next  year? — A.  Nexxt  year  I  went  oa 
the  schooner  Ellen,  of  Newburyport,  Israel  Morrill,  captain. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  did  you  go  ? — A.  As  sharesman.  They  generally 
bire  the  crew  and  put  in  a  competent  man  to  direct. 

Q.  Had  you  a  good  season  on  her  ? — A.  We  made  one  trip,  and  we 
landed  something  like  340  barrels. 

Q.  On  what  vessel  were  you  next  year? — A.  Next  year  I  went  in  the 
Morning  Star,  of  North  Haven,  Me.;  James  Brophy,  captain. 

Q.  Ilow  many  trips  did  you  make? — A.  Two  trips. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch? — A.  I  shipped  with  him  at  Oauso,  where  I 
was.  We  landed  from  the  first  trip  250  barrels  at  Cause ;  refitted,  and 
went  to  the  bay ;  we  took  in  310  barrels  on  the  second  trip.  The  catch 
ou  the  first  trip  was  forwarded  on  from  Canso ;  it  enabled  us  to  make  a 
second  trip.  We  were  too  late  to  get  up  home  and  come  down  again, 
and  so  landed  the  catch  there.  Next  year  I  went  on  the  Julia  Frank- 
lin, of  Georgetown,  Me. ;  Frank  Lowe,  captain. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her  ? — A.  Two  trips. 

Q.  With  what  result  ? — A.  On  our  first  trip  we  came  down  and  got 
our  trip  over  in  ten  days.  In  twenty -four  days  we  were  back  at  Glou- 
cester with  360  barrels. 


254 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Where  were  they  taken  Y — A.  Some  at  North  Gape,  but  the  priu- 
cipal  part  daring  the  first  tri]»  were  caught  on  Bunk  Orphan. 

Q.  That  is  off  the  mouth  of  Bay  of  Chaleur  7 — A.  Yeis. 

Q.  And  on  the  second  trip  i — A.  We  ^ot  them  coming  down  in  tbe 
bend  of  the  island,  close  in  off  St.  Peter's. 

Q.  How  many? — A.  Three  hundred  and  ten  or  three  hundred  and 
thirty  barrels. 

Q.  Did  you  go  more  than  one  season  in  that  vessel  ? — A.  No,  I  think 
not. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  any  other  American  flshingvessel  in  which  you 
sailed  after  that  ? — A.  No.  I  wont  in  several  other  vessels  sonie  short 
trips,  between  the  times,  but  I  did  not  keep  any  account  of  them.  They 
were  sometimes  for  a  week  or  ten  days. 

Q.  Yon  were  in  other  vessels  t — A.  T^es,  in  several  other  vessels ;  but 
I  do  not  recollect  their  names.  SometimevS  a  vessel  would  come  in  and 
we  would  go  out  and  try  a  week  or  two,  and  use  up  the  fittings.  1  made 
several  such  trips,  but  I  kept  no  record  of  them.  After  the  Joseph 
Franklin,  I  went  on  the  schooner  Emma.  '  I  went  from  that  time  ou  iu 
British  vessels.    I  went  iu  the  Josephine. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Was  the  Emma  an  American  vessel  ? — A.  She  was  a  British  ves* 
sel.    I  made  a  very  short  trip  in  her. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  The  Josephine  was  an  island  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  been  iu  the  fishing  business  ever  since  then? — A.  Yes, 
in  ray  own  vessel. 

Q.  Every  year  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Following  the  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  now  engaged  in  the  business? — A.  Yes;  I  am  now  so 
engaged. 

Q.  Taking  before  the  time  when  you  took  charge  of  a  British  vessel, 
tell  me  with  respect  to  the  American  fishing-fleet  frequenting  the  bay— 
what  number  of  vessels  it  was. — A.  The  fleet  of  American  fishermen 
would  average,  as  far  as  I  can  tell,  from  about  1848  to  1873,  about  four 
hundred  vessels ;  some  years  more  than  others. 

Q.  Why  do  you  draw  the  line  at  1873 ;  has  there  been  any  difference 
since  then  ? — A.  The  |)rice  of  mackerel  lias  been  very  low  on  account  of 
the  Jepression  in  trade.  The  Americans  have  a  new  way  of  takinjr 
mackerel  with  a  seine  off  the  coast.  Thus  mackerel  have  been  met  off 
Gape  God  and  taken  there  iu  large  quantities,  and  has  prevented,  more 
or  less,  the  body  of  mackerel  striking  down  to  the  gulf.  The  fleet  would 
not  average  since  1873  over  200  vessels  iu  the  gulf. 

Q.  Speaking  still  with  reference  to  the  fleet,  had  you  sufficient  experi- 
ence to  enable  you  to  tell  the  Gommission  under  oath  wliether  other 
vessels  fished  as  well  as  the  particular  vessel  on  which  you  were?— A. 
We  fished  in  the  body  of  the  fleet ;  sometimes  there  wouhl  be  300  ves- 
sels iu  one  fleet. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  three-mile  limit ;  did  the  American  fishermea 
before  1854  keep  outside  or  not? — A.  They  fished  inshore. 

Q.  Was  that  the  general  rule  ? — A.  Yes.  When  mackerel  struck  a 
bank,  they  fished  considerably  there  and  followed  the  fish  inshore. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  any  of  the  American  fishing- vessels  being  cap- 
tured ? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  Did  that  make  any  difference  with  the  others  ? — A.  There  was  the 


AWABD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


255 


Rio  del  Norte  in  1852 ;  I  was  fishing  inside  when  another  vessel  was 
taken,  and  the  whole  fleet  of  60  sail  was  fishing  close  inshore.  There 
was  H  vessel  called  the  Triumph  lying  with  us  inside  Margeree  Island, 
iu  Broad  Cove,  on  the  north  coast  of  Cape  Breton.  We  always  took 
ber  to  be  an  English  vessel,  for  she  did  not  mind  the  cutter,  and  we 
Icept  a  sharp  eye  on  her.  We  lay  alongside  of  the  vessel  catching 
mackerel  fast.    We  saw  a  boat  coining  from  the  island  toward  us. 

Q.  How  far  is  the  island  off  the  shore  ? — A.  About  five  miles ;  it 
would  be  six  miles  to  Broad  Cove,  but  it  is  not  direct.  We  saw  a  boat 
coining,  but  did  not  notice  anybody  in  it.  We  fished  away,  and  when  the 
boat  came  alongside  twelve  men  appeared.  Some  of  the  vessels  squared 
round  a  bit.  The  captain  of  the  vessel  which  was  lying  close  by  said, 
'« I  am  not  going  to  move ;  I  defy  them.  I  am  not  going  to  lose  the 
{jroniid."  The  captain  of  the  cutter  saw  there  were  enough  men  to 
bandle  bis  one  vessel,  and  he  put  sail  on  it  and  went  away.  The  cutters 
were  not  very  hard  as  to  keeping  American  fishing-vessels  from  the 
coast,  except  those  whose  crews  gave  a  good  deal  of  impudence  and  did 
not  put  themselves  out  of  the  way.  Some  were  pretty  brave  and  would 
not  go  away ;  but  others,  when  they  saw  the  cutter,  hauled  their  jibs 
and  moved  off,  and  when  the  cutter  had  passed,  they  hauled  their  jibs 
and  moved  in.  Anyway,  to  a  large  fleet  there  would  not  be  more  than 
one  or  two  cutters.  In  stormy  weather  we  would  lie  under  the  lee  of 
the  island,  and  the  cutter  would  make  for  Georgetown  or  Port  Hood, 
thirty  or  forty  miles  away.  It  would  take  them  three  or  four  days  to 
return  to  the  fishing  grounds,  for  they  would  perhaps  be  becalmed  part 
of  the  time.  We  looked  after  getting  all  the  fish  we  possibly  could, 
catters  or  no  cutters. 

Q.  Since  the  reciprocity  treaty  has  been  at  an  end,  what  has  been  the 
custom  with  regard  to  fishing,  on  the  part  of  Americans,  since  18GG  ? — 
A.  In  18G7  cutters  were  put  on  the  coast  for  the  Dominion,  but  they  did 
not  interfere  with  us  on  the  island. 

Q.  Did  American  fishermen  cease  fishing  within  the  three-mile  limit 
after  that  ? — A.  No ;  they  went  fishing  wherever  they  found  mackerel. 
Xbey  mostly  found  the  mackerel  inside. 

Q.  Had  they  licenses? — A.  Some  had  licenses  and  some  had  not. 
Some  would  not  have  licenses. 

Q.  Those  who  had  not  licenses,  did  they  keep  outside? — A.  No;  I 
fished  in  a  British  vessel,  and  as  I  found  more  mackerel  inside  the 
three-mile  limit,  I  fished  there.  I  was  a  pretty  successful  fisherman ; 
and  when  I  went  inside  the  limit  I  found  the  whole  fleet  there.  So 
niacb  was  this  the  case  that  I  almost  gave  up  the  idea  of  fishing  at  all, 
for  we  bad  no  more  privileges  than  the  American  fishermen,  while  we 
were  compelled  to  pay  a  duty  of  $2  per  barrel  on  fish  sent  into  the 
United  States.  I  know  almost  all  the  skippers,  and  talked  the  matter 
over  with  them  several  times.  I  felt  it  was  a  hard  thing  that  while 
they  could  fish  where  they  pleased,  we,  after  fitting  an  expensive  vessel 
and  feeding  from  eighteen  to  twenty-five  men,  were  compelled  to  pay  a 
duty  of  $2  per  barrel,  though  they  took  the  mackerel  inside  the  limit 
and  fished  alongside  of  us. 

Q.  Supposing  they  had  to  keep  outside  the  three-mile  limit,  would 
you  object  to  the  $2  per  barrel  duty  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Wby  ? — A.  I  consider  that  if  the  American  fishing-fleet  had  been 
kept  entirely  off  the  coast,  it  would  have  caused  the  mackerel  to  have 
heeu  kept  at  a  higher  price  in  the  market,  for  the  fish  are  wanted. 
There  is  a  certain  supply  required.  The  fewer  mackerel  in  the  market, 
the  higher  is  the  price.    If  they  were  not  captured  by  the  American  fish- 


in;! 


256 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Iff* 


ing-fleet  they  would  be  captured  by  the  British  fishing-fleet,  and  the 
price  would  be  so  much  higher  that  it  would  be  equal  or  more  ihan 
equal,  over  and  above  the  sum  of  the  duties  paid.  The  price  would 
rise  in  proportion,  and  the  British  fleet  would  get  more  mackerel.  Tbe 
Americau  fishermen  might  make  occasionally  a  catch  on  the  batiks, 
but  it  would  be  a  wild-goose  chase.  I  have  had  a  good  deal  of  money 
in  the  business,  and  I  would  decline  to  fit  up  a  vessel  to  fish  outside  of 
the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  You  have  had  a  good  deal  of  intercourse  with  Americau  captains 
and  fishermen;  what  is  their  opinion  cu  that  point? — A.  I  have  oftea 
talked  the  matter  over  with  them.  We  often  lie  together  in  a  large 
fleet,  sometimes  in  harbors,  waiting  to  get  out,  sometinoeson  the  banks, 
and  I  have  talked  the  matter  over  with  them.  Somebody  would  say 
there  would  be  a  big  catch  of  mackerel  to-morrow,  or  that  they  had  lost 
the  mackerel  somewhere.  They  thought  it  very  hard  that  they  sUould 
not  be  allowed  to  fish  within  the  three-mile  limit.  If  the  cutters  were 
there,  they  would  say,  "We  must  steal  our  chance  to  get  in,  so  as  not 
to  get  our  vessel  taken."  Some  of  the  skippers,  or  rather  a  great  many, 
own  a  part  of  their  vessels,  and  they  found  it  was  very  risky  for  tlieiu 
to  run  the  chance  of  losing  the  vessel,  and  so  they  felt  it  hard  to  fisli 
inside  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Was  it  their  opinion  that  if  they  could  not  get  inside,  they  could 
not  get  the  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes,  that  was  their  opinion.  In  October 
the  mackerel  are  caught  inside  the  three  miles,  and  unless  they  were 
allowed  to  fish  there  the  trips  would  be  a  failure. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  any  fisherman  hold  a  contrjiry  opinion!— 
A.  No;  I  never  heard  any  argument  to  show  that  a  trip  would  be  as 
successful  outside  as  inside.  I  have  not  heard  any  argument  of  tbat 
kind  in  favor  of  fishing  outside  altogether,  although  there  have  been 
many  trips  outside  in  deep  water.  A  school  of  mackerel  going  fioiu  one 
bank  to  another  would  cross  deep  water.  As  a  business,  there  is  no 
man  who  would  say,  "  I  w  ill  fit  my  vessel  and  will  keep  clear  of  the 
three-mile  limit;  lam  sure  of  getting  successful  trips."  They  could  not 
do  it,  and  I  have  had  experience,  having  fished  all  over  the  grounds  for 
thirty-three  years.  If  1  were  excluded  from  the  three-mile  limit,  I  would 
not  fit  up  a  vessel  for  the  mackerel-fishing  in  the  gulf. 

Q.  What  is  the  opinion  of  American  fishermen  of  the  value  of  these 
fisheries ;  have  you  ever  heard  them  express  an  opinion  ? — A.  Yes,  I 
have  talked  it  over.  In  1848  there  was  a  great  California  fever  amoug 
the  fishermen  of  the  United  States,  and  California  was  a  great  deal 
talked  about.  Many  thought  there  was  no  place  like  California,  and  it 
was  talked  about  on  board  the  vessels  and  in  the  boarding-houses.  Tbe 
conclusion  come  to  by  some  was  that  gulf  fishing  was  equal  to  the  Cali- 
fornia gold-diggings.  In  1853  I  shipped  in  Boston  on  the  ship  Milwau- 
kee. She  was  bound  to  California,  and  hearing  so  much  of  the  Cali- 
fornia fever  ([  was  young  at  the  time,  and  anxious  to  make  a  few  dol- 
lars), I  was  persuaded  to  ship  in  her.  I  agreed  to  do  so ;  I  did  not, 
however,  sign  articles.  I  was  afterward  persuaded  that  the  bay  flsbing 
was  as  sure  as  California,  and  so  I  took  to  bay  fishing.  After  a  few 
years  it  turned  out  so,  for  I  know  that  several  of  my  shipmates  who 
went  out  there,  in  a  year  or  two  came  back.  I  find  that  I  have  beeu 
making  money  at  the  fishing  business. 

Q.  Where  do  you  principally  fish  ? — A.  At  the  Magdalen  Islands  and 
round  the  coast  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  fishing  round  Prince  Edward  Island,  did  the 
inhabitants  fish  much  iu  L818,  1850, 1852,  aud  1851  ?— A.  No. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


257 


Q.  What  is  the  state  of  thiugs  now  1 — A.  The  whole  matter  is  entirely 
different. 

Q.  Will  you  explain  to  the  Commission  how  that  is? — A.  The  coast 
of  the  island,  wherever  there  is  msickerel  or  fish,  is  now  taken  up.  In 
1848  Souris  was  the  only  fishing-place  on  the  island,  and  there  cod  and 
bake  were  caught  in  abundance.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  mackerel, 
but  the  business  was  not  studied  much.  As  the  men  went  from  the 
island  and  met  with  fishermen  of  the  United  States,  they  began  to  find 
tbat  the  mackerel  business  was  the  most  important,  that  there  was 
money  in  it,  and  they  went  into  the  business.  Now  wherever  there  is 
a  farm  abutting  on  the  coast  there  is  a  fishery.  From  East  Point  to 
Souris,  where  in  1848  there  was  not  one  fishery,  there  is  not  now  a 
fanner  who  has  not  a  fishery.  They  are  doing  a  big  business  in  cod 
and  mackerel  fishing. 

Q.  How  many  boats  go  out  from  Souris  Harbor  alone  ? — A.  Out  of 
Souris  Bay  there  will  now  go  as  many  as  60  boats.  From  Sheepon, 
something  like  20  boats.  I  counted  about  that  number  two  or  three 
(lays  ago.  KoUo  Bay  would  give  20  boats ;  Bay  Fortune,  20  boats.  At 
Grand  River  and  Lanchon  there  is  a  great  deal  of  fishing  carried  on,  and 
they  send  out  upward  of  150  boats.  Cardigan  Bay  and  Georgetown  do 
not  have  many  boats,  not  more  than  25  or  30.  Murray  Harbor  sends  out 
a  large  number  of  boats,  but  they  follow  principally  the  cod  and  hake 
tlshing ;  they  do  not  follow  the  mackerel.  They  have  80  boats.  They 
put  np  cod  and  hake  for  the  western  markets.  The  fishermen  are  in- 
clined to  follow  the  mackerel  fishing,  but  their  business  does  not  follow 
that  way.    From  Point  Prim  to  Bear  Cape  there  are  60  boats. 

Q.  That  takes  you  round  to  Charlottetown  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Starting  from  Souris,  what  is  the  first  harbor  on  the  north  side  ? — 
A,  St.  Peter's.  All  along  the  shore  from  East  Point  to  St.  Peter's  there 
are,  I  should  say,  100  boats. 

Q.  Including  St.  Peter's  Harbor  ? — A.  Yes.  At  Tracadie  there  is  a 
large  fieet,  but  I  could  not  say  exactly  how  mauy ;  to  the  best  of  my 
knowledge,  60  boats. 

Q.  At  Kustico  how  many? — A.  When  I  was  there,  about  200  boats 
between  Little  Rustico  and  Grand  Rustico.  There  are  two  harbors  at 
that  point. 

Q.  And  at  New  London  ? — A.  There  are  50,  and  there  are  80  between 
the  cape  there  and  New  London. 

Q.  At  Malpeque  how  many? — A.  It  has  not  many. 

Q.  At  Tignish — how  many? — A.  It  is  pretty  hard  to  keep  the  run  of 
them ;  boats  swarm  all  along  the  coast.    I  suppose  at  Tignish  there  are 
1,000  men  employed  each  season  fishing.    lu  1848,  at  Tignish  and  along 
these  i)arts,  there  were  very  few  boats. 

Q.  Now,  fishing  is  being  carried  on  all  round  the  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 
Every  farmer  along  the  coast  carries  on  fishing.  The  fishing  season 
seems  to  set  in  between  the  putting  in  and  taking  up  of  the  crops,  and 
makes  it  a  very  profitable  business. 

Q.  Where  do  these  hundreds  or  thousands  of  boats  fishing  along  the 
shore  get  their  mackerel  ? — A.  All  inside  of  the  three-mile  limit.  Two- 
thirds  of  the  mackerel  are  caught  within  one  mile  and  a  half  of  the 
shore,  all  along  the  coast. 

Q.  Where  is  the  cod  and  hake  fishing  in  Prince  Edwanl  Island? — A. 
All  round  the  north  side  of  the  island. 

Q.  How  far  out  from  shore? — A.  The  cod  fishing  along  from  Tignish 
to  Georgetown  is  inshore ;  but  at  Murray  Harbor  they  fish  out  on  a 
little  bank  at  some  seasons  of  the  year. 

17  F 


m 


m 


i¥-\ 


lini 


258 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


r^ 


If 

lit.  w  ■ 

If* 


Q.  You  bave  spoken  about  tbe  cod,  bake,  and  mackerel  fisberies— 
have  you  any  berring  flsbery  along  tbe  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  any  extent? — A.  Not  to  a  very  large  extent;  we  bave  always 
enough  for  bait  for  our  cod  and  mackerel  fishing. 

Q.  Where  are  the  berring  taken,  bow  far  out  from  tbe  shore  ?— A. 
From  half  a  mile  to  a  mile. 

Q.  Do  all  tbe  fishing  establishments  on  tbe  island  get  sufficient  bait 
ftom  tbe  catch  of  these  herrings? — A.  They  do  for  tbe  cod  fishing. 
Sometimes  for  the  mackerel  fishing,  they  get  two  or  three  cargoes  from 
the  Magdalen  Islands.  They  use  a  great  deal  of  herring-bait.  Some 
years  they  send  a  vessel  down  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  in  case  tbey 
should  not  secure  enough  inshore,  and  get  a  cargo  or  two  to  back  up 
their  supply. 

Q.  Have  the  Americans  fished  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  much  for  bait 
of  late  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  are  tbe  berring  off  shore? — A.  They  are  right  on  shore; 
tbey  spawn  there.  A  very  heavy  body  of  berring  strikes  in  there.  The 
fishermen  bave  a  seine  150  fathoms  long;  they  heave  it  out  and  haul  it 
ashore ;  they  use  a  boat  and  get  out  the  fish. 

Q.  Have  many  berring  been  taken  there  ? — A.  Large  quantities.  One 
year,  when  I  was  seining,  I  filled  7,800  barrels,  usingoue  seine,  and  loaded 
seven  vessels  besides,  in  all  containing  2,700  barrels.  I  was  down  tbere 
a  fortnight. 

Q.  That  was  a  fortnight's  work  ? — A.  Yes.  Up  to  last  year,  a  man 
could  go  tbere  and  fill  a  seine  any  night,  by  throwing  it  over. 

Q.  Have  the  Americans  frequented  tbere  ? — A.  Tbey  have  taken  a 
great  deal  of  fish  from  there.  I  bave  known,  in  tbe  si>ring  of  some 
years,  500  sail  have  been  tbere. 

Q.  What  proportion  would  be  American  vessels  ? — A.  One  hundred 
sail  would  be  the  average  for  the  last  twenty  years. 

Q.  Did  they  each  get  a  catch  ? — A.  They  always  got  a  catch.  Up  to 
two  or  three  years  ago,  a  large  number  of  vessels  laid  outside,  some  com- 
ing in  for  bait.  From  Gloucester  vessels  have  come  and  fished  for  bait, 
and  ft'om  their  lying  in  tbe  body  of  tbe  fish,  using  so  many  seines,  and 
tbere  being  so  much  traffic  in  the  bay,  which  is  only  nine  miles  across, 
tbe  fish  have  been  disturbed,  and  the  berring  fishing  is  not  so  accessible 
as  before.  Of  late  tbey  have  got  tbe  herrings  outside,  taking  them  with 
the  purse-seine.  They  use  these  seines  outside  in  the  middle  of  the  bay, 
and  prevent  the  fish  coming  in  to  spawn.  This  year  has  been  a  total 
failure ;  there  were  300  vessels  there  for  herring.  There  has  been  quite 
a  business  in  filling  barrels  on  board  for  Norway.  The  herring  fishery 
has  been  a  failure  this  year  on  account  of  the  use  of  purse  seines. 

W^EDNESDAY,  August  1, 1877. 

The  conference  met  at  noon. 

Tbe  evidence  of  Captain  Chivarie  was  resumed. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  I  understood  you  to  say  yesterday,  Captain  Chivarie,  that 
during  the  last  four  years  the  American  fleets  have  not  come  to  the  bay 
in  such  large  numbers  as  formerly  ? — Answer.  No;  tbey  have  not. 

Q.  What  would  be  tbe  average  number  of  vessels  in  the  American 
fleet  during  tbe  past  two  years  ? — A.  During  tbe  last  two  years  I  would 
say  that  tbe  average  would  not  amount  to  over  two  hundred  vessels ;  and 
taking  tbe  past  four  years  in  succession,  it  would  not  be  over  three  hun- 
dred.   It  would  be  from  four  hundred  to  four  hundred  and  fifty  during 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


259 


tbe  pist  two  years,  bat  the  general  average  for  the  four  years  would  he 
about  three  hundred. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  the  falling  off  in  the  number  of  the  fleet 
(luring  the  last  two  or  three  years  ? — A.  They  have  adopted  a  new  way 
of  catching  fish  on  the  American  shore.  It  is  termed  purse  seining. 
The  tish  have  not  taken  the  hook  very  well  on  this  coast,  and  the  small 
mackerel  are  fat,  so  they  began  to  use  the  purse  seine.  It  is  composed 
of  large  nets,  and  used  in  deep  water.  Where  these  are  employed  the 
men  catch  a  large  quantity  of  fish.  During  the  past  three  and  four 
years  they  have  thus  ftshed  to  a  great  extent  on  the  American  coast. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  effect  of  this  practice? — A.  Judging  from  the 
course  which  the  fish  generally  take,  we  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
tbe  effect  has  been  to  sheer  the  fish  off  the  coast ;  and  during  tbe  last  two 
years  it  has  stopped  a  large  body  of  the  fish  from  coming  to  our  gulf, 
it  has  barred  them  off  to  such  a  large  extent. 

Q.  What  is  the  extent  of  these  nets? — A.  These  seines  contain  from 
six  to  eight  hundred  nets,  and  are  from  one  hundred  and  fifry  to  two 
hundred  and  fifty  fathoms  long.  I  suppose  they  have  barred  the  pas- 
sage of  the  fish  off  the  headlands  for  a  distance  of  fully  tb'rty  miles.  The 
uets  are  usually  set  about  the  coast. 

Q.  In  your  opinion  that  is  one  cause  of  the  decrease  1 — A.  It  has  this 
year  sheered  the  fish  off  that  coast.  Their  usual  course  is  to  strike  down 
for  our  gulf.  I  think  that  if  these  seines  had  not  been  used  on  tbe 
American  coast  during  the  last  two  years,  we  would  have  caught  as  much 
fish  in  our  waters  as  was  tbe  case  for  the  average  of  previous  years. 

Q.  What  is  tbe  character  of  the  fish  you  have  caught  in  the  gulf  dur- 
ing these  last  two  or  three  years  ? — A.  They  were  large. 

Q.  Larger  than  has  been  tbe  case  in  ordinary  years? — A  No,  not 
larger,  but  they  were  large. 

'  Q.  That  has  been  the  peculiarity  of  these  two  years?— A.  Yes;  but 
daring  tbe  two  years  previous  we  largely  caught  what  we  call  small 
Twos.  These  fish  grow  pretty  fast,  and  what  are  called  small  Twos 
(luring  the  first  part  of  the  season  are  called  Ones  in  the  fall. 

Q.  Coming  down  to  percentage,  captain,  has  the  season  advanced  far 
enough  to  enable  you  to  form  an  opinion  as  to  what  the  fishing  will  be 
this  year  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Then  perhaps  you  can  describe  to  tbe  Commission  what  the  indi- 
cations are?— A.  We  generally  form  our  opinion  of  the  fisheries  on  the 
first  of  J  uly,  or  about  the  fourth  of  July,  about  the  time  when  tbe 
American  fishermen  tit  out  to  come  to  the  bay.  If  we  have  reports  from 
the  bay  that  the  mackerel  are  there,  a  big  fleet  always  fits  out  and 
comes  in.  About  the  first  or  fourth  of  July,  we  know  whether  tbe 
uackerel  will  strike  the  bay  in  big  bodies,  or  not;  and  this  season  a 
large  body  of  fish  has  struck  down  in  the  bay,  and  the  waters  are  full 
of  them. 

Q.  Our  waters  are  full  of  mackerel? — A.  Yes,  I  have  seen  them  all 
around  the  coast  of  the  island,  and  down  tbe  Strait  of  Canso.  I  was 
down  there  in  a  schooner  about  two  or  three  weeks  ago,  and  I  found 
them  there.  Tbe  mackerel  were  coming  down  the  gulf  in  larga  bodies. 
1  saw  them  around  the  coast  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Have  many  been  taken  ? — A.  Yes,  quite  a  number.  They  have 
been  caught  around  tbe  back  part  of  the  island,  and  all  along  tbe  coast. 
Some  have  also  been  taken  by  American  fishermen. 

Q.  Tlie  American  fishermen  are  there  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  are  on  the 
coast  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  there  yourself? — A.  Y^es. 


M 
III 


;:i 


0 


m 


I"' 'I 


»'l 


260 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  With  tbe  uew,  large  seines? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  they  met  with  saccess  T — A.  They  have.  I  saw  tbein  a  fort- 
night ago.  They  have  seined  at  points,  and  the  mackerel  being  plenty 
they  have  obtained  large  catches — from  one  hundred  and  fifty  to  two 
hundred  barrels — with  a  set  of  nets;  they  have  found  the  mackerel 
school  where  they  have  arrived. 

Q.  What  catches  have  they  made? — A.  Up  to  two  hundred  barrels  a 
catcb. 

Q.  You  mean  in  the  one  seine? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  an  idea  of  tbe  proportion  of  tbe  fleet 
that  has  arrived  in  the  bay  ?  When  did  you  leave  that  quarter  ?— A. 
Last  Friday.  I  saw  the  vessels  commg  up  the  Strait  of  Ganso.  East 
and  nor'ard  winds  prevailed,  and  it  was  rough,  and  they  followed  the 
south  shore,  coming  to  anchor  there.  I  counted  fourteen  vessels  witli 
seines  in  tbe  fleet. 

Q.  You  know  these  men  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  in  conversation  with  them?— A.  Yes;  1  am  well  ac- 
quainted with  the  men  belonging  to  tbe  major  part  of  tbe  fleet. 

Q.  Did  you  find  out  how  many  of  the  fleet  have  arrived  in  the  Gulf 
of  the  St.  Lawrence  ? — A.  On  the  way  down,  and  in  tbe  bay,  tbere 
are  something  like  four  hundred  vessels.  They  are  coming  every  day 
and  every  hour. 

Q.  What  is  tbe  number  of  fishermen  it  is  expected  that  tbe  fleet  will 
aggregate  this  year  ? — A.  They  are  of  opinion  that  there  will  be  no  fish- 
ing this  year  of  any  consequence  on  tbe  American  coast,  and  tbe  whole 
fleet  will  be  down.  It  will  number  about  nine  hundred  sail.  I  think 
that  there  will  be  as  many  as  four  hundred  seines  among  them. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  some  of  them  have  taken  something  like  two 
hundred  barrels  of  fish  at  one  throw  ? — A.  Yes ;  as  manj^  as  one  thou  . 
sand  barrels  are  very  often  taken  in  this  way. 

Q.  Just  describe  a  seine  to  the  Commission,  captain,  give  its  size, 
length,  &c. — A.  Tbe  seines  are  made  of  very  light  cotton  twine,  and 
are  from  18  to  24  fathoms  deep.  They  are  made  large  and  deep,  so  as 
to  take  in  all  tbe  fish  they  come  across.  They  are  from  one  hundred  to 
two  hundred  and  fifty  fathoms  in  length.  They  are  placed  so  as  to  sur- 
round tbe  schools  of  fish.  A  school  is  round  in  shape  like  this  table. 
The  seines  may  be  of  any  depth. 

Q.  They  come  together  around  tbe  school  ? — A.  They  are  so  placed 
as  not  to  show  on  the  top  of  tbe  water. 

Q.  They  lay  large  seines  around  tbe  schools,  not  disturbing  at  the 
time  the  mackerel  on  tbe  top  of  tbe  water  ? — A.  Yes,  tbe  nets  are 
sunk,  and  a  draw  line,  called  a  purse  line,  brings  them  together  under- 
neath ;  thus  they  inclose  a  large  body  of  fisb. 

Q.  The  net  comes  together  ? — A.  Yes.  Tbe  fishermen  haul  up  the 
seine  and  have  the  whole  thing  closed,  until  the  fish  are  dry.  They  dry 
tbe  fish  in  order  to  assist  in  barreling  them.  Tbe  fisb  are  then  placed 
in  small  boats,  and  taken  on  board  tbe  vessel,  where  they  are  dressed. 

Q.  What  has  been,  in  your  experience  as  a  fisherman,  the  e|l'ect  of 
this  style  of  fishing  ? — A.  In  my  experience,  all  along  the  coast,  tbe  efl^ect 
of  seining  cod  and  herring  has  been  to  keep  them  off  shore  and  to  de- 
stroy a  great  many  Ash  which  are  of  no  use  at  the  time  of  catching. 
Besides  destroying  a  great  many  of  such  fisb,  seining  has  been  the  means 
of  frightening  and  keeping  tbe  fishing  off  our  coast,  where  they  are 
mostly  found  in  shoal  water.  In  addition  to  mackerel,  it  has  destroyed 
on  our  coast  many  herring  which  mix  with  the  schools.  These  herring 
tbe  Americans  do  not  preserve. 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


261 


Q.  Are  they  utterly  lost  f — A.  Yes.  Herring  show  up  ou  the  water 
like  ]uackerel,  aud  the  vessels  heave  them  up  in  their  seines ;  but  when 
they  come  to  dry  them,  finding  that  the  fish  caught  are  herring,  they 
let  them  go.  The  fish  are  almost  smothered ;  one-half  are  dead  and 
drop  to  the  bottom,  though  some  may  live  a  short  time.  These  fisher- 
men do  not  put  up  any  of  these  fish,  though  they  haul  in  heavy  schools 
of  thenu 

Q.  Do  they  take  any  other  small  fish  mixed  up  with  mackerel  be- 
sides herring  ? — A.  O,  yes;  though  there  may  be  nothing  but  herring 
in  a  school  of  mackerel  composed  of  small  and  large  fish. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  the  small  mackerel  ? — A.  They  let  these  fish 
go.  When  drying  up  the  seines  they  tip  out  the  big  mackerel,  and  if 
there  are  any  small  ones  which  it  does  not  pay  to  put  up,  they  are  heaved 
overboard. 

Q.  They  are  lost  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  destroyed  ? — A.  They  are  destroyed  altogether. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  has  this  mode  of  fishing  been  in  operation  on 
the  American  coast? — A.  For  about  seven  years.  It  is  not  more  than 
Ave  years  since  the  seines  have  been  used  in  large  numbers. 

Q.  Is  there  any  general  opinion  as  to  the  effect  of  this  style  of  fish- 
ing during  these  seven  years  ? — A.  I  have  talked  the  matter  over  with 
skippers  of  the  United  States  down  here  ou  several  occasions,  and  they 
were  strongly  of  opinion  that  its  effect  would  be  to  destroy  the  fisheries 
altogether.  I  have  been  acquainted  with  these  men  during  the  last  twenty 
or  thirty  years.  I  nearly  always  accompanied  them  to  the  grounds.  I 
think  they  have  told  me  that  they  have  tried  to  stop  this  seining;  that 
ii  certain  part  of  the  fishermen  of  the  different  States  have  done  so ; 
aud  that  meetings  to  this  end  had  been  held  ;  but  the  objection  raised 
to  it  was,  that  owing  to  the  number  of  seines  owned  and  the  great 
amount  of  money  expended  ou  them,  they  could  not  afford  to  do  so. 

Q.  What  would  one  of  these  seines  cost  ? — A.  From  one  thousand  to 
fifteen  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  Fishermen  believe,  I  understand,  that  this  seining  will  utterly  de- 
stroy the  fisheries  ? — A.  That  is  the  general  opinion. 

Q.  Do  you  coincide  with  that  view  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  do.  From  my  expe- 
rience of  thirty  years  in  cod  seining  and  herring  seining  I  would  judge 
so.  I  have  also  beeu  mackerel  seining  during  some  years  on  the  bay 
aud  on  the  coast  of  the  Labrador:  but  we  have  now  given  it  up,  as  we 
found  that  the  fish  decreased  in  numbers  in  consequence  of  the  prac- 
tice. Some  years  we  used  the  hook  and  line  altogether,  and  we  had 
successful  catches.  There  are  large  fisheries  on  the  Labrador  coast  fre- 
quented a  great  deal  by  the  Jersey  people,  who  use  the  hook  and  line 
altogether.  I  was  there  about  the  first  year  when  seines  were  used,  and 
the  Nova  Scotiaus  and  island  people  and  Americans  who  pursued  this 
mode  of  fishing  found  that  the  employment  of  seines  led  to  the  disap- 
pearance of  the  fish.  We  used  them  for  ten  or  fifteen  years,  and,  dis- 
covering that  the  fish  did  not  strike  inshore,  while  the  bait  kept  off  the 
coast,  we  had  to  wind  up  the  fishery. 

Q.  This  was  owing  to  seining? — A.  Yes;  we  found  that  it  ruined 
the  fisheries. 

Q.  You  have  proved  this  from  your  own  experience  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  After  abandoning  the  seine  have  these  fisheries  revived,? — A.  They 
have  in  some  places.  We  then  fonud  much  more  fish  on  the  shore.  I 
think  that  the  American  people  themselves  have  altogether  wound  up 
their  codfishing  on  the  Labrador  shore.  Few  vessels  now  go  in  there 
at  all. 


'I 


m 


M. 


mil 
piii 


m-' 


KHJ. 


262 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  I  understaud  you  to  say  that  the  mackerel  around  the  shore  of 
the  Bay  of  the  St.  Lawreuce  school  in  shoal  waters  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Supposing  that  the  seining  system  were  introduced  by  the  Amer- 
ican fleet  in  the  shoal  waters  of  the  bay,  what  would  be  the  effect  ou 
the  bait  and  fish  ? — A.  It  would  mean  the  ruin  of  our  bay  fisheries,  iu 
my  opinion.    It  would  destroy  our  mackerel  fisheries  in  toto. 

Q.  During  the  last  two  or  three  year?,  has  the  mackerel  catch  on  the 
island  decreased?  lias  the  local  catch  increased  or  decreased? — A.  I 
do  not  know  that  it  has  decreased.  I  think  that  during  the  past  year 
there  was  not  as  many  mackerel  caught  on  these  shores  as  was  the  case 
during  the  three  years  previous,  although  in  some  parts  of  the  bay,  iu 
the  northern  portion,  the  mackerel  have  been  very  plentiful. 

Q.  And  three  years  previously,  was  the  local  fishing  then  good  or 
bad  ? — A.  Two  years  ago  the  bay  was  full  of  mackerel,  and  there  was 
any  amount  of  fish  on  our  coast ;  this  was  in  1874. 

Q.  That,  I  believe,  was  an  excellent  year  1! — A.  Yea ;  there  was  any 
amount  of  fish.  In  1875  they  were  not  so  plentiful,  but  there  were  very 
many  of  them  on  the  island  coast.  At  the  Magdalen  Islands,  however, 
they  were  more  plentiful  than  during  the  year  previous ;  and  more 
mackerel  were  then  caught  there  than  had  been  the  case  since  fishing 
began  there. 

Q.  Is  there  any  peculiarity  connected  with  the  Magdalen  Islands  fish 
ery  which  prevents  successful  fishing  being  carried  on  there  ? — A.  These 
purse  seines  have  also  been  used  there. 

Q.  I  allude  to  winds? — A.  Itisa  very  blowy  country.  They  are  small 
islands  in  the  middle  of  the  gulf,  and  mountainous.  Vessels  fish  there 
in  small  fleets;  some  hardy  fishermen  remain  there,  but  the  best  vessels 
only  visit  it  during  j)art8  of  the  year.  Others  do  not  care  to  fish  there 
at  all;  it  is  too  blowy  there,  particularly  in  the  month  of  September; 
and  the  vessels  hsive  to  lay  around  the  island  iu  shelter  for  a  week  or 
ten  days  waiting  for  an  opportunity  to  take  fish.  Some  good  catches 
are  made  there  during  the  early  part  of  the  season,  and  a  small  portion 
of  the  fleet  remains  there  along  until  about  the  10th  of  October.  Hardly 
any  vessels  visit  there  after  that  date. 

Q.  This  is  on  account  of  the  heavy  winds  that  prevail  there  ? — A.  Yes. 
Besides,  there  are  no  harbors,  and  tiie  vessels  have  to  lay  around  these 
islands. 

Q.  One  word  about  the  codflshing,  captain ;  where  is  that  fishery 
carried  on  by  British  and  American  vessels  ? — A.  The  principal  codfish- 
eries  are  carried  on  in  the  gulf,  on  the  Labrador  shore,  off  the  coast  of 
New  Foundland,  and  on  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan,  near  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island,  and  iu  fact  in  all  parts  of  the  gulf  by  British  fishermen  and 
by  Americans  also.  They  fish  for  cod  besides  on  the  Gran<l  Banks  and 
West  Banks  and  off  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia  around  Sable  Island  and 
in  all  parts  of  these  regions.  The  cod  along  the  western  shore  are  prin- 
cipally taken  on  the  Grand  Banks  and  the  Western  Banks  of  Nova 
Scotia. 

Q.  Is  there  much  codflshing  within  three  miles  of  the  shores  of  these 
islands  and  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  Nova  Scotia,  and  New  Bruns- 
wick ? — A.  There  is  not  much  done  there  by  vessels.  They  come  to  the 
bay,  but  do  not  fish  for  cod  on  the  shore;  they  do  so  on  the  banks  and 
bait  altogether  on  shore. 

Q.  Where  do  the  fishermen  get  their  bait? — A.  In  the  harbors  and 
creeks  and  along  the  shores  of  Newfoundland  and  of  the  Magdalen 
Islands,  and  iu  the  creeks  of  Nova  Scotia.  They  procure  bait  on  the 
northern  and  southern  parts  of  Newfoundland. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


263 


Q.  If  tbey  could  not  thus  get  bait  how  could  they  carry  the  fisheries 
^Qf_A.  I  do  not  see  bow  they  could  carry  on  the  bank  fishing  at  all 
unless  they  could  secure  bait  here. 

Q.  Wbat  bait  do  they  use? — A.  H«^rrings  and  mackerel,  but  herrings 
principally. 

Q.  And  the  herrings  are  taken  where? — A.  About  Newfoundland, 
Nova  Scotia,  and  the  Magdalen  Islands.  They  are  chiefly  taken  with 
seines  on  shore  and  brought  up  by  the  American  fishermen,  who  also 
come  in  to  procure  ice  to  keep  a  quantity  of  the  bait.  Tbey  want  to 
strike  on  the  coast  here  and  look  into  the  harbors  for  bait;  and  if  they 
do  not  obtain  it  in  Nova  Scotia,  they  come  down  on  their  first  trip  in 
the  spring  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  and  get  it  there.  Then  they  are  off 
for  the  banks  off  Gape  North.    The  fleet  of  fishermen  fish  alltogetber. 

Q.  I  understand  that  they  also  obtain  ice  on  these  shores  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  that  requisite  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  keeps  the  bait  fresh. 

Q.  Is  that  desirable  ? — A.  O,  yes.  Tbey  cannot  effectually  carry  on 
fishing  operations  unless  the  bait  is  fresh. 

Q.  Therefore  ice  is  a  necessity  ? — A.  Yes,  and  bait  also.  You  cannot 
catch  fish  without  bait.  Then  they  go  around  the  coast  of  Newfound- 
land and  soon  use  up  a  certain  portion  of  their  fresh  herring.  The  bait 
keeps  fresh  about  three  weeks ;  and  when  they  find  it  is  soft,  they  fill 
up  again  with  bait  oft'  the  coast  of  Newfoundland.  They  get  what  they 
will  want  before  they  finish  their  trips. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  the  number  of  vessels  in  the  fleet  engaged  in  these 
operations  ? — A.  There  is  a  large  fleet.  I  would  say  there  would  be  as 
many  as  four  hundred  sail. 

Q.  Does  that  number  embrace  the  bank  fleet  and  the  whole  of  the 
vessels  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  would  be  fully  that  number.  There  are  also  ves- 
sels following  the  mackerel-fishing,  which  make  one  trip  for  cod  and 
another  for  mackerel.  Sometimes  they  find  that  there  is  more  money 
in  codfishing ;  the  markets  for  cod  may  be  high  and  for  mackerel  low ; 
and  they  may  go  for  cod  one  trip.  This  is  during  the  first  part  of  the 
season ;  and  when  at  a  later  period  they  find  mackerel  fat  and  more 
valuable,  tbey  seek  these  fish.  There  is  a  great  difference  between  the 
catches  of  mackerel  between  the  first  and  latter  parts  of  the  season, 
when  tbey  become  fat  and  valuable.  This  happens  about  October. 
They  are  more  looked  after  then.  The  difference  between  the  first  and 
latter  catches  of  mackerel  is  something  like  from  six  to  eight  dollars  per 
barrel  on  the  average.  These  fish  are  generally  packed  in  different 
numbers ;  there  are  threes,  twos,  and  ones,  and  medium  threes  and 
medium  twos.  The  small  fish  do  not  bring  so  much  as  the  threes  and 
twos,  and  the  ones  command  the  biggest  prices. 

Q.  Wbat  are  the  benefits  which,  in  your  opinion,  the  Americans  de- 
rive from  the  right  of  transshipping  fish  from  the  Gut  of  Canso  and 
Prince  Edward  Islaud  ? — A.  We  always  come  to  the  conclusion  that  to 
land  the  proceeds  of  one  trip  would  give  us  a  fair  opportunity  for  mak- 
ing a  third  trip.  I  would  say  that  it  would  about  make  the  difference 
of  one  trip  during  the  season.  We  generally  come  up  and  land  the  first 
trip.  As  a  general  thing  it  is  very  seldom  that  a  third  trip  is  made  by 
going  to  the  United  States.  We  land  the  second  trip  and  go  into  these 
places  to  refit.  We  very  often  land  two  trips;  and  vessels  have  landed 
as  many  as  four  during  a  season  by  remaining  down  here  and  shipping. 

Q.  The  fleet  when  the  vessels  come  down  passes  through  the  gulf? — 
A.  The  majority  of  them  do. 

Q.  In  coming  through  the  gulf  the  fishermen  are  required  to  report 
themselves;  thus  would  the  otflcials  at  the  Gut  of  Canso  have  knowl- 


I    F 


264 


AWARD   OB'   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


edge  of  all  the  vessels  passing  through  ? — A.  O,  no.  Many  pass  tbiuugh 
unperceived  during  the  night-time.  In  former  years,  when  a  tax  ot 
sixpence  a  ton  on  the  tonnage  of  each  vessel — I  think  that  was  tbe 
amount  levied — the  fishermen  generally  made  it  a  point  to  run  cbar 
through  without  paying  the  duties  if  this  were  possible. 

Q.  So  that  the  ofQcial  record  of  arrivals  might  not  be  correct  ?--A. 
A  number  of  vessels  ran  through  and  were  never  stopped  at  all,  takiuK 
advantage  of  a  north  wind.  1  do  not  think  that  in  uiy  several  years' 
experience  on  the  Julia  Franklin  and  Morning  Star,  I  paid  the  (lutici^ 
more  than  twice.  It  is  considered  rather  a  smart  thing  to  go  in  and 
come  out  and  have  no  such  expenses. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  the  Commission  should  draw  from  your  state- 
ment the  inference  that  a  very  considerable  portion  of  the  fleet  did  this? 
— A.  O,  yes.  I  would  say  that  during  these  years  one-third  if  not  olc- 
half  of  the  vessels  did  not  pay  their  light  dues. 

Q.  To  what  years  do  you  refer  ? — A.  The  years  from  1848  to  1804. 
The  cutters  would  be  after  them,  and  when  closely  chased  they  would 
have  to  pay,  especially  on  the  island.  But  up  to  the  year  when  light 
dues  were  levied  on  vessels  by  the  island  government,  once  througli 
the  Gut  of  Ganso,  they  had  no  other  place  to  call  at  here,  and  they  paid 
no  one. 

Q.  The  years  in  question  extended  from  1848  to  1864? — A.  Yes.  Tbe 
vessels  were  always  boarded  by  the  island  people  in  these  harbors ;  and 
generally  at  these  times  they  landed  a  good  deal  at  tbe  Gut  when  pass- 
ing through. 

Q.  How  did  you  come  to  pay  twice  when  on  the  Julia  Franklin  and 
Morning  Star? — A.  We  landed  at  the  Gut,  and  of  course  had  to  report. 

Q.  You  were  under  the  necessity  of  paying  light  dues  when  you 
landed  cargoes  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  if  you  did  not  land  cargoes  you  considered  it  a  clever  tbiujr 
to  get  through  without  paying? — A.  O,  yes.  There  were  very  honor- 
able men  among  them,  however,  and  many  skippers  would  not  make  it 
a  point,  as  a  rule,  to  evade  payment.  If  they  saw  a  boat  coming  for 
them  they  had  to  heave-to  and  wait.  On  the  whole,  nevertheless,  fully 
one-third  of  the  vessels  during  these  years  would  not  pay  light  dues. 

Q.  If  they  were  not  boarded,  of  course  they  did  not  pay? — A.  No. 
Often  a  current  of  three  or  four  knots  an  hour  would  be  running  at  tbe 
time,  and  the  officials  had  no  means  of  finding  these  vessels,  wbicb 
would  run  through  with  the  tide.  It  sometimes  run  at  the  rate  of  eigbt, 
nine,  or  ten  knots  an  hour.  A  vessel  would  be  by  before  the  officials 
could  reach  her. 

Q.  At  what  would  you  place  the  average  catch  of  the  American  fleet 
during  the  last  three  years  in  our  waters  ? — A.  During  the  last  two 
years  I  do  not  think  that  the  catches  have  averaged  over  250  barrels, 
but  in  the  previous  year,  1874,  there  were  some  large  catches.  During 
that  year  the  average  would  be  more. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  The  average  of  250  is  for  each  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Whit  would  it  be  for  the  previous  year  ?— A.  The  average  would 
be  about  350  barrels. 

Q.  Where  were  these  fish  taken!— A.  Mostly  about  the  coast  of 
Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  All  inside  of  the  three-mile  limit  ? — A.  Mostly  inside. 


AWARD    OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


265 


Q.  What  would  be  the  proportion  caught  iusidef— A.  Fully  two- 
tbiids. 

Q.  Give  me  the  average  catch,  if  you  can,  captain,  for  any  number  of 
years  previous  to  these  last  three  that  you  like  to  take. — A.  I  would 
say,  judging  from  my  experience,  that  the  average  from  1818  up  to  the 
last  two  years  would  amount  to  something  like  45t)  barrels  a  vessel. 
During  some  years  the  fleet  would  average,  I  should  say,  700  barrels. 
Other  years  the  average  would  be  lower,  and  the  general  average  I 
would  put  down  at  about  400  barrels.  Of  course  some  vessels  are  small 
and  go  for  only  one  trip;  others  again  make  two  or  three  trips.  This 
brings  the  average  down.  1  have  known  some  vessels  take  as  many  as 
1,520  barrels  in  one  season.  Several  during  that  season  landed  from 
1,100  to  1,200  barrels ;  the  general  average  was  something  like  700.  This 
is  about  seven  years  ago. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  What  year  was  that  ? — A.  It  was  seven  years  ago. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  they  average  that  year? — A.  Iiilly  700 
barrels.  The  catches  were  very  large.  I  think  they  were  abont  the 
largest  that  have  been  made  in  the  bay,  and  for  single  vessels  this  was 
the  case. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  give  the  Commission  your  opinion  as  to  the  prospects 
for  this  year  ? — A.  I  think  there  is  a  big  body  of  mackerel  ott"  the  coast. 
I  have  a  vessel  out.  They  struck  the  American  coast  last  year,  and  I 
I  think  they  will  be  down  here  this  season.  The  fish  struck  down  out 
here  the  tirst  thing,  and  my  vessel  so  far  has  done  very  well.  I  find 
that  the  mackerel  are  as  plentiful  this  year  as  they  were  ever  known  to 
J  be  down  here,  and  my  impression  is  that  there  will  be  a  very  large  catch 
this  season. 

Q.  What,  in  your  opinion,  would  be  the  general  effect  of  excluding 
the  American  fishermen  from  the  privilege  of  fishing  withm  three  miles 
of  our  shores? — A.  They  fit  out  their  vessels  in  an  expensive  way,  and 
I  should  judge  that  they  would  discontinue  fitting  out  vessels  for  our 
bay  altogether,  under  such  circumstances.  I  do  not  think  that  they 
could  then  carry  on  fishing  operations  on  our  coast  at  all. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect,  judging  from  your  knowledge  of  the  men 
engaged  on  these  vessels?  What  would  be  the  result?  When  you 
speak  of  the  bay  you  mean  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence? — A.  Yes.  That 
is  the  term  used  by  the  fishermen  in  referring  to  the  bay. 

Q.  What  class  of  men  are  the  sailors  and  fishermen  employed  among 
the  Americans? — A.  I  would  say  that  for  the  last  fifteen  years  two  thirds 
of  them  have  been  foreigners. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  the  term  "foreigners"  ? — A.  That  they  are 
Nova  Scotians,  and  that  they  come  pretty  much  from  all  parts  of  the 
world.    Their  fishermen  are  picked  pretty  much  out  of  all  nations. 

Q.  If  the  Americans  were  excluded  from  our  fishing  privileges,  what 
do  you  think  these  men  would  do  ? — A.  They  would  return  to  their 
native  homes  and  carry  on  fishing  there. 

Q.  Have  many  of  them  come  back  ? — A.  O,  yes.  We  have  a  num- 
her  of  island  men  who  have  returned.  A  large  number  have  done  so. 
A  great  many  come  home  for  the  winter  and  go  back  to  the  States  in 
the  spring ;  but  during  the  past  two  years  many  of  this  class  have  come 
down  to  remain.  This  year  I  do  not  know  of  more  than  a  dozen  out 
of  three  hundred  in  my  neighborhood  who  have  gone  back.  They  get 
boats  and  fish  along  the  coast,  because  they  find  there  is  more  money  to 


I'll 


I'll 

I'Hi 

i 

m 
l:fi 


266 


AWABD   OF   THE  FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


be  secured  by  this  plan  of  operations.  The  fisheries  being  better,  tlic 
general  impression  is  that  they  are  all  making  towards  home  to  fish  on 
their  own  coast. 

Q.  Daring  your  thirty  years'  experience,  have  you  known  of  any  of 
our  vessels  frequenting  the  American  coast  for  fishing  purposes?— A.  I 
never  knew  of  any  British  vessel  fishing  on  the  American  coast. 

Q.  And  why  f — A.  We  never  think  of  fitting  out  vessels  to  go  to  tbe 
American  coast,  since  we  have  such  good  fisheries  down  here.  Ours 
are  far  superior  to  theirs.  We  have  better  fish  and  more  of  them  at 
home  than  they  have.  Ours  are  surer.  We  would  never  think  at  all 
of  fitting  out  vessels  to  go  up  to  that  coast. 

Q.  You  would  not  thiuk  of  it? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  beard  of  a  British  vessel  going  there? — A.  Only 
of  one ;  she  was  a  schooner  1  went  in  for  two  or  three  years.  She  be- 
longed to  I.  G.  Hall. 

Q.  He  is  an  American,  is  he  not? — A.  Yes.  He  attends  to  the  fish- 
eries in  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  He  is  an  American  citizen  ? — A.  Yes.  Our  vessel  went  up  there 
to  get  some  pogies  for  bait  one  year.  We  were  there  a  long  time,  and 
were  bothered  a  good  deal  by  the  number  of  vessels  engagad  in  fishing 
with  seines.  There  was  not  much  show  for  us  to  do  anything.  The 
shore  seemed  to  be  completely  taken  up  by  all  kinds  of  traps,  nets,  and 
vessels.  I  think  as  far  as  the  American  shore  mackerel  fishery  is  con- 
cerned, that  they  have  no  more  room  than  is  required  for  their  fleet  of 
vessels.  Our  people  would  have  but  a  very  small  show  indeed  among 
them. 

Q.  You  would  not  like  to  invest  capital  in  such  an  undertaking  yoar- 
self? — A.  I  never  would  think  of  such  a  thing  at  all. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  You  were  about  sixteen  years  old  when  you  began  fishing  in  tbe 
Josephine,  in  1848? — A.  I  was  between  fourteen  and  sixteen  years  of 
age. 

Q.  And  I  think  you  said  you  first  shipped  on  the  island? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Prince  Edward  Island? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  then  made  one  trip  in  the  gulf? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  go  then? — A.  Up  to  Newburyport,  in  the 
United  States. 

Q.  When  did  you  reach  it? — A.  In  the  latter  part  of  October,  about 
November. 

Q.  And  there  you  were  discharged  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  spend  the  winter? — A.  At  and  near  Newburyport. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  ship  the  following  spring  ? — A.  In  April. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  go  first? — A.  I  made  two  trips  on  the  coast, 
and  then  went  mackerel-fishing  in  the  bay. 

Q.  You  went  in  a  schooner? — A.  No;  but  in  a  coaster.  We  do  not 
use  coast  vessels  fishing  in  the  bay. 

Q.  You  started  to  coast  in  the  spring  of  1849  ? — Yes. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  coast  ? — A.  Until  July. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  you  begin  fishing  in  July,  1849  ? — A.  lu  the 
schooner  Hezron. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  fish  first?— A.  Down  the  Bay  of  Ohaleurs  and 
and  along  the  British  coast. 

Q.  You  did  not  try  to  fish  until  you  reached  the  bay?— A.  No;  we 
came  directly  down. 

Q.  And  you  made  two  trips  tbe  second  year? — A.  No ;  one  trip. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FI8BEBT   COMMISSION. 


267 


Q.  At  what  time  did  yon  reach  Newbnryport  that  yearf — A.  In 
October.  It  was  about  the  20th.  It  was  along  in  October  that  we  gen- 
erally got  bacic  from  the  bay.  We  usually  leave  the  bay  about  the  20th 
of  October — towards  the  last  of  the  month. 

Q.  You  said  that  the  Josephine  was  a  vessel  of  75  tons;  what  do  yon 
judge  was  the  tonnage  of  this  vessel  ? — A.  About  80  tons. 

Q.  How  many  men  were  on  board  f — A.  I  think  we  carried  16  men  on 
the  Josephine. 

Q.  And  on  the  other  f — A.  I  think  there  were  fourteen.  The  Jose- 
phine was  rather  a  clipper  schooner,  and  lengthy,  and  took  more  hands. 
The  other  schooner,  though  of  heavier  burden,  was  not  so  long. 

What  is  the  average  number  of  men  employed  ou  an  American  mack- 
erel Hchooner  f — A.    I  would  say  it  would  be  fifteen  hands  to  a  vessel. 

Q.  On  a  large  schooner  ? — A.  On  some  large  schooners  there  would 
be  as  many  as  24. 

Q.  Their  average  aize  is  from  7U  to  80  tons  ? — A.  It  is  about  65  tons. 
Some  are  smaller  and  some  larger.  For  that  number  of  tons,  fourteen 
or  fifteen  men  would  be  about  the  average. 

Q.  Are  they  all  employed  on  shares  ? — A.  In  some  ports,  as  in  New- 
baryport,  the  men  are  now  employed  on  wages.  This  has  been  the  ease 
of  late  years.  In  those  years,  generally  in  fitting  out  vessels,  four  men 
were  hired  to  take  a  risk  with  the  owners,  and  the  balance  of  the  crew 
were  hired  by  the  month.  If  they  had  fourteen  men,  they  shipped 
eight. 

Q.  What  wages  were  paid  1 — A.  From  $20  to  $40  a  month. 

Q.  According  to  skill  ? — A.  According  to  the  worth  of  the  men. 

Q.  And  for  how  many  months  were  you  employed  ? — A.  They  wonld 
commence  on  their  own  coast.  Some  would  go  out  south  during  the 
latter  part  of  April;  and  they  would  again  be  employed  on  the  Amer- 
ican coast  in  the  fall,  and  until  the  last  of  November. 

Q.  A  regular  mackerel  vessel  would  usually  begin  fishing  on  the 
American  coast  in  the  beginning  of  spring  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  follow  up  the  fish  and  catch  them  wherever  a  chance  presents 
itself?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  then  return  in  the  same  way,  fishing  down  the  coast,  ending 
in  autumn,  where  you  go  in  the  spring? — A.  Yes.  We  fish  right 
through  the  season. 

Q.  How  many  months  in  all  wonld  be  so  employed  ? — A.  We  would 
be  80  engaged  from  the  15th  or  20th  of  April  until  the  last  of  November, 
aud  as  a  general  thing  from  the  1st  of  May.  The  mackerel  fishery  is 
over  in  November. 

Q.  The  average  number  of  months  is  between  five  and  seven  f — A. 
Ye?. 

Q.  And  how  many  trips  would  you  make  in  that  time  ? — A.  They  would 
make  one  trip  out  south,  and  sometimes  two.  Then  they  would  go 
down  the  bay  and  make  what  we  call  three  trips,  landing  two  and  taking 
one  home.  They  would  ship  on  the  steamers  and  make  another  trip 
before  going  home. 

Q.  How  many  trips  would  they  then  make? — A.  They  would  besides 
make  one  after  returning  home,  and  sometimes  two ;  and  they  would  be 
Bbort  trips,  being  near  home.    Tb*  y  would  fit  out  in  a  fortnight  or  so. 

Q.  During  the  latter  part  of  the  season  the  fish  are  larger  and  fatter 
than  they  are  previously  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  those  caught  in  autnmn  are  the  largest  of  all  ? — Yes. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  what  the  mackerel  schooners  cost,  on  the  average, 
ia  the  States? — A.   We  have  mackerel-fishing  and  George's  fishing 


268 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


schooners ;  and  the  cost  of  what  we  call  a  Oeorgiaman  would  be  some- 
thing like  $6,000  or  $7,000  in  gold.  That  would  be  a  smallsized  vessel. 
A  Georgian  (ishermau  would  be  of  about  05  or  70  tons. 

Q.  The  greater  part  of  the  American  mackerel  Ashing  is  doue  in  yan. 
sels  of  that  class  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  altogether  of  the  largest  class  of  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  about  fourteen  men  are  employed  on  each  vessel  f — Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  number  of  barrels  the  vessels  caught  in  a 
yearf — A.  I  gave  it  in  the  bay  ns  four  huudroil.  I  vould  say  tbut 
would  be  a  fair  average. 

Q.  That  was  formerly  f — A.  From  1818  up  to  four  years  ago,  iu  niy 
experienc<^. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  would  be  an  average  catch  outside  of  the  bay 
on  the  American  shores  f — A.  O,  well,  some  vessels  would  go  out  soutli 
and  return  with  none,  while  others,  perhaps,  would  obtain  a  huudred 
barrels  and  more. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  the  average  ? — A.  The  average  catch  out  south, 
taking  the  spring  trips  for  ten  years  iu  succession,  say  from  1818,  would 
not  be  over  150  barrels. 

Q.  A  trip  ? — A.  That  would  be  the  catch  all  through. 

Q.  Making  two  spring  trips  ? — A.  Some  did  and  some  did  not ;  very 
few  did. 

Q.  With  two  trips  on  the  southern  coast,  do  you  think  that  tbev 
would  average  150  barrels  a  trip  i — A.  I  do  not  say  that  they  would 
average  two  trips  there ;  very  few  make  two. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  the  average  there  would  be  ? — A.  O,  I  would 
say  that  the  average  catch  would  be  150  barrels  for  the  spring  fishing. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  they  did  not  average  more  than  150  barrels  iu 
the  spring,  when  they  went  one  or  two  trips  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Some  went  once  and  some  twice  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  would  they  catch  iu  the  autumn  trips  off  the  Ameiican 
coast  with  the  same  vessels  that  come  up  here  ? — A.  Some  of  these  ves- 
sels would  remain  on  the  coast  of  Maine,  and  fish  there ;  some  made  very 
good  catches. 

Q.  You  have  undertaken  to  show  us  the  average  on  the  British  coast, 
and  I  want  to  learn  what  it  is  on  the  American  coast  ? — A.  1  would  give 
the  average  catch  on  the  American  shore  out  south,  taking  the  whole 
season  right  through,  as  200  barrels  a  vessel. 

Q.  You  have  given  the  average  spring  catch  aa  150  barrels? — A.  Yes, 
I  have  not,  however,  kept  the  run  of  fishing  on  that  coast  as  well  as  ou 
this  coast. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  as  much  about  the  American  as  about  the  British 
fisheries? — A.  1  have  kept  the  run  of  the  fishing  on  the  Gulf  better  thau 
on  that  coast,  and  for  this  reason,  that  I  could  not  be  in  two  places  at 
once. 

Q.  We  understand  that  you  do  not  know  as  much  about  the  Ameri- 
can coast  as  about  the  coast  nearer  home,  and  yet  you  have  knowu 
enough  about  the  former  to  think  that  the  fishing  there  is  of  very  little 
value  f — A.  It  is  of  very  little  value  to  our  fleet. 

Q.  Well,  stick  to  the  autumn  trip,  if  you  know  anything  about  it,  for 
the  American  coast.  What  is  the  average  number  of  barrels  that,  iu 
your  opinion,  the  American  mackerel  vessels  obtained  at  this  season  iu 
the  same  years  you  have  already  spoken  of,  when  the  fisheries  were  in 
their  good  condition —from  1848  to  1865, 1  believe,  was  the  period  you 
gave  us. — A.  I  do  not  think  I  could  compute  the  average  of  the  season, 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


2G9 


takiug  the  ruu  from  1848  np  uQtil  they  ooinmenced  the  seining  business, 
sav  four  years  ago. 

Q.  I  want  it  for  the  same  years  you  mentioned  with  reference  to  the 
catcb  here  from  1848  to  x805.  Lamp  them  together. — A.  I  would  put 
it  at  flomething  like  '250  barrels  a  vessel. 

Q.  I8  it  250 !— A.  For  the  hook-and-liue  tishiug  on  the  shore,  I  mean. 

(J.  Oil  the  American  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Ill  the  three  trips  they  would  take,  you  think  an  average  of  2.'>0 
Imrrels !— A.  Ye*,  for  the  season. 

( j.  That  would  be  150  for  the  spring  and  100  for  the  autumn  ? — A.  Yes ; 
tliey  would  land  two  trips.  They  would  land  at  New  York  and  sell  the 
mackerel  when  fresh.    These  are  not  considered  big  fish  trips. 

Q.  That  would  make  650  barrels  all  told  for  the  season,  with  400  for 
tie  bay.  The  bay  mackerel  are  perfectly  well  known  in  the  market 
among  dealers  as  distinguished  from  the  shore  mackerel,  are  they  not! — 
A.  They  are,  of  late  years. 

Q.  Which  brings  the  highest  price  in  the  market,  the  mackerel  caught 
otl'  the  American  coast  or  those  caught  up  heret — A.  Up  until  ten  years 
ago  the  bay  mackerel.  No.  ones,  always  commanded  the  best  prices, 
compared  with  the  American  mackerel.  If  anything,  I  think  they  were 
more  in  demand.  Of  later  years,  however,  the  shore  mackerel  appear 
to  be  the  fatter,  and  I  think  they  command  about  $1  a  barrel  more  than 
the  others. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  it  would  he  $4  or  $5  more  ? — A.  O,  no,  sir.  Per- 
haps you  allude  to  Nos.  threes  and  twos.  There  is  a  great  ditt'ereuoe  in 
the  numbers. 

Q.  1  refer  to  number  ones? — A.  The  difference  in  value  per  barrel 
wmUl  be  $1. 

Q.  Not  more? — A.  I  always  get  the  Boston  quotations,  and  find  the 
bay  mackerel,  number  ones,  quoted  at  $18,  and  the  shore  catch,  number 
ones,  at  $19. 

Q.  Now  for  number  twos  ? — A.  Number  twos  bring  likewise  $1  differ- 
ence. The  American  mackerel,  number  twos,  are  smaller  than  ours  and 
likewise  fatter. 

Q.  And  number  threes  ? — A.  In  large  threes  there  is  no  difference. 

Q.  When  you  get  to  threes,  the  British  catch  sell  as  well  as  the  Ameri- 
tau  f— A.  Yes.  Number  three  is  considered  everywhere  as  a  poor  brand. 
There  is  no  fat  about  them.  They  bring  about  the  same  price  as  long  as 
they  are  large. 

Q.  You  began  to  fish  on  your  own  account  in  1853  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  were  captain  of  a  Prince  Edward  Island  vessel? — A.  Yes.  She 
was  named  the  Montana. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage  ? — A.  Sixty  tons. 

Q.  How  many  men  were  on  her  ? — A.  Twelve. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  go  that  year — to  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  ? — A.  Up 
the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  on  the  western  shore,  along  the  bend  of  the 
island,  all  down  by  Port  Hood,  and  along  the  coast  of  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  And  the  following  years  you  went  on  an  American  vessel  as  a 
sharesmau.  Explain  to  the  Commission  what  that  is  ? — A.  I  so  went  for 
the  owners.  No  one  in  that  port  had  been  fishing  out  there,  and  the 
owners  always  put  in  a  share  man  when  they  do  not  know  the  ground 
themselves.  Each  port  generally  has  a  rule  of  its  own  with  regard  to  the 
fitting  out  of  vessels.  In  Newburgport  they  principally  hire  the  crews, 
itud,  suppose  the  owners  stay  at  home,  then  they  engage  a  man  to  take 
their  place,  and  they  pay  him  extra  wages. 

Q.  In  short,  a  sharesman  is  a  man  whose  duty  it  is  to  keep  count  of 


270 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


the  catcb  of  each  man  f — A.  He  fishes,  and  is  supposed  to  take  a  greater 
interest  in  the  voyage  than  the  others,  who  are  simply  on  wages. 

Q.  He  keeps  count  of  the  catch? — A.  No.  When  the  barrels  are  lauded 
the  owners  are  there,  and  of  course  they  count  the  fish. 

Q.  You  were  simply  there  on  wages  fishing,  and  not  superintending 
the  catch  ? — A.  I  took  care  of  the  mackerel,  kept  them  in  good  shape" 
and  saw  thpt  they  were  split  and  properly  cured,  in  order  that  they 
might  bring  the  highest  prices.  If  neglected,  these  fish  will  only  make 
threes,  though  if  properly  attended  to  they  would  have  made  cues. 
This  makes  a  difference  of  from  $6  to  $7  a  barrel.  For  this  reason  the 
owners  place  a  responsible  man  as  sharesman  in  the  vessel,  to  see  that 
the  fish  are  properly  put  up. 

Q.  What  wages  were  you  paid  as  sharesman  ? — A.  $40  a  month. 

Q.  And  were  you  in  the  vessel  all  that  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  this  vessel  cost  f — A.  She  cost  about  $5,00U. 

Q.  In  gold  ?— A.  About  $4,000  in  gold. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage? — A.  About  75  tons.  I  have  reference  to 
the  Ellen. 

Q.  I  allude  to  the  one  you  shipped  in  after  you  had  been  captain  ?— A. 
That  was  tLo  Ellen. 

Q.  Whai.  was  the  cost  of  running  that  vessel  ? — A.  I  did  not  have 
any  responsibility  of  that  kind. 

Q.  Your  knowledge  of  the  business  will  enable  you  to  tell ;  begin 
with  the  cost  of  the  cost  of  the  crew. — A.  The  wages  averaged  about 
$20  a  month. 

Q.  How  many  men  received  $20  a  month  ? — A.  About  one-third  of 
the  men,  young  fellows  and  green  hands.  Others  obtained  from  $25  to 
$30. 

Q.  One-third  of  twelve  or  fourteen  received  $20?— A.  One-third  of 
fourteen  did  so. 

Q.  Four  or  five  men  got  $20;  which? — A.  Four  men  received  about 
$20 — One-third  of  the  crew  did.    The  others  were  paid  from  $25  to  $30. 

Q.  That  would  be  $80 ;  for  how  many  months  ? — A.  I  think  we  were 
out  that  year  3J  months. 

Q.  Did  you  usually  make  short  trips? — A.  No.  We  then  made  one 
trip  down  here.  The  others  staid  a  certain  time  on  the  way  back 
home. 

Q.  Were  you  with  that  vessel  throughout  the  season  ? — A.  Yes. 
That  season  we  only  made  one  trip  to  the  bay. 

Q.  Where  did  she  go  afterwards  ? — A.  I  do  not  know.  I  left  her  at 
Newburyport  at  the  end  of  the  trip.  We  did  not  return  to  the  bay  tbat 
year. 

Q.  During  that  trip  four  men  were  paid  $20  a  month  ;  how  many 
men  came  in  the  next  grade  ? — A.  The  wages  averaged  from  $20  to  $30 
a  month. 

Q.  How  many  men  received  $30  ? — A.  Not  more  than  one  or  two.  I 
could  not  say  exactly.    Their  wages  were  $2.5  or  $30. 

Q.  I  merely  want  the  average  ? — A.  It  was  $25. 

Q.  For  fourteen  men  ? — A.  Yes.  I  mean  for  the  crew,  outside  of  wbat 
we  called  a  sharesman. 

Q.  Fourteen  men  were  paid  $25? — A.  I  would  not  say  fourteen,  but 
with  four  taken  out  this  would  be  the  ca.se. 

Q.  How  many  got  $25  ? — A.  Four  from  fourteen  leaves  ten. 

Q,  Ten  received  $25?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  the  other  four  cost?— A.  They  averaged  $40  a  month. 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


•271 


These  are  considered  by  the  crew  as  sbaresuieu,  because  tliey  are  hired 
to  replace  the  other  sharesmen. 

Q.  What  did  the  equipment  costf — A.  We  fitted  out  for  400  barrels 
of  mackerel,  and  these  barrels  then  cost  about  sixtytive  cents  apiece. 

Q.  Give,  if  you  can,  the  cost  of  the  barrels,  provisions,  salt,  bait,  &c., 
all  together. — A.  The  outflttiugs  would  co8t  about  $700. 

Q.  Give  us  the  items? — A.  There  would  be  about  one  hundred  barrels 
of  salt,  at  about  ninety  cents  each,  400  empty  barrels,  at  sixty  cents  each ; 
the  salt  then  cost  something  like  $1.75  a  hogshead,  and  that  comprises 
two  barrels.  I  also  put  down  $50  for  flour  and  beef;  sugar,  molasses, 
bread,  apples,  and  such  things  would  be  provided  besides.  The  minor 
outfitting  would  cost  $75. 

Q.  We  are  solely  dealing  with  a  schooner  with  a  crew  of  14  men  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  do  you  not  think  that  the  provisions  for  these  men  for  three 
and  one-half  months  would  cost  more  than  $75? — A.  I  only  gave  the 
small  stores  at  $75. 

Q.  What  would  it  cost  to  feed  these  fourteen  men  for  three  and  one- 
half  months? — A.  You  can  set  it  down  at  $1.50  a  week  each.  Tht^y 
pay  in  the  boarding-houses  $1.25  a  week,  and  on  board  their  provisions 
would  be  more  expensive.    They  allow  $1.50  a  week  for  this  purpose. 

Q.  That  would  be  vJ».  a  week  for  fourteen  or  fifteen  weeks? — That 
would  be  about  as  bear  as  you  can  get  at  it. 

Q.  What  amount  of  bait  was  taken? — A.  On  these  trips  we  gen- 
erally took  about  forty  barrels  of  pogies,  costing  about  three  dollars  a 
barrel,  and  some  clams. 

Q.  How  many  clams? — A.  From  six  to  eight  barrels,  or  perhaps  five 
barrels  with  40  barrels  of  pogies. 

Q.  What  would  the  lines  cost? — A.  A  trifle — $10, 1  guess. 

Q.  The  hooks  and  lines? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  insurance  on  such  a  vessel  or  the  outfittings  of 
the  trip? — A.  Many  do  not  insure  at  all. 

Q.  Tliere  is  not  much  insurance  taken  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  But  there  were  cases  of  shipwrecks  during  these  years?— A.  Yes, 
there  were. 

Q.  W^liat  other  expenses  were  there  ? — A.  Those  of  packing  off — 
preparing  the  fish  for  market  and  culling  them. 

Q.  What  would  the  Inspection  cost  per  barrel  ? — A.  Fifty  cents. 

Q.  And  branding  and  packing? — A.  That  is  included  in  inspection. 
It  would  cost  about  $1.25  to  inspect  each  barrel,  but  in  this  case  we  had 
the  barrels  with  us.    Inspection  means  the  barreling  and  all. 

Q.  You  did  not  then  rebarrel  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  of  mackerel  did  you  get  that  trip  ? — A.  I  think 
3D(>. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  the  price  at  which  they  then  sold  in  the 
market  ?— A.  This  was  told  us. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  it? — A.  1  think  No.  1  sold  for  about  $10  that 
year.  The  mackerel,  as  a  general  thing,  were  large.  There  was  never 
more  than  $2  difi'erence  between  the  price  of  ones  and  twos  at  that 
time. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  secure  on  the  Ellen  during  the  trip  that 
year?— A.  Three  hundred  and  ninety. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  say  that  your  whole  catch  consisted  of  No. 
11— A.  No;  but  this  was  the  case  for  two-thirds  of  it;  the  remainder 
would  be  No.  2.    We  had  no  threes  that  year. 

Q.  What  did  No.  twos  then  bring  ?— A.  From  $13.50  to  $11. 


272 


AWARD    OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  This  was  in  1854? — A.  Yes;  No.  ones  were  sold  as  high  as  $20 
that  3'ear,  but  the  average  price  was  $16.  The  inspecting,  branding, 
and  repaclcing  of  the  barrels  cost  fifty  cents  each. 

Q.  Now,  that  was  your  last  trip  in  American  vessel  ? — A.  No;  it  was 
not. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  next  American  vessel  in  vhich  you 
were  ? — A.  The  Fanny. 

Q.  Which  was  wreclied  ? — A.  No ;  she  was  not. 

Q.  Where  were  you  during  the  year  following  the  one  when  you 
were  on  the  Ellen  ? — A.  On  the  Julia  Franklin. 

Q.  That  was  in  1854?— A.  No;  in  1855. 

Q.  Where  were  yon  in  1856  ? — A.  On  the  Morning  Star. 

Q.  When  did  you  start  on  a  vessel  of  your  own  again  ? — A.  In  1857, 
on  the  Josephine.  I  was  proprietor  of  her  for  four  years.  I  have  run 
her  in  this  business  all  through,  with  the  Game  Gock  and  others. 

Q.  The  Josephiue  was  the  first  of  your  own  vessels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage  ? — A.  Forty. 

Q.  How  many  men  did  you  have  on  hw? — A.  Eleven. 

Q.  How  many  irips  did  you  make? — A.  Two.  I  went  late  the  first 
season,  an  1  was  out  two  months  and  eight  days ;  I  obtained  400  barrels. 

Q.  And  what  did  you  do  with  the  mackerel  ? — A.  I  shipped  them  to 
the  United  States. 

Q.  Yourself?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Direct  ? — A.  No ;  I  did  not  do  so  that  trip.  I  sold  them  at  Char- 
lottetown  to  I.  C  Hall. 

Q.  Thac  was  in  1857?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  was  no  duty  on  the  fish  then  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Where  were  you  in  1858  and  '59  ?— A.  In  1858  I  think  I  was  on  a 
vessel  belonging  to  Hall. 

Q.  As  captain? — A.  Yes;  I  put  a  man  on  my  own  vessel.  The  reason 
I  left  her  was  because  I  had  been  very  successful  on  this  vessel  the  year 
before.    She  was  of  American  style,  but  built  on  the  island. 

Q.  Did  yon  go  in  her  on  shares  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  shares  did  you  have  ? — A.  I  had  four  and  a  half  per  cent,  on 
the  whole  catch  and  one-half  of  the  fish  I  caught. 

Q.  And  the  following  year  you  went  back  to  your  own  vessel  ?— A.  I 
olitained  a  vessel  that  winter — the  Game  Cock— of  100  tons. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  with  her? — A.  In  the  bay,  in  the  mackerel 
business,  for  two  years. 

Q.  At  what  time  of  the  year  did  you  begin  ? — A.  In  July. 

Q.  What  was  your  vessel  doing  prior  to  July  ?— A.  She  went  up  to 
the  West  Indies. 

Q.  She  was  not  exclusively  used  as  a  fishing- vessel ? — A.  No;  sbe 
was  built  for  fishing  and  coasting.  She  was  a  coaster  in  winter,  and 
employed  at  fishing  during  the  summer. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  in  her?— A.  Two  years. 

Q.  This  will  bring  us  to  1860;  what  vessel  were  you  in  after  thatf— 
A.  In  the  Livy.  I  sold  her.  I  was  in  her  one  year,  and  in  1865  I  was 
in  her  again. 

Q.  What  did  you  go  into  after  1866? — A.  I  was  in  a  schooner. 

Q.  Did  you  own  her  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  bought  her? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  then  ? — A.  In  1867  I  was  in  the  bay. 

Q.  And  1868  ?— A.  Then  I  was  in  the  gulf. 

Q.  When  was  it  you  made  up  your  mind  to  give  up  the  business  on 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


273 


account  of  the  duty  ? — A.  In  1866.    That  was  the  first  year  cutters  were 
employed. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  of  mackerel  did  you  catch  in  1866  ? — A.  Two 
bnudred  and  forty. 

Q.  During  how  many  months? — A.  About  two  and  a  half. 

Q.  What  was  the  vessel  doing  the  rest  of  the  year? — A.  I  sold  her. 

Q.  And  what  did  you  do  the  following  year,  1867  ? — A.  1  went  buy- 
log  mackerel  along  the  coast. 

Q.  Of  farmers  who  caught  them  in  boats  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  what  did  you  do  with  them? — A.  I  shipped  them  to  Boston. 

Q.  Did  ycu  ship  or  sell  them? — A.  I  shipped  to  Boston  and  sold 
tbem. 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  sell  in  Boston? — A.  To  Hall  &  Merrick. 

Q.  You  dealt  with  Hall ;  he  was  on  the  island  ? — A.  They  had  an 
office  there. 

Q.  When  you  say  you  shipped  them  to  Boston  you  mean  you  sold 
them  to  a  man  who  lived  on  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  who  happened 
to  be  an  American  citizen,  and  to  have  another  house  in  Boston ;  do  you 
call  that  shipping  them  to  Boston? — A.  I  do  not  say  that  I  so  shipped 
tbis  trip. 

Q.  When  you  sold  to  Hall  &  Merrick  you  sold  at  Charlottetown,  did 
you  not? — A.  Yes;  but  this  was  not  the  case  with  all  my  catches  in  the 
Game  Cock.    I  shipped  to  Boston  on  my  own  account. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  the  lish  you  bought  around  the  island,  and  I  ask 
to  whom  did  you  sell  them? — A.  They  were  sold  in  Boston,  and  bought 
ou  the  joint  account  of  Hall  and  mj'self. 

Q.  Then  you  were  in  partnership  with  him? — A.  Yes;  they  were  all 
sbipped  to  Boston. 

Q.  Were  they  sold  on  joint  account  at  Boston? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  years  did  you  follow  that  system? — A.  Two  years. 

Q.  Were  these  fish  sold  as  American  or  as  British  fish? — A.  As  British 
fis)i. 

Q.  And  you  paid  the  duty  of  $2  a  barrel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  how  many  barrels  you  bought  the  first  year 
you  worked  on  joint  account  ? — A.  We  bought  about  five  hundred  bar- 
rels. 

Q.  What  did  they  cost  you  ?— A.  We  paid  from  $4  to  $8  a  barrel  for 
them ;  the  barrels  held  two  hundred  pounds.  We  bought  them  from 
the  fishermen — ones,  twos,  and  threes.  We  did  not  cull  thera  at  the 
time,  but  we  did  so  at  Charlottetown. 

(J.  When  did  you  resume  fishing? — A.  I  also  fished  that  year.  I  had 
the  vessel  out  fishing  and  buying  both. 

Q.  The  same  vessel? — A.  Yes;  the  Josephine. 

Q.  You  ran  her  on  joint  account  with  Mr.  Hall  ? — A.  Yes ;  she  was 
cbartered  on  joint  account.    She  was  a  British  vess*»l. 

Q.  This  was  in  1866  and  '67  and  '68  ?— A.  It  was  in  1868  and  187-1. 

i].  That  was  your  business  all  along  these  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  bought  as  many  fish  as  you  caught  probably,  did  you  not  ? — 
A.  We  bought  more  than  we  caught.  We  took  only  a  small  crew.  We 
bought  along  the  shore  and  caught  some  in  the  vicinity. 

Q.  Did  you  sell  goods,  too  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  A  good  deal  of  the  traffic  consisted  of  barter,  I  suppose  ? — A.  Yes; 
and  we  also  paid  cash. 

Q.  Tbis  brings  jou  down  to  1873  ? — A.  This  comes  down  to^l874, 
III  1875  I  went  likewise  into  partnership  with  Mr.  Hall.    We  took  in 
three  or  four  vessels,  and  traded.    I  went  down  to  the  Magdalen  Islands 
ISP 


■i^w:.^ 


■^ 


274 


AWABD   OP   THE   FI8IIERY  COMMISSION. 


u 


it 


and  bought  a  large  quantity  of  fish  there.    We  shipped  1,G80  barrels 
Ikat  year. 

Q.  You  did  not  say  much  in  your  testimony  yesterday  about  the 
nackerel  fishery  about  the  Magdalen  Islands,  did  you  ?— A.  Yes,  I  did. 

Q.  Is  not  that  as  good  a  place  for  catching  fish  as  there  is  in  the 
gnlf  ? — A.  No ;  it  is  not.  The  mackerel  there  are  principally  caught  by 
the  vessels  among  shoal  rocks,  and  in  small  spots  where  they  stay  a 
little  while  and  are  hard  to  get  out  of.  It  is  very  blowy  there  part  of 
the  year. 

Q.  And  you  do  not  regard  the  Magdalen  Islands  as  a  good  place  for 
fishing? — A.  We  do,  but  we  cannot  well  fish  there. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  great  deal  of  fish  caught  down  there  ? — A.  Some  fish 
are  got  there. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  great  deal  ? — A.  O,  yes — by  boats. 

Q.  And  by  vessels  ? — A.  There  is  good  herring  fishing  at  this  point. 

Q.  And  is  there  not  also  mackerel  fishing  ? — A.  There  are  some  mack- 
erel about  these  islands,  but  not  many  compared  with  other  parts  of  the 
gnlf.    I  should  say  that  about  one-fifth  of  the  vessels  go  there. 

Q.  One-fifth  of  the  entire  fleet,  British  and  American  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  the  other  four-fifths  do  not  go  there  at  all  ?— A. 
I  do  not  say  that;  they  are  back  and  forth.  These  vessels  are  like  a 
flock  of  birds,  flying  all  over  the  country.  I  think  that  is  the  average 
all  the  season.    I  mean  that. 

Q.  Then  one-fifth  of  the  fishing  done  in  the  gulf  is  done  at  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  not  more  ? — A.  Not  more ;  the  vessels  run  back  and  forth 
around  the  islands ;  they  do  not  stay  and  fish  at  one  place. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  seining  of  herring  at  the  Magdalen  Islands— is 
that  always  done  on  shore? — A.  Always  on  shore,  except  in  the  case  of 
purse  seining,  and  this  has  been  practiced  of  late  years  in  the  bay. 

Q.  These  seines  cannot  be  used  on  shore  at  all  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  They  require  deep  water  ? — A.  Yes,  though  they  have  seines  for 
shoal  water,  eight,  nine,  or  ten  fathoms  deep. 

Q.  But  the  great  bulk  of  the  purse  seining  is  done  in  deep  water!— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  any  diflBculty  experienced  in  seining  herring  on  the  Magdalen 
Islands  from  boats  ?  It  can  be  done  in  boats  ? — A.  Yes,  and  also  iu 
shoal  water. 

Q.  It  is  not  very  expensive  when  done  from  boats  ? — A.  No ;  of  late 
years  it  has  been  preferred  with  purse  seines.  I  have  found  the  her- 
ring there  during  the  last  twenty  years  I  visited  the  islands,  mostly  iu 
the  spring. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  Americans  buy  most  of  their  herring  ?— A. 
Daring  the  last  eight  or  ten  years  they  have  done  so ;  the  fish  cost 
from  four  to  five  cents  a  barrel ;  they  generally  call  at  Oanso  on  their 
way  down  and  charter  seines ;  they  give  so  much  a  load,  and  the  aver- 
age is  about  four  or  five  cents  a  barrel.  I  have  sold  thousands  aud 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  barrels  for  five  cents  each. 

Q.  You  sell  them  to  the  Americans? — A.  Yes;  and  to  our  own  vessels. 
They  usually  buy  rather  than  stop  and  do  shore-seining  for  themselves; 
they  find  it  comes  much  cheaper.  Of  late  years,  however,  they  canuot 
buy  so  many  as  they  did  on  shore;  this  is  due  to  the  purse-seining. 

Q.  Because  the  fish  do  not  strike  the  shore,  there  has  been  complete 
failure  iu  the  herring  catch? — A.  Yes;  for  four  or  five  years  purse-seines 
have  been  used  there;  and  it  has  been  found  that  the  fish  were  leaving 
the  shore.    A  large  fleet  going  down  could  not  get  enough  for  a  trip. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


275 


Q.  Parse-seining  is  a  very  comprebenaive  mode  of  catcbing  flsb  1 — A. 
It  is  very  handy. 

Q.  Yoa  can  thas  catch  fish  whether  or  no  they  are  inclined  to  bite? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  no  bait  is  required  ! — A.  No. 

Q.  And  you  do  not  have  to  wait  to  be  sure  of  getting  fish ;  whenever 
you  iiuow  there  is  a  school  you  can  take  possession  of  it  and  bring  them 
on  board  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  done  by  force  instead  of  by  fraud  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  think  that  the  seining  that  has  been  practiced  off  the  Ameri- 
cau  coast  accounts  for  the  poor  condition  of  your  bay  fisheries  during 
the  past  four  and  five  years ;  did  you  not  yesterday  say  that  this  was  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  Americans  took  possession  of  the  schools  on  their 
way  np? — A.  No.  The  American  fleet  did  not  frequent  our  waters 
much  last  year  as  during  the  previous  year.  Probably  if  they  had  done 
so,  they  would  have  had  as  good  fishing  as  during  former  years. 

Q.  You  think  the  trouble  met  with  last  year  was  due  to  the  fact  that 
tbe  people  were  not  here  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  say  that  this  was  the  case  on  Prince  Edward  Island  1 — A.  No, 
but  in  all  parts  of  the  bay. 

Q.  Perhaps  their  not  getting  fish  is  owing  to  the  absence  of  the  Ameri- 
can fishermen.  You  do  not  agree  with  the  fishery  report,  which  says  that 
the  mackerel  fishing  last  year  was  a  failure  on  the  coast  of  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island? — A.  I  say  that  last  year  there  were  not  as  many  fish  caught 
as  was  the  case  previously. 

Q.  You  would  not  call  the  fishery  a  failure  because  less  people  came 
there  to  fish,  if  the  fish  were  waiting  to  be  caught? — A.  Certainly  not. 

Q.  You  think  that  the  failure  of  the  fisheries  was  due  to  the  failure 
of  ttie  Americans  to  come  here  ? — A.  I  alluded  to  the  North  Shore  mack- 
erel flsbiiig  last  year. 

Q.  What  north  shore  ? — A.  Labrador,  and  down  to  Seven  Islands  and 
(laspe,  and  all  this  coast.  A  large  body  of  mackerel  were  at  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands  last  year. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  had  not  enterprise  enough  to  come  and  catch 
them  ?— A.  I  did  not  see  more  than  a  few  of  their  vessels  last  year. 

Q.  What  kept  them  away  ? — A.  I  think  it  was  because  they  had  ex- 
pensive seines,  and  because  they  found  fish  on  their  coast,  and  conse- 
quently they  would  rather  stay  there  than  come  down  to  the  bay. 

Q.  Then,  in  your  opinion,  the  failure  of  your  mackerel  fisheries 
spoken  of  in  all  your  reports  for  the  last  three  or  four  years  was  not 
<lue  to  the  fact  that  of  the  fish  not  being  there,  but  to  the  circumstance 
that  the  Americans  got  their  fish  at  home  ? — A.  This  was  not  entirely 
the  case.  The  same  body  of  fish  that  frequents  the  American  frequents 
our  shore.  We  find  them  in  our  waters ;  they  take  their  course  down 
the  Gulf  Stream  and  come  to  the  gulf  and  as  far  as  fresh  water,  and 
when  the  water  gets  cold  they  turn  ;  we  follow  the  schools  all  round, 
starting  from  Cape  May  in  the  spring. 

Q.  And  wherever  you  find  them  with  purse-seines  you  can  catch 
them,  can  you  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  now,  you  do  not  begin  to  fish  for  them  up  here  until  July, 
do  you? — A.  We  commence  in  June— about  the  15th  of  June. 

Q.  At  what  time  does  the  school  usually  arrive  oft'  Nova  Scotia  ! — A. 
They  do  not  strike  there  till  about  the  first  of  June ;  on  the  coast  of 
Prince  Edward  Island,  we  generally  fit  out  for  mackerel  along  about  the 
10th  or  loth  of  that  month. 

Q.  Xow,  by  manning  a  first-rate  vessel,  well  fitted  out  to  engage  in 


276 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


this  bnsinesfi,  the  proper  way  to  do  is  to  begin  in  the  spring  down  as  far 
as  Gape  May  and  then  to  follow  the  fish  up  and  down  in  the  mode  which 
yon  have  described  ? — A.  No ;  I  do  not  think  so,  as  a  general  thing. 

Q.  You  think  it  depends  on  where  the  fishermen  live  ? — A.  Princi- 
pally ;  but  we  cannot  have  the  benefit  of  the  American  shore  fisheries 
unless  we  winter  in  some  American  harbor. 

Q.  You  could  winter  in  Halifax,  could  you  notf — A.  We  would 
rather  winter  our  vessels  at  home. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  are  there  engaged  in  the  mackerel  fiahery— 
I  do  not  mean  boats  and  vessels — owned  in  Prince  Edward  Island  ?— 
A.  Well,  there  have  been  about  forty  sail. 

Q.  That  is  the  utmost  figure? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  tonnage? — A.  Forty-five  or  fifty-five  tons. 

Q.  What  other  parts  of  the  Dominion  are  there  where  mackerel -ves- 
sels are  fitted  out  ? — A.  There  is  another  pretty  large  fleet  fitted  out  in- 
side the  gut — the  Gut  of  Canso,  of  course. 

Q.  flow  large  is  this  fleet? — A.  It  belongs  to  Nova  Scotia  and  Cape 
Breton,  as  high  as  the  Gut  of  Canso,  and  up  to  Eastport,  Pelton,  and 
Calais. 

Q.  You  do  not  include  in  your  reckoning  Calais  and  Eastport?— A. 
^^e  take  '-alf  of  them. 

""  Ho.v  many  British  Canadian  vessels  are  engaged  in  the  mackerel 
:  ;..erv? — A.  The  British  fishery  fleet  for  some  six  or  eight  years  has 
consisted  of  some  two  hundred  sail. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  tonnage  of  the  vessels? — A.  Forty-five  tons. 

Q.  '->  10  ire  hardly  any  large  vessels  owned  up  here? — A.  There  are 
a  few.     '  iiav    seen  up  here  vessels  of  120  tons. 

Q.  Which  are  used  exclusively  for  this  fishery? — A.  Throughout  the 
summer.  There  have  not  been  many  of  this  class,  however,  engaged  iu 
the  fishing  of  late  years. 

Q.  And  why  not? — A.  This  is  due  to  the  depression  in  trade;  the 
markets  for  fish  have  gone  down,  as  a  general  thing,  and  they  have  given 
up  the  idea  of  fitting  vessels  out  expressly  for  the  mackerel  business; 
besides,  there  are  large  quantities  of  these  fish  caught  iu  seines.  They 
are  always  found  in  bodies. 

Q.  The  seine  fishery  has  controlled  the  market  of  late  years,  has  it 
not? — A.  It  has. 

Q.  And  the  hook-and-line  inshore  fishery? — A.  It  does  not  injure  the 
seine-fishing  on  our  coasts  at  all,  but  I  think  it  has  injured  the  dshing 
on  the  American  coasts. 

Q.  Did  you  find  it  pretty  bard  to  pay  a  duty  of  $2  a  barrel  on  jour 
mackerel? — A.  No;  I  did  not  so  find  it;  for  some  years,  at  least,  we 
have  not  paid  it.  If  the  American  fishermen  were  kept  oft"  the  coast  we 
would  think  notliiug  of  paying  a  duty  of  $2  a  barrel ;  for  their  catches 
would  then  be  small  and  they  would  have  to  pay  us  a  bigger  price,  and 
we  would  make  money  out  of  it. 

Q.  This  was  before  purse-seines  were  used  ? — A.  It  was  when  the  duty 
was  levied.  1  would  feel  pretty  sore  at  times.  I  would  come  around  a 
point  with  a  large  fleet  of  vessels  and  fish  within  the  three-mile  limit. 
A  cutter  would  come  out  but  would  not  take  notice  of  my  vessel  as  it 
was  a  British  vessel.  I  would  know  that  the  mackerel  would  strike  in 
for  the  shore  and  where  to  find  them,  and  often  having  waited  a  week 
for  an  opportunity  to  fish,  when  the  mackerel  oame  alongside,  I  would 
feel  it  pretty  hard  to  see  the  cutter  disappear  and  the  other  vessels  pop 
in  to  perhaps  not  a  mile  from  the  shore.  They  would  perceive  me 
catching  the  fish  with  glasses  and  tliey  would  make  for  the  schools.    So 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


277 


many  vessels  would  come  in  that  there  would  be  haxdly  room  in  which 
to  fisb.  Tbe  mackerel  would  at  once  be  taken  up  by  the  Americau  fish> 
ermen,  and  I  was  often  forced  to  leave  the  spot. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  Because  the  vessels  lay  so  close  beside  me  and  each 
other. 

Q.  But  you  were  nearer  to  tbe  fish  than  they ;  why  did  you  leave  ? — 
A.  Because  these  vessels  would  run  in  and  say,  *'We  are  going  to  fish; 
uow  is  our  only  chance." 

Q.  Wby  should  you  have  been  so  modest  as  to  leave  ? — A.  Because 
tfaey  would  come  alongside  and  say,  '*  This  is  our  chance  to  fish." 

Q.  Wby  had  you  to  get  out  of  their  way  more  than  they  out  of  your 
^ay  ?— A.  They  heave  to  with  tbe  wind  oflf  shore.  The  first  vessel  lies 
to  and  fishes  for  mackerel;  another  vessel  goes  under  her,  the  fish  leave 
tbe  first  vessel. 

Q.  Then  the  American  boats  draw  the  fish  away  from  you  ? — A.  Any 
vessel  which  comes  alongside  will  do  it. 

Q.  Wben  using  the  same  b  lit  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  does  not  matter  what 
kind  of  bait  you  use.  If  left  tbere  alone  we  had  a  good  business.  I 
thoagbt  it  pretty  hard  that  the  American  vessels  should  take  tbe  fish 
in  our  own  waters,  and  compel  us  to  pay  $2  per  barrel  duty. 

Q.  You  thought  of  giving  up  tbe  business  before  the  last  treaty  was 
adopted — tbe  Treaty  of  Washington — because  the  effect  of  the  duties 
was  so  bad  ? — A.  The  duty  did  not  affect  us,  but  the  American  fisher- 
men  were  allowed  to  come  inshore. 

Q.  Tbe  state  of  things  was  such  before  the  Treaty  of  Washington 
that  you  thought  of  abandoning  the  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  state  of  things  you  attribute  to  the  combined  effect  of 
the  American  fishing  and  the  duty ;  is  that  what  you  wish  us  to  under- 
stand ? — A.  Yes ;  I  certainly  came  to  that  conclusion. 

Q.  Your  government  vessels  did  all  they  could  to  keep  the  coast  clear, 
dill  tbey  not  ? — A.  I  don't  think  they  did.  We  followed  the  mackerel 
close  inshore,  and  got  among  tbem  as  quickly  as  possible.  We  might 
be  a  week  sometimes  in  a  barbor  waiting  for  the  fish.  We  had  then  to 
make  tbe  trip  in  a  few  days,  perhaps  24  hours  out  of  ten  days,  and  would 
run  along  tbe  shore  with  tbe  whole  tieet.  We  lost  no  time  in  making 
up  our  minds  to  get  ahead  to  tbe  mackerel.  Sometimes  tbere  would  be 
cutters  in  tbe  fleet,  which  would  be  300  sail. 

Q.  Did  you  talk  over  the  matter  of  tbe  treaty  with  Mr.  Hall,  the  gen- 
tleman with  whom  you  were  connected  in  business ! — A.  Yes ;  we  have 
talked  it  over. 

Q.  Do  you  agree  with  him,  or  differ  from  him,  in  opinion  as  to  the 
effect  of  allowing  your  fish  to  enter  the  United  States  free  of  duty  11 — A, 
AVe  have  always  acted  together  pretty  well. 

Q.  Is  it  your  opinion,  honor  bright,  that  you  lost  more  by  tbe  duty 
than  you  gained  by  excluding  American  fishing-vessels,  and  that  you 
are  the  better  off  today  bj'  being  allowed  to  import  your  fish  free  of 
duty  into  American  markets  ? — A.  No ;  it  is  not. 

Q.  You  would  rather  have  tbe  Americans  excluded  from  tbe  inshore 
fisheries,  and  have  your  fisb  imported  into  the  United  States  subject  to ' 
whatever  duty  tbe  United  States  thought  fit  to  impose  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  is  tbe  opinion  of  Mr.  Hall  ? — A.  I  don't  know 
that  it  is. 

Q.  Have  you  not  talked  with  him  about  this  specific  point? — A.  No ; 
we  talked  tbe  fishing  over,  talked  about  the  catches  and  duties,  and  all 
that  kind  of  thing. 

Q.  Have  yea  not  talked  about  the  specific  point  as  to  which  I  am 


278 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


asking  yoa ;  and  don't  .yoa  know  what  bis  opinion  is? — A.  On  tny  oatb 
1  cannot  give  Mr.  Hall's  opinion  on  ibis  matter. 

Q.  You  don't  know  the  opinion  of  the  islanders  T — A.  I  know  what 
Mr.  Hall  has  said. 

Q.  Don't  .you  know  the  opinion  of  your  own  island  to  have  been  tbus 
expressed,  that  if  the  duties  conld  be  removed,  they  were  content  to 
have  the  Americans  use  the  inshore  fisheries? — A.  No;  all  the  talk  ou 
this  matter,  and  everywhere  the  general  opinion  is,  that  it  is  no  equiv- 
alent whatever.  They  all  agree,  and  we  have  talked  over  the  fisheries 
in  our  meetings,  that  ever  since  the  duty  has  been  taken  ofi'— the  duty 
of  $2  per  barrel — we  have  no  equivalent  whatever ;  that  is,  the  giving 
to  us  of  the  American-shore  fisheries,  and  our  allowing  them  to  catch 
mackerel  where  they  please  is  no  equivalent  at  all.  The  American-shore 
fisheries  have  no  value  to  us.  That  is  the  general  opinion — that  is  the 
opinion  of  every  man  I  have  ever  had  conversation  with. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  removal  of  the  duty,  is  that  a  benefit?— A.  No, 
because  the  Americans  can  come  here  and  catch  fish  where  they  please 
and  glut  the  market. 

Q.  You  catch  more  fish  than  yon  did  formerly  ? — A.  Yes,  and  so  do 
the  American  people. 

Q.  You  are  sending  more  fish  into  the  United  States? — A.  If  the  fish 
were  not  caught  on  our  coast  by  American  fishermen,  there  would  be 
more  demand  for  our  fish.  They  cannot  supply  their  markets  from  the 
American  inshore  fisheries.    From  my  experience  I  know  it  has  failed. 

Q.  You  say  that  is  the  opinion  of  the  people  of  your  island  ?— A. 
Yes,  that  is  the  general  opinion. 

Q.  Was  that  the  opinion  of  the  people  at  the  time  the  treaty  was 
adopted? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  the  opinion  at  the  time  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  ab 
rogated  ? — A.  The  people  of  the  island  had  not  gone  into  the  mackerel 
fishing  very  extensively. 

Q.  At  the  time  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  abrogated,  was  it  the 
opinion  of  the  people  of  your  island  that  they  were  better  off  with  a 
duty  on  fish,  such  as  the  United  States  might  see  fit  to  impose,  and  the 
Americans  excluded  from  the  inshore  fisheries? — A.  Do  I  understand 
you  to  refer  to  the  Washington  Treaty  or  to  the  Reciprocity  Treaty ! 

Q.  To  the  Reciprocity  Treaty.  What  was  the  opinion  of  your  people 
then  ? — A.  At  that  time  there  was  no  duty  imposed  on  our  fish  by  the 
United  States,  not  to  amount  to  anything.  I  don't  know  that  there  was 
any  duty ;  that  was  before  the  Reciprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  the  time  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  ended.— A. 
When  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  ended,  and  the  duty  was  put  ou  mackerel, 
we  felt  in  this  way:  that  the  American  fleet  of  vessels  would  have 
larger  catches  on  our  shores  and  privileges  nearly  equal  to  us,  unless 
we  kept  them  outside  with  cutters,  and  yet  we  would  be  compelled  to 
pay  a  duty  of  $2  per  barrel  for  taking  in  the  fish.  This  we  did  not  look 
on  as  a  fair  shake.    This  is  the  argument  of  it. 

Q.  Did  yon,  up  to  the  time  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  ended,  regard  your- 
selves as  better  off? — A.  No. 

Q.  Considered  it  an  injury  to  them,  did  they? — A.  An  injury  during 
that  time,  for  we  had  very  little  fish  going  into  the  United  States  marliet 
before  that.  Our  trade  was  principally  with  our  produce,  our  crops, 
especially  potatoes.    When  the  duties  came  on  they  shut  up  that  trade. 

Q.  Did  your  people  not  regard  the  imposition  of  the  duty  on  fish  enter- 
ing the  United  States  as  injuring  you  more  than  yon  would  gain  by 
excluding  American  vessels  from  the  inshore  fisheries? — A.  No. 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


279 


Q.  Not  then  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  That  was  not  the  opinion  of  the  people  of  the  island  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  them  express  an  opinion  that  the  inshore  fishing 
is  worth  more  than  the  $2  per  barrel  duty  f — A.  Yes.  All  leading  men 
aud  men  interested  in  the  fishing  business  are  of  that  opinion. 

Q.  And  have  been  so  right  along?— A.  Yes;  since  I  have  been  ac- 
quainted with  them. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg: 

Q.  Where  do  you  reside?— A.  At  Bouris,  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Has  that  always  been  your  home  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  Jersey  people  coming  there  to  fish  sometimes  ? — A. 
That  is  on  the  Labrador  coast.  They  are  the  Jersey  people  from  the 
coast  of  England  ;  they  have  large  fisheries  on  the  Labrador  coast. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q,  What  is  the  population  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  SouActhing 
like  140,000. 

Q.  How  many  of  them  are  fishermen  by  business;  I  don't  meaa 
farmers  who  fish  in  summer? — A.  I  don't  know  that  we  have  many  peo- 
ple in  the  island  who  carry  on  only  the  fishing  business.  Farmers  fol- 
low tishing  as  much  as  anybody  else  in  the  summer  season. 

Q.  Have  you  a  considerable  number  who  follow  the  fishing  business 
(luring  the  year  ? — A.  No ;  they  do  many  things.  They  are  engaged  iu 
all  kinds  of  business  and  preparing  for  next  season.  Many  build  boats 
and  vessels. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  and  Prince  Edward  Island, 
what  was  the  nature  of  the  benefit  we  derived  in  the  island  from  that 
treaty  ? — A.  Our  produce  went  into  the  United  States  free,  and  wo  de- 
rived some  benefit  from  that ;  it  increased  our  trade  a  good  deal.  In 
fact,  at  that  time,  we  were  opening  up  a  new  country,  and  that  treaty 
was  the  means  of  clearing  it  up  aud  causing  a  great  many  more  people 
to  enter  into  business. 

Q.  We  shipped  oats  and  farm  produce  from  the  island  ? — A.  Yes; 
American  vessels  would  enter  our  harbors  and  buy  our  produce  and 
beef  and  pork. 

Q.  All  the  agricultural  produce  was  shipped  under  that  treaty  to  the 
States  ? — A.  Almost  all. 

Q.  So  far  as  the  fishing  is  concerned,  at  that  ti(ne  the  people  were  not 
so  extensively  engaged  in  the  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  the  benefit  which  it  is  claimed  we  derived  under  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty  was  chiefly  confined  to  agricultural  produce  ? — A.  Altogether. 
At  that  time  there  were  only  two  fishing  firms  on  the  island. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  $2  per  barrel  placed  upon  Canadian  fish,  do 
you  not  think  that  the  abolition  of  the  duty  would  be  an  equivalent  for 
the  admission  of  Americans  into  our  fishing  waters  ? — A.  I  say  it  is  no 
equivalent  at  all. 

Q.  Please  explain  why  it  is  not  equivalent. — A.  The  American  fish- 
ing fleet  come  down  here.  No.  2  mackerel  were  selling  a  few  years  ago 
in  Boston  at  $L3  per  barrel.  Owing  to  there  being  a  short  catch  on  the 
American  shores  they  are  quoted  at  $20  per  barrel.  If  no  American 
vessels  were  allowed  to  fish  on  our  shores  this  year  we  would  have  a 
good  pile  of  money.  I  would  not  wish  auy  better  business.  We  had 
bad  accounts  of  American  seiners  in  our  waters,  and  if  they  make  large 


■ft 


280 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMTSSION. 


: 


l^^' 


n 


W 


catches — and  they  cannot  help  it,  for  mackerel  are  there— the  price  of 
mackerel  will  fall,  and  we  will  lose  $5  or  $G  per  barrel  in  price. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  Magdalen  Islands  as  being  to  some  extent  a 
fishing  ground,  and  have  said  that  one  fifth  of  the  fleet,  in  all  proba- 
bility, would  fish  there  during  the  season  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Supposing  Americans  were  admitted  to  Magdalen  Islands  and 
excluded  from  Prince  Edward  Island,  Bay  Ohaleurs,  Nova  Scotia,  and 
the  gulf,  would  it  be  worth  their  while  to  make  fishing  trips  ?— A.  I 
think  a  very  small  fleet  would  come  down.  Allowing  them  Magdalen 
Islands  and  the  deep  water  of  the  gulf,  it  would  not  pay  to  fit  their 
vessels.  Occasionally  a  vessel  might  come  in  with  a  trip,  but  they  could 
not  make  it  a  paying  business,  and  they  would  look  at  it  in  that  light. 

Q.  One  reason  you  gave  for  not  being  able  to  take  advantage  of  the 
American  fishing-grounds  was  that  the  vessels  must  be  laid  up  ia 
American  harbors  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  About  what  time  of  the  year,  on  an  average,  are  you  able  to  leave 
your  harbors? — A.  On  an  average,  about  the  15th  May,  on  the  east  part 
of  the  coast. 

Q.  Would  it  be  worth  your  while  to  commence  a  voyage  to  the  Amer- 
ican shores,  leaving  on  the  15th  May  ? — A.  No.  We  would  not  meet  tbe 
first  school,  and  would  not  have  a  fair  show  with  the  American  fleet. 

Q.  Some  seasons  you  are  later  than  that? — A.  Some  seasons  in  Juue. 

Q.  Would  any  sane  man  on  the  island  attempt  to  prosecute  fishiugou 
the  American  shore  and  send  a  vessel  south  ? —  \.  No ;  I  don't  tbitilx 
any  man  there  would  attempt  it. 

Q.  Could  it  be  done  ? — A.  It  could  not  be  done. 

Q.  Supposing  you  could  get  the  vessels  out,  would  you  feel  inclined 
to  go  into  such  a  speculation  and  send  vessels  down  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Would  it  pay  to  get  out  vessels  and  send  them  down  there  ?— A.  I 
don't  believe  it  would.  I  cannot  see  there  would  be  any  encouragement 
to  do  it.  For  this  reason,  we  have  only  about  six  months'  fishing  season 
in  the  gulf.  If  we  built  vessels  specially  for  the  fishing  business  we 
would  have  to  leave  them  in  American  harbors  during  the  winter 
season.  The  expense  of  keeping  the  vessels  there,  and  travelling  bacii- 
ward  and  forward,  would  be  such  a  heavy  expense  that  it  would  not  be 
a  profitable  business. 

Q.  And  practically  it  has  not  been  attempted  ? — A.  No;  I  don't  tbink 
it  will  be  for  some  time.  I  think  I  do  the  principal  fishing  business  on 
the  island,  and  I  don't  think  I  will  attempt  it  any  way  for  ten  years. 

Q.  When  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  ended,  and  our  mackerel  were  taxed 
$2  per  barrel,  did  the  Americans  confine  themselves  to  fishing  outside 
the  three-mile  limit  ? — A.  Not  at  all.  This  is  what  I  complain  of.  I  was 
tied  up  both  ways ;  they  took  the  fish  from  me,  and  then  they  compelled 
me  to  pay  $2  per  barrel  duty. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  disadvantage  that  results  to  you  from  the  presence 
of  the  American  fleet,  explain  how  it  is  that  they  take  away  the  tisb 
from  you  and  compel  you  to  leave  the  fishing-ground  ? — A.  The  vessels 
gather  at  the  north  part  of  Gape  Breton  and  the  bend  of  the  island. 
When  a  wind  comes  from  the  north  we  run  to  Georgetown,  Port  Hood, 
or  Souris,  and  we  have  to  lie  in  harbor.  As  soon  as  the  wind  changes, 
we  take  two  or  three  days,  sometimes  a  week,  to  go  on  the  grounds;  we 
never  go  there  unless  the  wind  is  blowing  from  the  southward.  We 
afterwards  run  close  inshore  and  find  the  mackerel  there.  We  know 
that  the  fish  work  to  the  shore  when  the  water  is  smooth ;  when  it  is 
rough  they  lie  at  the  bottom.  The  vessels  heave  to  half  a  mile  from 
shore.    A  large  fleet  of  American  vessels  may  go  inshore,  if  there  is  no 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


281 


cutter.  They  may  have  been  there  very  early,  but  as  soon  as  they  see 
the  cutter  they  move  off  a  bit.  The  cutter  does  not  stop,  and  the  ves- 
sels begin  to  spread  along  the  shore.  They  will  not  go  inshore  when 
the  cutter  is  there,  but  they  enter  when  the  cutter  has  passed  by.  The 
American  vessels  come  alongside,  close  up  to  the  leeward.  Mackerel 
come  right  up  where  the  bait  is;  they  come  right  up  to  the  vessel,  and 
when  they  find  the  bait  and  the  vessel  drifting  they  follow.  I  have 
known  the  first  vessel  get  mackerel  as  fast  as  they  could  haul,  and  two 
minutes  afterwards  they  were  away. 

Q.  The  vessel  to  the  leeward  gets  the  catch  ? — A.  Yes ;  the  one  to  the 
lee  bow.  The  American  vessels  leave  others  to  go  in  and  raise  the 
mackerel,  and  then  go  in  and  lee-bow  them. 

Q.  They  take  the  advantage  of  your  being  able  to  go  in  aud  raise  the 
mackerel  f — A.  Yes,  it  is  a  practical  thing  with  them. 

Q.  llow  far  south  do  you  go  to  catch  fish  off  the  American  (;oast  f — 
A.  To  Cape  May. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  is  the  parallel  of  latitude? — A.  About  38°. 

Q.  Do  you  go  below  Cape  May? — A.  Yes,  we  sometimes  go  as  far 
down  as  Cape  Uatteras. 

Q.  Cape  Hatteras  is  in  about  35°  I — A.  We  don't  often  go  below  Cape 
May. 

Q.  But  you  sometimes  go  as  far  down  as  Cape  Hatteras? — A.  Yes; 
we  tind  them  down  that  far,  but  we  generally  leave  the  mackerel  at  Cape 
May,  which  is  a  good  place  to  go  and  meet  them. 

Q.  Is  there  any  fishing  in  Delaware  Bay? — A.  No  mackerel  fishing, 
but  there  is  good  shad  and  other  fishing. 

No.  2. 

James  B.  Maclean,  merchant,  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  called 
on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Brittanic  Majesty,  sworn  and 
examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  You  are  a  member  of  the  legislature  of  Prince  Edward 
Island?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Aud  have  been  so  for  some  years  ? — A.  Yes,  since  1869. 

Q.  Have  you  any  practical  acquaintance  with  the  fishing  business  ? — 
A.  I  have  had. 

Q.  Your  experience  has  extended  over  how  many  years  ? — A.  My  flrdt 
experience  would  be  about  1854. 

Q.  And  hasyour  experience  continued  more  or  less  from  that  date  up 
to  the  present  time  ? — A.  Yes,  in  a  general  way. 

Q.  Has  your  experience  been  of  a  practical  kind  ? — A.  In  1854  my 
father  kept  boats  and  was  running  the  fishing  business  in  connection 
with  farming  at  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island.  At  that  time  I 
used  to  go  out  in  some  of  the  boats  and  take  considerable  quantities  of 
flsh,  mackerel  and  cod.  We  had  trawls  set  in  the  spring  of  the  year, 
and  in  the  summer  season  used  to  catch  mackerel  close  in  along  the 
coast. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  go  on  board  American  vessels  ? — A.  Very  frequently. 
From  that  time  until  1869  and  1870 1  very  often  went  on  beard  American 
fishing  vessels  which  frequented  the  coast. 

Q.  Were  you  ever  on  board  an  American  fishing  vessel  as  a  fisher- 
man?— A.  I  was.  1858  was  the  first  year  I  went  out  fishing  in  an 
American  vessel. 


282 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1 


Q.  Do  you  remember  the  iiame  of  the  vessel? — A.  TUe  schooner 
Rescue,  of  Gloucester,  Mass. 

Q.  That  was  in  1858  f — A.  Yes,  I  was  a  boy  at  the  time.  I  was  not 
in  very  good  health  and  I  went  out  for  a  trip  iti  the  fall. 

Q.  Where  did  you  secure  Ash  ? — A.  In  the  bend  at  the  island  prin- 
cipally. 

Q.  What  do  yon  call  the  bend  of  the  island  f — A.  Inside  of  a  straight 
line  ftom  North  Gape  to  East  Point. 

Q.  When  you  were  in  the  Rescue,  in  185S,  did  yoa  fish  along  that 
shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  distance  from  the  shore  did  you  fish  f — A.  So^ietimes  within 
a  quarter,  sometimes  within  half  a  mile ;  we  never  flshe«  e  than  two 
miles  off  the  shore  there,  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  what  the  catch  was  that  season  ? — A.  The  catch 
was  pretty  large.  I  was  only  for  one  trip  in  the  Rescue.  I  went  out  in 
September,  and  we  fished  until  the  latter  part  of  October.  We  got  a 
full  fare,  as  many  as  the  vessel  would  take. 

Q.  What  quantity  would  that  be? — A.  About  450  barrels. 

Q.  All  were  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  coast) — A.  That  is,  there 
and  Gape  Breton  waters,  down  to  Margaree  Island,  Port  Hood,  Cape 
Mabou,  and  close  in  off  Broad  Gove.  We  were  once  so  close  that  we  put 
out  oars  to  prevent  the  vessel  going  aground.  In  calm  weather  the 
mackerel  keep  close  in  shore,  and  we  were  t^o  close  to  the  shore  that  we 
had  to  get  the  boat's  oars  out  to  row  the  vessel  off. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that,  whether  in  the  bend  of  the  island  or 
off  the  shore  of  Gape  Breton,  all  the  fish  were  taken  within  the  three- 
mile  limit  ? — A.  Yes ;  all  except  15  barrels.  We  went  to  the  Magdalen 
Islands,  but  found  no  mackerel,  and  we  came  back  to  Prince  Edward 
Island  and  found  mackerel  on  the  north  shore ;  this  r  ate  in  Octo- 
ber. We  followed  them  down  to  East  Point,  and  ran  i  that  night 
to  Port  Hood.  We  tried  off  there,  but  found  no  macK^.jl,  and  next 
day  started  across  and  met  the  mackerel  half  way  and  got  a  few  bar- 
rels while  they  were  running,  and  went  and  struck  them  again  at  the 
shore. 

Q.  Did  you  go  in  any  other  American  vessels  after  that? — A.  Yes; 
I  went  in  the  schooner  Fairy  Queen,  in  1859. 

Q.  When  you  were  in  the  Rescue,  in  1858,  what  was  the  number  of 
the  American  fishing  fleet  ? — A.  The  number  that  year  would  be  pretty 
large. 

Q.  How  many  f— A.  I  should  say  600  or  700  sail. 

Q.  When  you  were  fishing  in  the  Rescue,  within  a  short  distance  of 
the  shore,  what  is  your  evidence  regarding  the  rest  of  the  fleet ;  where 
were  they  fishing  f  Were  they  occupying  the  same  water  or  noti— A. 
When  we  were  fishing  on  the  north  side  there  was  a  large  fleet  on  the 
north  shore,  from  New  London  down  to  East  Point.  All  those  were 
fishing  within  the  shore  line.  When  we  fished  in  1858  near  Port  Hood 
we  saw  450  vessels,  American  vessels  principally. 

Q.  In  1859,  when  yon  were  in  the  Fairy  Queen,  what  would  you  esti- 
mate to  be  the  number  of  the  American  fleet? — A.  I  should  think  the 
average  was  about  the  same. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch  of  the  Fairy  Queen  in  1859  ?— A.  I  don't 
remember  the  exact  catch,  but  I  should  say  somewhere  about  250  bar- 
rels.   She  was  a  very  small  vessel. 

Q.  What  was  her  size  ? — A.  About  50  tons.  The  Rescue  was  from 
94  to  96  tons. 


AWARD   OF   TDK   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


283 


Q.  Where  did  you  make  your  catch  T — A.  Principally  about  Prince 
Edward  Island. 

Q.  In  the  bend  of  the  island  f — A.  Yes. 

Q,  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Close  in  shore.  Mackerel  keep  along 
the  shore. 

Q.  Where  did  the  rest  of  the  fleet  fish  that  year  ?— A.  The  fleet  which 
we  saw  with  us — and  we  generally  kept  with  a  fleet  of  vessels — all  flshed 
within  say  from  half  a  mile  to  two  miles  of  the  shore;  down  to  Port 
Hood  they  all  flshed  close  in. 

Q.  I  understand  a  large  portion  of  the  fleet  fish  in  the  fall  f — A.  In 
the  latter  part  of  the  season  they  go  up  to  Gaspe,  Seven  Islands,  and 
Sbippegan. 

Q.  Did  you  sail  on  board  any  other  American  vessel  ? — A.  No ;  that 
la  the  last  American  vessel  I  went  out  in  to  catch  mackerel.  I  went 
down  to  the  American  coast  and  went  out  to  the  Middle  Banks  in  two 
American  vessels.  We  went  out  in  November,  to  the  Middle  Bank,  off 
Cape  Cod,  after  we  went  home;  they  were  taking  a  small  catch  of 
mackerel  there. 

Q.  Did  they  take  a  heavy  catch  in  the  fall  ?— A.  In  that  quarter  I  am 
not  aware.  I  cannot  speak  from  experience ;  my  experience  is  confined 
to  one  year.  Some  seasons  they  got  a  moderate  catch,  and  at  other 
seasons  they  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  live  at  Souris  all  the  time? — A.  I  lived  at  East  Point  up 
to  1870 :  about  two  miles  from  East  Point,  on  the  south  side. 

Q.  Where  is  Souris? — A.  Fifteen  miles  from  East  Point,  on  the 
southern  side.    I  live  within  fourteen  •-liles  of  Souris. 

Q.  Had  you  an  opportunity  of  forming  an  opinion  of  the  fishing  fleet 
frequenting  the  bay  each  year? — A.  Yes,  I  had  every  advantage. 

Q.  How  were  you  enabled  to  form  an  opinion  ? — A.  I  remember  often 
seeing  them  coming  to  the  shore  with  a  heavy  north  wind ;  they  get 
close  under  the  south  shore  at  East  Point  and  anchor  along  the  shore 
for  miles.  I  remember  seeing  400  sail  anchored.  1  have  counted  them 
often.  I  have  seen  that  number  fishing  right  along  the  coast  close  in, 
both  on  the  north  and  south  side.  They  stand  in  the  north  side  and 
fish  for  mackerel  along  in  the  second  chapel  and  at  St.  Peter's. 

Q.  What  is  your  estimate  as  to  the  number  of  the  American  fishing 
fleet  which  frequented  the  bay  yearly,  excluding  the  past  two  or  three 
years? — A.  I  should  say  that  from  1854  to  1874  it  would  average  five 
hundred  vessels. 

Q.  There  has  been  a  slight  falling  off  since  1874  ? — A.  A  slight  fall- 
ing oflf  latterly. 

Q.  Do  you  include  1874  in  the  statement? — A.  That  is  including 
1874, 1  make  the  average  to  have  been  five  hundred  sail. 

Q.  Was  there  much  difference  between  the  fleetone  year  and  another? — 
A.  There  was  considerable  di^^rence.  I  think  there  would  be  between 
seven  hundred  and  nine  hundred  sail  in  the  bay  one  season.  I  don't 
remember  the  season,  but  I  remember  having  conversations  with  Ameri- 
can captains,  a  great  number  of  whom  came  ashore,  in  regard  to  the 
number  of  boats,  the  catches  made,  where  they  caught  the  mackerel, 
and  I  used  to  find  it  out  in  that  way. 

Q.  Has  the  number  of  the  fleet  during  the  past  two  or  three  years 
declined  to  an  appreciable  extent  ? — A.  It  has.  There  has  been  nothing 
like  the  number  of  vessels  in  the  bay  during  the  last  three  years  that 
there  was  formerly. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  reduction  in  the  number  ? — A.  I  have  not  paid 


■I'r 


284 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISIIKRY   COMMISSION. 


' 


inncb  attention  to  the  fleet  during  the  last  year  or  two,  since  I  have 
been  living  at  Souris. 

Q.  In  1875  and  1876  the  fleet  was  considerably  reduced  in  number  !— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  cannot  give  an  estimate  of  the  reduced  number? — A.  I  can- 
not. I  have  seen  a  number  run  on  the  coast  during  the  winter,  and  I 
had  conversations  with  some  of  the  captains,  but  I  never  found  out  au 
idea  in  regard  to  the  number.  We  have  not  had  nearly  so  many  fre- 
quenting the  port  of  Souris  as  in  former  years. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  result  thus  far  for  the  present  year  ? — A.  There 
appears  to  be  quite  a  number  of  American  vessels  in  our  port  this  sea- 
son.   They  have  been  making  catches  of  mackerel  near  East  Point. 

Q.  Taking  the  present  year — did  you  ever  know  the  number  of  ves- 
sels greater  at  this  time  of  the  year  than  now  ? — A.  The  American  fish- 
ermen do  not  remain  at  Prince  Edward  Island.  The  greater  purtion  of 
the  vessels  go  north  in  the  spring  up  to  Gasp^  and  those  points  for 
mackerel,  and  they  work  down  as  the  mackerel  grow  fatter,  after  spawu- 
ing,  and  they  catch  them  round  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  The  present  indications  are  that  there  will  be  a  large  fleet  there 
this  year? — A.  They  do  not  afford  ground  to  judge  by;  but  we  have 
beard  from  some  of  the  captains — we  have  heard  from  Captain  Lee,  of 
the  schooner  Giark — that  quite  a  number  of  seiners  would  come  in 
there;  they  tell  me  a  fleet  of  over  400  seiners. 

Q.  And  what  would  be  the  number  of  jiggers? — A.  I  did  not  inquire. 
Some  of  the  vessels  have  taken  200  barrels  in  two  days  on  the  north 
shore  with  their  seines.    One  vessel  took  230  barrels. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  the  seining? — A.  They  take  in  large  quanti- 
ties of  mackerel,  herring,  and  other  sorts  of  fish  in  the  purse-seines.  lu 
time  fish  die  in  the  seines  and  when  they  are  thrown  overboard  they 
poison  the  ground.  They  dress  the  mackerel  and  throw  the  offal  over- 
board, which  is  a  great  injury  to  the  parties  who  follow  fishing  in  boats. 
That  arises  from  the  offal  and  dead  fish  being  thrown  overboard.  Mack- 
erel are  very  timid,  and  if  you  make  a  noise  when  they  are  in  schools 
they  get  away  scared.  When  the  seines  are  thrown  round  you  cauaot 
find  any  mackerel  there  after  a  day  or  two. 

Q.  Then  the  result  is  very  injurious? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  fishermen  destroy  a  large  number  of  fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  of 
the  smaller  fish  and  herring. 

Q.  They  dress  them  on  the  vessels  ? — A.  They  do  after  a  certain  time. 
The  seiners  do  not  have  as  many  men  in  a  crew  as  the  jiggers;  they 
have  not  crew  enough  to  dress  the  fish. 

Q.  Within  how  long  after  the  time  of  being  caught  must  mackerel  be 
dressed  to  turn  out  good  fish  ? — A.  They  should  be  dressed  immediately 
to  be  good  fish,  within  half  an  hour  or  an  hour,  particularly  iu  hot 
weather;  within  two  hours,  in  hot  weather,  after  being  taken. 

Q.  Is  a  large  proportion  of  mackerel  destroyed  in  that  way  or  not  ?— 
A.  A  pretty  large  proi)ortion. 

Q.  Besides  other  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Besides  destroying  the  fish,  you  have  said  that  they  poison  tlie 
water? — A.  They  generally  anchor  to  fish  close  inshore  and  throw  the 
offal  overboard. 

Q.  Is  that  an  injury  ? — A.  My  experience  in  regard  to  the  fish  is  this: 
if  even  a  bucket  of  bloody  water  is  thrown  overboard  where  mackerel 
are  you  will  not  be  able  to  get  any  for  a  short  time.  They  go  down  to 
the  bottom. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


285 


Q.  Tben  yonr  opioiou  is  that  the  throwing  of  offal  overboard  is  in- 
jurious T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  the  boat  flshermen  dry  the  mackerel  t — A.  They  take 
tbe  fish  to  shore  to  dry  them,  unless  they  are  large  vessels  which  are 
fitted  out  for  the  season  to  be  off  the  coast  all  the  time.  They  land  the 
tish  on  stages,  and  dry  them  on  shore. 

Q.  What  is  the  practical  result,  supposing  a  vessel  dries  mackerel  to- 
day at  a  given  point,  would  the  fish  be  found  there  the  next  day  or 
not?— A.  I  think  not.  Where  there  is  a  large  fleet  and  they  dress 
mackerel  on  board  you  seldom  find  the  fish  there  next  day.  l^hey  make 
a  rule  when  fishing  along  the  coast  to  dress  mackerel  when  working  to 
windward,  so  as  to  keep  the  vessel  clear  of  the  ground  along  which  they 
are  fishing. 

Q.  Will  you  state  what  portions  of  the  shore  of  Prince  Edward  Island 
mackerel  most  frequent? — A.  From  Georgetown,  on  the  shoals,  Grand 
Eiver,  round  to  East  Point  and  Souris  Harbor — East  Point  is  a  very 
good  place — along  the  second  cbapal  down  to  St.  Peter's.  Mackerel  is 
a  shoal-water  fish ;  they  are  seldom  taken  in  deep  water,  except  when 
crossing  from  one  point  to  another.  They  are  found  on  banks  or  shoal 
grounds.  Their  bait  and  little  fish  work  toward  the  coast  and  the  mack- 
erel follow  it  inshore. 

Q.  What  time  of  the  /ear  do  they  take  them  at  East  Point  and 
Georgetown  ? — A.  They  commenced  about  the  time,  or  rather  ten  days 
ago— from  about  lOtb  July  or  15th  July  to  September  or  October. 

Q.  And  the  same  applies  to  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  They  generally  take 
the  fish  later  there.  The  large  catches  are  taken  later  in  the  season. 
When  the  mackerel  settle  down  after  the  heavy  winds  from  the  north 
tbey  take  them  on  the  Cape  Breton  coast. 

Q.  There  are  some  mackerel  caught  in  the  open  bay  ? — A.  Yes;  there 
is  a  small  portion ;  but  from  my  experience  and  conversations  with  cap- 
taius  generally,  I  think  that  the  number  of  mackerel  taken  at  any  dis- 
tance from  the  shore  will  be  very  small.  They  always  gave  me  the  idea 
that  it  was  only  when  the  mackerel  were  shifting  they  took  them  ex- 
cept on  shoal  grounds  and  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan. 

Q.  When  you  fished  yourself  where  did  you  take  mackerel  ? — A.  All 
within  three  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Then  the  statements  you  heard  from  the  captains  corresponded 
with  your  own  experience? — A.  They  always  set  the  most  intrinsic 
value  on  the  inshore  fisheries. 

Q.  What  proportion  do  the  mackerel-catchers  take  within  the  three- 
mile  limit  ? — A.  From  my  own  experience  in  fishing,  and  from  the  quan- 
tity I  have  seen  taken  when  fishing,  there  would  be  seven-eighths  taken 
within  the  three-mile  limit,  oveu  within  two  nules.  1  may  fairly  say 
three-fourths  of  the  whole,  from  conversations  1  have  had  with  difterent 
captains.  A  few  have  given  me  to  understand  tha:  they  have  caught 
mackerel  on  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan ;  but  they  don't  take  large 
catches  there.  They  are,  however,  large  mackerel.  A  few  Newbury- 
port  vessels  used  to  go  there  some  years  ago,  but  lately  they  don't  fish 
there  at  all,  except  for  a  very  short  time  in  the  spring. 

Q.  Can  you  account  for  the  mackerel  coming  so  close  to  the  shore  ? 
Can  you  give  any  reason  for  it  ? — A.  There  is  generally  a  large  quantity 
of  small  fish,  bait,  along  the  shore. 

Q.  On  what  do  the  mackerel  feed? — A.  Some  small  kinds  of  fish, 
lants,  and  shrimps. 

Q.  And  these  are  found  close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes,  generally.  I 
omitted  to  state  that  I  went  out  to  George's  Banks  in  the  winter  of  1860 


'M^ 


If 


^lU 


286 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


on  the  cod-fishing  business.  I  went  to  see  how  things  were  getting  on. 
I  made  three  trips. 

Q.  In  an  American  vessel  ? — A.  Tes ;  in  the  Happy  Louis. 

Q.  Can  you  speak  with  regard  to  the  efforts  made  by  the  cutters  to 
keep  American  vessels  outside  of  the  limits;  what  was  the  result  f— A. 
The  cutters  did  some  good  in  this  way :  when  cutters  were  in  the  imme- 
diate-neighborhood American  vessels  did  not  venture  within  the  three- 
mile  limit,  but  as  soon  as  the  cutters  were  gone  they  did  so.  For  in- 
stance, at  East  Point,  when  the  mackerel  were  on  both  sides,  and  the 
vessels  fishing  on  both  sides,  the  American  vessels  would  run  out  when 
the  cutters  came  round,  but  turn  in  again  within  the  limits  and  fish 
when  the  cutters  had  left.  It  was  the  same  on  the  north  shore.  Then, 
when  vessels  were  at  Mageree  Island  and  had  a  school  of  mackerel  there, 
and  no  cutters,  the  American  fishermen  had  a  free  chance  to  fish  inshore; 
and  when  the  cutters  were  there,  they  would  not  be  at  Prince  Edward 
Island  and  they  could  fish  close  inshore. 

Q.  How  could  they  afford  the  risk  of  entering  the  limits  f — A.  It  was 
this  way :  These  vessels  were  fitted  for  trips  for  mackerel,  and  when 
they  could  not  get  the  fish  outside  they  would  run  great  risks  to  get 
them ;  they  were  bound  to  get  a  trip.  They  were  never  afraid  of  any 
information  from  the  country  people,  with  whom  they  were  generally  on 
friendly  terms. 

Q.  Speaking  witL  regard  to  the  three-mile  limit,  would  fishermen  en- 
gage in  the  business  if  they  were  excluded  therefrom  ? — A.  I  think  not 
I  do  not  think,  if  I  had  a  vessel  and  were  going  to  engage  in  the  fishery 
business,  I  would  engage  in  it  if  excluded  from  the  inshore  fishery.  It 
would  be  a  too  uncertain  business.  You  might  catch  some  mackerel 
outside,  but  there  probably  would  be  none  at  all  outside.  Ton  might 
happen  to  hit  them,  but  not  in  any  large  quantity. 

Q.  Apart  from  running  the  risk,  would  any  prudent  man  engage  in 
the  business  under  such  conditions  t — A.  I  would  not  engage  in  it. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  boat-fishing  iu  Prince  Edward  Island,  will  you 
tell  the  Oommission  whether  that  has  increased  to  any  material  ex- 
tent?— A.  It  has  increased  lately. 

Q.  To  what  extent? — A.  I  suppose  it  has  doubled  during  the  last  few 
years. 

Q.  These  boats  will  take  the  fish  within  the  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  form  any  estimate  of  the  number  of  the  boats  engaged  !— 
A.  As  regards  the  eastern  section  of  the  country,  I  could. 

Q.  Show  me  what  you  mean  by  the  eastern  section. — A.  Say,  from 
Grand  liiver  or  Georgetown  round  to  St.  Peter's;  say.  King's  County. 

Q.  Including  Murray  Harbor? — A.  I  leave  out  Murray  Harbor. 

Q.  How  many  boats  were  engaged  fishing  there  ? — A.  I  should  say 
between  80  and  100  boats  from  Georgetown,  60  boats  out  of  Souris, 
between  80  and  100  boats  from  Souris  to  East  Point ;  from  East  Point 
to  St.  Peter's,  I  should  say,  80  or  90  boats. 

Q.  How,  is  it  an  advantage  to  these  boats  to  have  the  American  fleet 
fishing  alongside  them  ?— A.  It  is  a  decided  disadvantage. 

Q.  Explain  in  what  way. — A.  One  reason  is,  that  the  boats  throw 
over  a  smaller  quantity  of  bait  for  the  mackerel  than  the  vessels  do,  and 
very  often  the  fleet  of  boats  may  have  the  mackerel  inshore,  and  the 
vessels  will  come  alongside  and  throw  out  a  much  larger  quantity  of 
bait  and  take  the  mackerel  from  the  boats ;  and  iu  rough  weather  they 
drift  down,  and  the  boats  have  to  stand  clear. 

Q.  Do  the  boats  fish  at  anchor? — A.  Sometimes  at  anchor  and  some- 
times drifting.    Iu  some  places  they  fish  at  anchor  almost  altogether. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


287 


Sometimes  they  fish  on  the  spring,  bringing  the  boats  to  the  wind  so 
that  they  all  have  a  chance  to  flsh.  They  anchor,  and  turn  the  boats 
sideways  to  the  wind.  Vessels  also  in  calm  water  often  fish  on  the 
spring. 

Q,  Is  it  looked  upon  as  an  advantage  or  a  disadvantage  to  have  the 
American  fishing  fleet  in  the  neighborhood  ? — A.  As  a  decided  disad- 
vantage. They  look  upon  it  as  the  end  of  good  fishing  when  they  see  a 
larf;e  lleet  of  vessels  coming  in  where  they  are  fishing. 

Q.  Is  it  a  fact  that  the  extra  bait  attracts  the  fish  to  particular  grounds, 
and  makes  it  better  for  the  boat  fishermen  ? — A.  I  don't  think  it  attracts 
the  fish  to  these  grounds.  The  mackerel  have  certain  grounds  round 
the  shores  which  they  frequent.  They  visit  these  grounds  whether  the 
vessels  come  there  or  not.  The  vessels  break  up  the  schools  and  send 
tlie  fish  somewhere  else.  They  come  and  dress  the  flsh  close  inshore. 
In  heavy  weather  they  run  inshore,  and  they  throw  the  anchors  down, 
dress  the  flsh  and  throw  the  ottal  overboard. 

Q.  Supposing  CO  or  80  boats  were  out  of  Souris  harbor  fishing  and  the 
fleet  struck  in  among  them  and  dressed  their  flsh,  would  any  mackerel 
be  there  next  day  1 — A.  ^N^ot  in  any  great  numbers.  You  could  not  ex- 
pect to  get  nearly  so  many. 

Q.  You  would  get  some  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  Americans  have  not  come  down  during  the  last  two  or  three 
years  in  such  large  numbers  ? — A.  They  have  not. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  result  so  far  as  the  island  fishing  is  concerned f 
Have  the  flsh  been  plenty  ?  Do  you  remember  1874  T  What  kind  of 
a  year  was  that  ? — A.  A  large  quantity  was  taken  that  year. 

Q.  Has  there  been  a  better  year  for  many  years  past  ? — A.  I  don't  re- 
member  a  better  year  for  boat  fishing. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fish  was  taken  1 — A.  Mackerel. 

Q.  They  were  good  flsh  ? — A.  Some  were  large,  but  they  were  not  so 
good  as  I  have  seen  them.    They  were  not  a  very  large  run  of  mackerel. 

Q.  In  1875  and  1876  what  was  the  result  of  the  boat  flshing  f — A.  It 
was  not  so  good. 

Q.  What  kind  of  flsh  were  they? — A.  They  were  fully  better  fish. 

Q.  And  were  they  taken  inshore  or  offshore  ? — A.  Near  to  the  shore. 
I  have  seen  myself  along  the  coast  for  miles,  as  far  as  the  eye  could  see, 
vessels  among  schools  of  mackerel,  and  schools  of  mackerel  as  far  as 
the  eye  could  see,  either  way,  along  the  coast  right  inshore.  I  have 
seen  mackerel  taken  with  jigs  in  two  fathoms  of  water. 

Q.  Can  you  speak  with  reference  to  what  was  witnessed  on  the  west 
shore  of  New  Brunswick  up  to  Gaspe  ? — A.  I  have  never  been  fishing 
in  that  quarter.  I  have  only  learned  matters  from  captains  who  have 
tished  there. 

Q.  What  was  the  general  information  you  obtained  as  to  the  place 
where  they  fished  f — A.  They  always  fished  close  in  and  np  along  Garu- 
quet,  and  across  to  Gaspe  and  round.  They  always  fished  close  up  the 
shore. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  presence  of  the  American  fleet  is  not  an  advan- 
tage but  a  disadvantage  to  the  island  fishermen ;  are  there  any  advan- 
tages in  any  way  ? — A.  I  don't  know  of  any  advantages. 

Q.  Are  there  any  other  disadvantages  connected  with  the  presence  of 
a  large  American  fleet  on  our  shores  ? — A.  There  may  be  some  small 
disadvantages  which  are  not  worth  mentioning  here.  They  very  often 
frequent  the  harbors ;  some  are  pretty  rough  customers,  and  it  is  pretty 
hard  to  maintain  order  when  a  crew  of  these  fellows  get  ashore.    I  have 


288 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


! 


never  had  a  great  deal  of  trouble  with  them  myself,  but  I  have  seeo 
other  parties  have  trouble  with  them. 

Q.  Is  it  looked  upon  as  a  special  benefit  to  Prince  Edward  Island  that 
they  frequent  there  and  catch  fish  ? — A.  It  is  looked  upon  as  a  decided 
disadvantage,  because  they  supply  their  own  markets  with  fish.  The 
most  of  the  farmers  on  the  shore  have  boats  and  fish.  They  fish  in 
May,  June,  July  and  August.  iSome  of  the  very  best  farmers  aloug  the 
seabOkird  have  boats  and  employ  men  fishing  part  of  the  season. 

Q.  They  don't  view  with  any  degree  of  love  and  don't  regard  as  a 
benefit  the  presence  of  the  American  fleet? — A.  They  do  not. 

Q.  The  contrary,  you  say  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  not  an  injury  1 — A.  It  is  a  decided  injury. 

Q.  Is  it  a  material  injury  t — A.  It  certainly  is  a  very  great  injury. 

Q.  It  is,  of  course,  a  benefit,  all  things  being  equal,  that  we  should 
get  our  fish  admitted  into  the  United  States  duty  free.  Would  you  con- 
sider that  as  an  equivalent  for  the  right  to  fish  iu  our  waters  ? — A.  To 
have  the  duty  of  $2  taken  off  I  should  think  was  no  equivalent  at  all. 

Q.  Explain  why  you  hold  that  opinion  ? — A.  Because  I  think  that  if 
the  American  fishermen  were  not  allowed  to  come  into  our  waters,  close 
inshore,  our  vessels  would  be  quite  safe  iu  fitting  out  for  making  very 
large  catches  of  mackerel. 

Q.  When  you  have  large  catches  of  mackerel,  how  do  you  dispose  of 
them  to  advantage  ? — A.  We  dispose  of  them  iu  the  best  way  we  can. 
The  American  market  would  require  them,  and  the  Americans  would 
have  to  give  more  than  the  $2  per  barrel  duty. 

Q.  You  would  have  the  control  of  the  market? — A.  The  control  of 
the  market  to  a  very  great  extent.  If  their  vessels  were  excluded  from 
our  coasts  we  would  have  the  advantage  in  our  own  hands. 

Q.  Would  the  amount  of  duty  imposed  have  anything  to  do  with  it; 
suppose  it  was  $2,  $2.50  or  $3  per  barrel  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Who  would  have  to  pay  it  ? — A.  The  Americans  would  have  to  pay 
it  indirectly. 

Q.  But  with  the  presence  of  the  American  fleet  catching  side  by  side 
with  our  fishermen,  you  look  with  some  disfavor  on  them  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  Because  they  have  the  same  advantages  as  our  fisher- 
men, while  we  have  to  pay  $2  per  barrel  in  gold  to  have  them  placed  in 
the  United  States  market. 

Q.  If  your  privileges  were  preserved  intact,  you  would  be  quite  pre- 
pared to  pay  the  duty  f — A.  We  are  quite  satisfied  to  have  the  duty  ou, 
so  far  as  I  am  concerned. 

Q.  Can  you  speak  with  regard  to  the  advantages  arising  from  trans- 
shipment of  fish  to  the  American  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Just  explain  ? — A.  Having  the  right  to  transship  fish  saves  a  great 
deal  of  time  in  the  very  best  of  the  fishing  season.  It  occupies  irom 
12  to  20  days,  perhaps  longer,  from  12  to  24  days,  for  vessels  to  go 
home  to  the  United  States  and  refit  for  another  trip,  and  during  that 
time  it  may  be  the  very  best  of  the  fishing  season,  and  a  vessel  remain- 
ing in  the  bay  may  perhaps  have  a  whole  trip  during  that  time.  If  they 
land  their  fish  in  the  provinces,  say  at  the  Gut  of  Canso  or  Souris,  for 
example,  and  get  them  sent  home  in  sailing  vessels  or  steamers,  they 
might  have  another  trip,  where  otherwise  they  would  be  away  home  with 
their  fish. 

Q.  Is  that  the  practical  effect  of  the  granting  of  that  privilege  T— A. 
That  is  the  practical  effect  in  my  opinion. 

Q.  Suppose  you  were  asked  to  place  some  kind  of  approximate  value 
on  the  privilege  of  transshipment,  what  would  you  place  it  at  ?— A.  I 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


289 


have  bad  conversations  with  captains  who  were  just  about  going  to  the 
United  States,  who,  on  their  return,  told  me  they  had  spolcen  vessels 
golD^  into  Canso,  or  close  at  hand,  who  had  got  nearly  a  trip,  200  or 
300  barrels,  during  the  interim,  while  they  were  away  home  with  the 
trip.  These  vessels  which  they  had  seen  coming  into  the  bay  as  they 
were  going  home  had  taken  200  or  300  barrels  while  they  were  going 
home.  They  took  very  large  catches.  Mackerel  is  a  fish  that  is  often 
caught  in  large  bodies.  One  hundred  barrels  a  day  is  taken  by  some  of 
the  schooners  with  jibs. 

Q.  You  say  this  is  the  most  valuable  part  of  the  season — when  they 
have  to  go  home  with  the  first  catch  ? — A.  It  does  not  matter  whether 
it  is  with  the  first  or  second.  The  second  trip  would  be  generally  about 
the  middle  of  August,  when  there  is  generally  the  best  fish,  particularly 
about  Prince  Edward  Island.  I  have  seen  vessels  make  a  full  fare  right 
round  the  north  side  and  the  south  side,  say  in  three  weeks,  in  Au- 
gust and  September. 

Q.  Then  does  the  transshipment  privilege  enable  them  to  make  an 
extra  trip! — A.  It  would  enable  a  vessel  fishing  the  whole  season  to 
make  an  extra  trip.  For  instance,  a  vessel  with  the  privilege  of  trans- 
shipment will  make  three  trips  where  she  would  not  be  able  to  make 
over  two  if  she  went  home  with  the  mackerel.  Another  advantage  is 
that  they  can  transship  at  a  port.  Souris  is  right  in  the  fishing  ground, 
and  they  can  run  in  and  refit  some  day  when  the  wind  is  blowing  from 
the  north  and  they  cannot  fish,  and  be  able  to  go  on  the  fishing  ground 
the  next  day,  the  fish  being  forwarded  by  steamer.  They  might  also 
run  to  Port  Hood  or  Port  Mulgrave. 

Q.  Your  practical  experience  of  fishing  off  Prince  Edward  Island  and 
Cape  Breton  is  that  three-fourths  of  the  catch  is  taken  within  the  three- 
mile  limit? — A.  They  are. 

Q.  And  that  the  presence  of  the  American  vessels  is  an  injury  to  the 
hoat-flshing  ? — A.  Decidedly. 

Q.  And  that  it  is  looked  upon  with  dislike  and  disfavor  by  the 
people! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  the  offal  thrown  overboard  poisons  the  fishing  ground  f — A. 
Yes ;  it  fouls  the  ground  so  that  there  will  be  no  fish  there  until  a 
heavy  wind  has  washed  it  away. 

Q.  Have  the  Americans  of  late  years  bought  their  cod-fishing  bait 
here?— A.  Yes;  they  have  to  buy  their  whole  cod-fishing  bait  in  the 
Dominion. 

Q.  Is  that  a  great  advantage  ? — A.  Without  it  they  could  not  prose- 
cute their  cod-fishing  at  all.  It  affords  employment  to  vessels  which 
go  mackerel-fishing  during  the  winter.  They  go  down  to  Newfound- 
land and  take  bait,  and  they  very  often  go  south  in  spring  for  fruit,  or 
after  the  mackerel. 

Q.  What  other  articles  do  they  get  here  besides  bait? — A.  Very 
often  wood  and  water,  potatoes,  carrots,  and  vegetables. 

Q.  Do  they  get  ice  ? — A.  They  don't  get  ice  in  our  harbors.  When 
the  American  vessels  are  oat  on  long  trips  they  have  to  call  in  and  get 
stores,  for  it  would  be  inconvenient  to  carry  all  the  stores  from  home 
with  them.  Besides,  they  generally  get  the  fittings  cheaper  in  the 
provinces  than  they  can  at  home. 

Q.  Can  yon  tell  us  what  has  been  the  price  of  mackerel  daring  dif- 
ferent years? — A.  I  have  a  pretty  good  'dea.  They  would  average, 
from  1854  to  1874,  $14  or  f  15  per  barrel. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  price  during  any  separate  year? — A.  I  cannot; 
19  F 


i 


a 


,."^■'1 


290 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


bat  during  soiue  years  they  would  be  as  high  as  $25  per  barrel  for 
No.  1. 

Q.  How  low  have  they  gone  ? — A,  To  $9  or  $10  per  barrel. 

Q.  Have  No.  1  quality  ever  goiie  down  as  low  as  $0  or  $10? — A.  I 
never  knew  No.  1  as  low  as  that ;  $14  or  $15  is  as  low  as  I  have  ever 
known  of. 

Q.  .And  they  have  gone  up  to  $25?— A.  Up  to  $25  or  $26. 

Q.  'Are  you  giving  the  i)rice  in  gold  or  currency  ? — A.  The  gold 
^)rice. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whjit  the  prices  are  running  at  this  year  ? — A.  I  am 
not  aware  what  the  prices  are. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  the  catch  on  the  American  coast  has  been 
large  ? — A.  It  has  been  slim.  I  am  speaking  from  information  gleuned 
from  different  quarters. 

Q.  From  whence  did  you  derive  your  information  ? — A.  From  Ameri- 
can fishermen  and  from  letters  of  commercial  men. 

Q.  Who  have  been  fishing  on  tiie  coasts  themselves? — A.  Yes;  one 
captain  particularly  who  seined  on  the  American  coast  could  tiud  uo 
mackerel  along  there,  and  he  came  down  to  Canso  and  telegraphed  and 
found  there  were  plenty  of  mackerel  in  the  gulf,  lie  came  down  here 
and  seined  along  the  north  side. 

Q.  Has  he  been  successful  there? — A.  He  had  just  taken  45  barrels 
when  I  saw  him ;  he  had  only  made  one  haul  in  shoal  water. 

Q.  If  he  had  not  had  the  privilege  of  coming  down  he  could  not  have 
used  the  vessel  fitted  up  for  any  other  purpose  and  made  it  pay  ?— 
A.  He  would  have  had  to  have  gone  home. 

Q.  There  is  no  other  place  where  he  could  have  prosecuted  the  mack- 
>erel-fishing  except  on  our  coasts? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  codfishing ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  that  followed  to  any  extent  around  Prince  Edward  Island  !— 
A.  Not  by  Americans  ;  not  to  any  very  great  extent.  They  fish  along 
from  North  Cape  to  Cape  Breton.  Quite  late  in  the  summer  vessels 
are  fitted  to  go  down  there  trawling.  They  generally  go  down  to  the 
Magdalen  Islands  or  Anticosti  to  get  herrings  for  bait  and  go  baci£  to 
Cape  North  for  fish.  They  catch  them  in  trawls.  Occasionally  they 
come  to  the  island  and  trawl  along  the  coast.  Some  have  been  trawling 
for  hake  daring  the  summer  season. 

Q.  How  close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  The  best  fishing  is  in  10,  13,  or  14 
fathoms. 

Q.  Do  they  catch  halibut  along  the  shore  ? — A.  They  do. 

Q.  Not  to  any  very  great  extent  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Is  it  true  the  people  of  the  island  have  not  prosecuted  the  cod 
fishing  ? — A.  Not  very  much ;  there  is  cod-fishing  up  along  Bradley 
Bank. 

Q.  Is  there  good  fishing  there  ? — A.  Yes ;  very  fair. 

Q.  Is  it  prosecuted  by  the  island  people  ? — A.  Yes,  to  a  very  great 
extent  in  boats. 

Q.  Around  the  shores  ? — A.  Close  inshore,  in  from  2  to  20  fathoms. 

Q.  The  fishing  interest  is  a  very  large  interest  in  the  island  ? — A.  A 
very  large  interest. 

Q.  A  good  many  hundreds  of  thousands  of  boats  are  engaged  in  it  !— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  All  around  the  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  far  the  Americans  are  not  engaged  in  the  cod-fishing  business 
there  ? — A.  They  find  the  mackerel-fishing  during  the  summer  season 
pays  better. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


291 


Q.  With  regard  to  the  bait  ia  use  for  cod-fishing  and  mackerel,  where 
is  it  obtained  f— A.  They  very  often  use  herring  and  sometimes  pogies. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  the  herring  ?— A.  They  catch  them  around  the 
coast  and  at  Labrador. 

Q.  Are  herring  caught  there  ? — A.  Yes ;  there  is  quite  a  lot  of  herring 
taken. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  coast! — A.  Within  half  a  mile  of  the  coast. 

Q.  In  the  spring? — A.  In  the  spring  and  summer. 

Q.  The  different  fishermen — the  large  fishermen,  the  small  fishermen 
—don't  they  all  catch  their  own  bait  ? — A.  Yes,  with  nets,  and  for  mack- 
erelbait  they  take  capling — a  verj'  fat  little  fish — and  they  make  out 
that  it  is  better  bait  for  mackerel  than  pogies.  They  catch  them  in  cer- 
tain ponds. 

Q.  But  the  large  proportion  of  the  bait  is  herring  I — A.  Yes  j  but 
they  use  pogies  which  they  often  buy  for  bait. 

Q.  To  any  extent  ? — A.  The  vessels  which  go  fishing  generally  buy 
them.    They  prefer  herring  when  they  cannot  get  pogies  good. 

Q.  Where  do  they  buy  pogies  I — A.  They  generally  buy  them  on  the 
island,  where  they  are  imported. 

Q.  They  buy  them  from  the  merchants? — A.  Yes.  It  would  not  pay 
to  send  down  to  American  waters  to  fish  for  pogies  for  the  number  of 
vessels  engaged  in  mackerel-fishing. 

Q.  They  prefer  to  take  herring  to  do  that  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  of  any  island,  Cape  Breton,  Nova  Scotia, 
or  New  Brunswick  vessel  leaving  our  waters  and  prosecuting  fishing 
operations  in  American  waters  ? — A.  1  have  never  known  of  any  such 
case. 

Q.  Do  you  think  any  prudent  man  would  so  act  ? — A.  I  don't  think 
any  man  would  leave  our  own  good  fisheries  and  go  down  there.  I  don't 
think  it  would  be  profitable. 

Q.  Asa  matter  of  fact  it  has  never  been  done? — A,  To  my  knowl- 
edge it  has  never  been  done. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  the  herring  fisheries  of  the  Magdalen 
Island  ? — A.  1  have  been  there,  but  we  got  no  mackerel. 

Q.  Is  the  mackerel-fishing  prosecuted  as  much  there  as  around  Nova 
Scotia,  New  Brunswick,  Cape  Breton,  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  Ves- 
sels frequent  there,  but  not  so  much  as  they  do  Prince  Edward  Island 
and  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  One  reason  is  that  the  weather  there  is  stormy,  and 
tbey  seldom  have  large  catches  there.  They  may  pick  up  a  few  mack- 
erel around  the  coast,  but  they  seldom  get  large  catches. 

Q.  Supposing  American  fishermen  were  allowed  to  fish  there  and  ex- 
eluded  elsewhere,  do  you  think  it  would  pay  to  fit  out  the  American 
fleet?— A.  No;  for  sometimes  they  would  not  get  any  mackerel. 

(i.  How  is  the  herring  fishery  there  prosecuted  ?— A.  By  netting  and 
seining. 

Q.  Do  they  use  the  shore  for  the  purpose  of  netting  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Describe  how  it  is  done. — A.  I  have  never  been  there  myself— not 
seining  herria^ — but  from  what  I  can  learn,  it  seems  they  cast  their  nets 
ill  the  bay  and  take  the  herring  on  shore  or  into  the  vessels.  The  man- 
ner adopted  formerly  was  to  drag  the  nets  to  the  shore.  It  has  only 
been  during  a  year  or  two  that  herrings  have  been  taken  with  purse 
seines  there.  A  good  deal  of  herring  is  taken  for  bait  in  Newfound- 
land. 

Q.  Can  yon  form  any  estimate  of  the  catch  of  mackerel  of  the  Ameri- 
can fleet?— A.  Yes;  for  a  number  of  years,  but  it  would  be  very  difficult 


292 


AWARD   OF   THE   FI8HERT   COMMISSION. 


to  take  one  year.  For  the  twenty  years,  from  1854  to  1874, 1  should  say 
that  the  average  catch  would  be  about  500  barrels  per  vessel. 

Q.  As  a  rule,  did  you  fiud  the  quantity  from  the  captains  of  tbe 
vessels  ? — A.  When  I  lived  at  East  Point  they  frequently  came  ashore, 
and  I  had  often  conversations,  particularly  with  the  more  intelligent  nieu 
(there  were  some  fine  men  among  them),  and  they  were  very  glad  to 
have  a  chat  and  tell  and  explain  all  about  the  Ashing.  From  what  I 
learned  from  them  and  my  own  experience  in  fishing  I  should  judge 
that  each  vessel  would  take  500  barrels.  Some  have  taken  far  more, 
and  some  less  than  that;  some  of  the  large  class  of  vessels  took  from 
700  to  750  barrels. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  500  barrels,  you  average  that  as  the  result  of 
the  season's  work? — A.  As  the  average  of  the  season's  work ;  some 
were  far  in  advance,  and  some  not  so  much.  That  is  from  my  own 
personal  knowledge,  having  been  among  the  fleet  while  they  were  fish- 
ing, and  having  traded  a  good  deal  with  them,  and  having  seen  them 
very  often.  I  think  that  is  as  close  as  1  could  go  to  the  average  catch 
l)er  vessel. 

Q.  Do  you  know  much  about  the  cod  fishery  ?  Where  do  jou  con- 
sider is  the  market  our  for  cod-fish  ? — A.  The  principal  part  or  a  large 
amount  of  the  island  cod-fish  is  shipped  to  Halifax. 

Q.  It  is  not  exported  to  the  United  States? — A.  Not  from  Prince 
Edward  Island ;  they  do  not  ship  many  to  the  United  States. 

Q.  There  are  a  great  many  cod-fish  dried  in  Prince  Edward  Island!— 
A.  Quite  a  number. 

Q.  A  good  deal  is  shipped  to  the  West  Indies? — A.  A  good  deal  is 
sent  direct,  and  some  is  shipped  to  Halifax. 

Q.  The  large  dealers  send  direct  to  the  West  Indies  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  sent  here  is  sent  for  what  market  ? — A.  It  is  sent  to  the 
merchants,  who  forward  it  to  the  West  Indies. 

Q.  I  understand  you  know  it  is  shipped  by  those  merchants  to  the 
West  Indies. — A.  We  know  generally  with  whom  the  parties  deal,  and 
we  know  they  buy  for  the  West  India  merchants. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  told  us  that  there  was  an  unfriendly  feeling  among  the  people 
of  Prince  Edward  Island  toward  American  fishermen,  so  much  so  that 
they  would  not  give  them  correct  information  about  the  fishing.  Do 
you  understand  that  to  extend  pretty  generally  through  Prince  Edward 
Island  ? — A.  I  don't  remember  of  having  made  such  a  statement. 

Q.  Your  statement  was  that  the  shore  people  have  an  unfriendly  feel- 
ing to  the  American  fishermen,  so  that  they  don't  go  to  them  for  infor- 
mation.— A.  No;  I  don't  remember  having  made  that  statement  in 
regard  to  the  shore  people  having  an  unfriendly  feeling  toward  Ameri 
cans.    I  think  it  was  in  regard  to  boat  fishing. 

Q.  Kindly  state  in  what  form  you  put  it. — A.  I  don't  remember  iu 
regard  to  that. 

Q.  Don't  you  remember  saying  anything  in  regard  to  the  unfriendly 
feeling  ? — A.  I  don't  remember  using  those  words. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  you  did  not  use  them  ? — A.  That  thei  ejwas  a 
bad  feeling  ? 

Q.  Not  bad,  but  unfriendly.  Don't  you  remember  using  thos  wordsf- 
A.  I  don't  remember  having  used  that  phrase. 

Q.  If  you  did  use  it,  where  did  you  mean  it  to  apply? — A.  I  don't 
remember  having  said  there  was  an  unfriendly  feeling  between  tbe 
fishermen  and  the  people  of  the  province. 


AWARD   OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


293 


Q.  But  an  unfriendly  feeling  on  the  part  of  the  shoremen  toward  the 
fleet?— A.  I  remember  saying  that  fishermen  did  not  look  upon  the 
appearance  of  the  American  fishermen  in  a  friendly  way. 

Q.  The  phrase  you  used  was  that  the  American  fishermen  did  not 
inquire  of  them  tor  information  about  the  fisheries  because  of  the  nn- 
frieudly  feeling  held  toward  them. — A.  I  don't  remember  having  made 
that  statement. 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  to  say  you  did  not  say  it  ? — A.  I  am  not  aware  that 
I  said  it. 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  to  say  there  is  not  such  an  unfriendly  feeling,  whether 
you  said  it  or  notf — A.  Between  the  fishermen  or  the  people  generally? 

Q.  Is  there  an  unfriendly  feeling  between  the  men  engaged  in  the 
boat  lishiug  of  your  island  and  the  American  vessels  ? — A.  They  don't 
like  to  see  them  among  them  in  the  fishing  season. 

Q.  To  what  extent  does  that  go  ?  You  said  the  Americans  did  not 
go  to  them  for  information  because  of  that  feeling. — A.  I  don't  remem* 
ber  having  used  that  phrase. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  go  to  them  for  information  ? — A.  In  regard  to 
fishing— yes. 

Q.  To  get  information  as  to  where  to  find  the  fish  ? — A.  I  have  often 
seen  tbein  come  ashore  and  talk  over  the  fishing,  and  whether  we  have 
beard  where  the  catches  have  been  taken. 

Q.  Is  there,  then,  a  friendly  feeling  between  the  boat  fishermen  and 
the  American  fishermen  or  not  ? — A.  No ;  because  they  take  our  fishing. 

Q.  Another  reason  is  because  the  demoralizing  effect  of  the  presence 
of  American  fishermen  on  your  coast  when  they  come  ashore ;  do  you 
thiuk  that  is  deeply  felt  by  the  people  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ?— A. 
It  was  pretty  deeply  felt,  it  seems,  at  times. 

Q.  Do  you  thiuk  the  morals  of  the  people  of  Prince  Edward  Island 
have  clearly  advanced  during  the  two,  three,  or  four  years  the  American 
fishermen  have  been  less  common  ? — A.  When  we  talk  of  Ameiicans  we 
speak  of  all  the  parties  among  the  American  fishermen.  Of  course  there 
are  very  rough  crowds  among  them.  It  is  no  advantage  in  any  moral 
point  of  view  that  they  frequent  the  island. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  United  States  gains  by  their  absence  when  they 
come  here,  on  account  of  the  demoralizing  effect  of  their  presence? — 
A.  J  don't  know  in  regard  to  the  moral  effect,  but  in  a  pecuniary  point 
of  view  they  would  gain  by  their  absence,  because  they  take  back  large 
qaautities  of  fish. 

Q.  So  what  with  interfering  with  your  fisheries  and  the  demoralizing 
effect  of  the  American  fishermen,  your  people  would  prefer  that  the 
American  fleet  went  elsewhere  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  think  it  is  a  great  error  on  the  part  of  the  British  Govern- 
ment to  make  this  treaty? — A.  Yes ;  we  think  so. 

Q.  You  would  rather  have  the  fish  all  to  yourselves? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  think  that  is  the  general  impression  in  Prince  Edward  Island 
—that  the  trestty  is  an  error  ? — A.  So  far  as  I  am  aware,  it  is  the  gen- 
eral impression  that  we  would  be  better  oft'  if  we  had  our  own  fishery  to 
ourselves — the  inshore  fishery. 

Q.  You  say  the  American  fleet  interferes  with  the  boat  fishing  ? — A. 
Yes;  they  come  close  in  ar  Dug  the  boats;  they  take  advantage  of  the 
fish  you  have  raised  by  throwing  over  bait  from  your  boat,  and  they  get 
them. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  the  faculty  of  taking  that  advantage  is  an  Ameri* 
can  faculty  particularly ;  would  not  British  vessels  do  the  same  f — A. 
Americans  do  it. 


'*.1'i 


294 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Don't  yon  suppose  if  British  and  colonists  were  out  there  in  tlieii 
boats  they  would  do  very  much  the  same  thing  ? — A.  I  cannot  speak  on 
supposition ;  I  never  saw  a  British  vessel  do  that,  but  I  have  seen  it 
done  by  Americans. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  British  vessels  there? — A.  Yes;  and  I  have  been 
amongst  them.    I  have  never  seen  them  leebow  boats. 

Q.  1)0  you  say  they  don't  take  that  advantage  ? — A.  I  have  never 
seen  thein  take  it. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  British  vessels  would  not  do  the  same  thing?— 
A.  I  suppose  they  would  take  the  flsh  where  they  could. 

Q.  Would  they  not  take  the  advantage  of  going  among  the  boats  ?— 
A.  It  is  looked  upon  as  a  small  thing  to  lee-bow. 

Q.  It  has  excited  a  good  deal  of  feeling? — A.  Yes,  some. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  British  vessels  to  do  that  ? — A.  I  have  never 
seen  it. 

Q.  Then  it  is  an  American  habit  ? — A.  They  practice  it. 

Q.  It  has  been  stated  that  there  were  400  or  500  American  vessels 
fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  shore;  how  many  British  and  Canadian 
vessels  would  be  there  ? — A.  I  don't  know  the  exact  number  of  Britisli 
vessels ;  not  a  very  great  number. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  in  the  mackerel  fishing  are  owned  on  the  island  j 
sixty  or  seventy ! — A.  Not  that  many. 

Q.  Is  there  one-tenth  part  ? — A.  1  don't  know;  I  have  never  paid  any 
attention  to  it. 

Q.  Are  there  forty  ? — A.  "So. 

Q.  Did  you  not  hear  the  statement  of  Mr.  Chivarie,  in  which  he  placed 
the  number  at  forty  ? — A.  I  did  not  hear  his  statement. 

Q.  Would  you  differ  from  him  in  regard  to  that? — A.  With  regard  to 
the  island  vessels,  I  don't  know  the  exact  number.  I  have  seen  eight 
or  ten  or  twelve  out  in  the  fleet  at  once.  I  have  never  seen  British  ves- 
sels lee-bow  or  foul,  but  I  have  seen  them  fishing  there.  Our  vessels 
would  go  in  and  raise  the  mackerel,  and  American  vessels  would  come 
in  and  lee-bow  them. 

Q.  This  is  another  reason  why  it  is  nndesirable  to  have  American 
vessels  there — that  British  ships  raise  their  own  mackerel  and  then 
American  vessels  go  in  and  fill  their  vessels  ? — A.  That  is  done. 

Q.  That  is  the  general  impression  in  the  island  ? — A.  The  Americans 
don't  mind  who  raise  the  fish,  but  they  go  in  and  take  them. 

Q.  All  these  matters  which  you  have  stated  have  not  affected  your 
testimony  ? — A.  No ;  certainly  not. 

Q.  You  are  just  as  well  able  to  testify  the  exact  truth  without  any 
color  or  exaggeration  as  if  the  Americans  were  your  best  friends  f— A. 
I  am  here  to  do  that  upon  my  oath. 

Q.  You  are  quite  sure  you  are  able  to  succeed  in  it  ? — A.  I  am  able  to 
succeed  in  telling  the  truth. 

Thursday,  Ai(^ust  2, 1877. 
The  conference  met  at  noon. 
The  cross-examination  of  Mr.  McLean  was  resumed  by  Mr.  Dana : 

Question.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  the  boat  fishery  on  your  island 
had  doubled  within  the  past  three'  years  ? — Answer.  Yes ;  I  think  this 
has  been  the  case. 

Q.  You  account  for  that  in  part,  I  suppose,  by  the  absence  to  a  great 
extent  of  the  American  fleet ;  yon  say  that  the  presence  of  the  Ameri- 
can fleet  has  been  very  injurious  to  your  boat  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


295 


boat 


fishing 


has  doubled  iti  exteut  ? — A. 


Q.  But  nevertheless  your 
Yes. 

Q.  And  you  reconcile  these  twr  statements  by  the  fact  that  within 
tbe  period  during  which  this  has  doubled,  the  American  fleet  has  not 
been  ranch  in  your  waters? — A.  Yes.  Besides,  however,  there  is  another 
cause:  in  consequence  of  the  times  not  being  so  good  in  the  United 
States  latterly,  a  good  many  young  men  have  remained  at  home,  and 
tbey  And  that  their  own  fishing  proves  more  remunerative  than  any 
otber  business  they  can  go  into. 

Q.  But  how  long  have  they  been  found  more  remunerative  and  since 
when  have  these  persons  come  bacli;  it  has  been  within  these  three 
years,  I  understand? — A.  Yes:  latterly. 

Q.  Why  is  it  that  your  people  do  not  build  and  fit  out  more  vessels ; 
tbey  use  boats  for  day  fishing ;  would  it  not  be  better  for  them  to  cure 
as  fast  as  they  catch  ? — A.  One  cause  was  this :  When  the  American 
vessels  would  come  down,  they  practically  had  the  privilege  of  fishing 
\ritliiu  the  inshore  limit,  and  as  the  colonists  had  to  pay  a  duty  of  $'J 
a  barrel  on  the  mackerel  they  sent  into  the  United  States,  of  course 
they  could  not  compete  with  the  Americans,  who  paid  no  such  duty. 
British  vessels  could  not  compete,  and  a  great  many  of  the  men  left  the 
English  vessels  altogether  and  went  on  American  vessels,  as  they  could 
thus  make  the  most  money. 

Q.  Fishing  on  shares  ? — A.  They  generally  fished  on  shares  on  the 
American  schooners. 

Q.  And  then  they  bad  the  advantage  of  paying  no  duties? — A.  Just 
so.  In  Newbury  port  some  used  to  hire  a  crew  or  a  part  of  it,  but  as  a 
general  thing,  from  Gloucester,  Portland,  and  most  of  the  other  Ameri- 
can ports,  they  fished  on  shares. 

Q.  Is  not  this  fishing  business  very  largely  centralized  in  Glouces- 
ter f— A.  Gloucester  is  the  largest  fishing  port. 

Q.  The  business  of  Marblehead  has  very  largely  fallen  off  in  this  re- 
lation, and  of  all  the  other  ports  where  they  used  to  fish  a  great  deal? — 
A,  I  think  their  business  has  fallen  off  to  some  extent.  Gloucester  is 
the  largest  American  fishing  port. 

Q.  As  soon  as  they  come  to  be  on  an  equality  and  no  duties  were 
paid,  no  advantage  was  to  be  obtained  by  islandmen  in  going  on 
American  vessels.  They  do  not  gain  anything  by  it  ? — A.  I  should  not 
think  so. 

Q.  I  can  understand  the  farmers  who  live  on  the  coast  fishing  in 
small  boats,  but  why  do  your  enterprising  men,  merchants  and  young 
men,  not  take  out  fishing  vessels  of  60  and  120  tons  ? — A.  Many  of  these 
fishermen  are  farmers;  they  find  it  convenient  to  prosecute  fishing 
(luring  a  certain  season,  and  attend  to  farming  during  the  remainder  of 
the  season. 

Q.  There  is  anotber  reason,  I  suppose,  is  there  not?  Owing  to  the 
climate  and  the  amount  of  iie  you  have  about  Gasped,  the  Gulf  of  Canso, 
et  cetera,  your  vessels  have  to  be  unemployed,  if  built  for  fishing  pur- 
poses, for  so  large  a  part  of  the  year,  that  it  would  hardly  pay? — A.  We 
could  send  them  south  on  trading  trips. 

Q.  When  would  you  have  to  send  them  ? — A.  Any  time ;  generally 
(luring  the  month  of  January  ;  they  can  generally  come  down  during 
January — during  the  early  part  of  that  month,  at  all  events.  I  have 
seen  vessels  cross  in  February. 

Q.  How  is  it  in  November? — A.  They  have  during  that  month 
a  chance  of  crossing. 

Q.  Could  you  then  go  from  Prince  Edward  Island  to  the  United 


296 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


I 

■  >*, 

I 
S 


States  coasts  ? — A.  lu  some  seasons  navigation  closes  much  oailier  than 
in  others.  Somotimes  the  25th  of  December  is  the  latest  date  whea 
they  can  get  across. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average  time  yon  would  think  they  would 
have  to  lie  up,  if  they  did  not  get  out  toward  the  new  year?— A.  I  would 
Bay  from  about  the  first  of  the  year  to  perhaps  the  1st  of  April.  They 
could  not  well  get  back  until  April  or  May.  This  would  not  be  the  case, 
however,  every  season.  Some  seasons  I  have  seen  vessels  cross  io 
March. 

Q.  How  are  the  vessels  at  present  of  the  island  employed  during  the 
winter  f— A.  They  generally  lay  the  smaller  ones  up  during  the  winter, 
but  the  larger  ones  are  sent  coasting  to  the  West  Indies. 

Q.  Tott  mean  for  trading  T — A.  During  the  winter  season  and  the 
spring  they  might  go  fishing,  and  early  in  the  spring  they  could  prose- 
cute the  Cape  North  cod-fishing,  and  go  to  the  Grand  Banks.  In  fact, 
if  they  wish,  they  could  go  from  Souris  late  in  the  fall,  say,  during  the 
latter  part  of  November  or  early  in  December,  and  proceed  to  the  Grand 
Banks,  and  fish  during  the  winter. 

Q.  Then,  from  the  Grand  Banks  it  is  about  as  near  and  safer  to  run 
to  the  United  States  than  to  come  home  here,  is  it  not  ? — A.  Well,  it 
would  be  convenient  for  them  to  run  into  Canso  or  any  of  these  har- 
bors— Halifax,  for  instance. 

Q.  Or  to  Eastport,  Portland,  and  Boston ;  there  is  not  much  diifer- 
ence,  is  there! — A.  There  is  only  the  difference  in  sailing  ;  they  would 
not  be  troubled  with  ice. 

Q.  You  told  us  yesterday  that  if  you  had  a  Reciprocity  Treaty  gene- 
rally, so  that  all  your  produce  could  be  sent  into  the  United  States  duty 
free,  you  would  prefer  it ;  you  think  that  would  be  really  a  benefit  and 
boon  to  the  island  ? — A.  It  would  be  so ;  but  it  would  not  be  equal  to 
having  the  fisheries  kept  altogether  to  ourselves.  Beciprocal  trade 
would  not  equal  this  in  advantage  for  us. 

Q.  You  do  think  that  a  Reciprocity  Treaty  would  be  of  itself  a  boon 
to  the  island  f — A.  It  would  be  an  advantage,  but,  in  my  opinion,  it 
would  not  be  equal  to  the  privilege  of  controlling  our  own  fisheries. 

Q.  What,  under  such  a  treaty,  could  you  export  besides  fish  ?--A. 
Potatoes  and  oats,  the  products  of  the  soil,  and  perhaps  hay. 

Q.  Is  it  the  general  opinion  in  the  island  that  this  is  what  you  ought 
to  have,  and  what  it  would  be  expedient  and  proper  to  have  ? — A.  It  is 
the  general  impression  that  this  would  be  an  advantage ;  but,  as  I  have 
told  you,  it  would  not  be  equal  to  having  our  fisheries  to  ourselves. 

Q.  As  it  now  stands,  you  have  only  the  chance  to  export  fish  and  fish- 
oil,  and  you  don't  think  much  of  it? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  said,  I  think,  yesterday,  that  if  the  American  fleet  could  be 
kept  three  miles  off  these  coasts,  or  if  the  Americnus  .s  '\  to  with- 
draw from  these  fisheries,  you  could  comma » <1  tl)  American  tnuiket, 
even,  under  a  duty  of  two  dollars  ? — A.  Th!< '  ,  impression. 

Q.  You  could  not  do  that  by  boat  fish  juld  you  ?—     .  1  think 

we  could. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  day  bay  fishing  ould  ciiable  you  to  com- 
mand the  American  market? — A.  We  could  prosi  ute  the  fishing  in 
boats  and  send  the  fish  off  in  vessels. 

Q.  As  the  boats  stand  now,  and  with  no  duty  to  pay,  you  told  us 
nevertheless,  that  you  sent  very  little  fish  and  fish-oil  to  the  Uuited 
States? — A.  This  relates  to  codtish. 

Q.  Take  the  other  fish — herring  and  mackerel. — A.  All  the  mackerel 
go  to  the  United  States,  I  think. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


297 


Q.  All  you  send  away  1— A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Wbat  proportion  of  l^lie  mackerel  caught  by  the  boats — not  by  the 
larger  craft— do  yoa  think  goes  to  the  United  States?— A.  I  think  that 
the  greater  portion  of  them  do. 

Q.  Two-thirds  or  three  quarters  i — A.  I  shonld  think  so ;  yes. 

Q.  IIow  are  they  sent  there f — A.  Generally  by  steamers  and  sailing- 
vesselH. 

Q.  You  have  no  vessels  specially  fitted  for  that  purpose  T — A.  We 
have  traders  and  coasters ;  when  packets  were  running  they  were  sent 
by  them,  but  stoamers  have  taken  their  place. 

Q.  And  freight  has  to  be  paid  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  the  farmers  do  this  business,  or  is  it  done  through  some  com- 
mercial house  ? — A.  Some  of  the  farmers  who  are  pretty  independent, 
and  who  fish,  send  away  their  own  fish ;  sometimes  this  is  done  through 
an  agent  or  commercial  man. 

Q.  Some  commission  has  to  be  paid  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  all  cases. 

Q.  Freight  and  commission  to  the  person  who  sells  them  for  yoa  at 
Boston,  or  wherever  it  may  be  ! — A.  It  is  generally  supposed  so. 

Q.  And  still  it  is  so  profitable  that  two-thirds  or  tliree  quarters  of 
your  mackerel  are  sent  to  the  United  States? — A.  I  think  the  principal 
part  of  the  mackerel  is  sent  there. 

Q.  I  suppose  there  are  not  inhabitants  enough  at  home  who  care  to 
eat  the  mackerel  the  great  part  of  the  time  ? — A.  They  do  not  like  these 
fish  all  the  time;  but  they  generally  keep  a  barrel  or  half  a  barrel  of 
the  best  class  for  winter  use.    It  is  what  they  call  mess  mackerel. 

Q.  You  think  that  if  you  had  these  fisheries  to  yourselves,  this  fish- 
ing to  yourselves,  the  boat  fishing  would  very  largely  increase  I — A.  I 
think  it  would. 

Q.  And  new  vessels  would  be  built  ?— A.  That  is  my  impression. 

Q.  It  would  stimulate  your  industry  ?— A.  The  fishermen  would  at 
once  very  actively  engage  in  it. 

Q.  After  securing  the  mackerel  fisheries,  the  great  point  would  be  to 
get  the  American  market.  The  home  consumption  would  not  increase 
with  an  increase  of  production  ? — A.  It  would  not  be  very  large. 

Q.  You  think  that  the  right  of  transshipping,  buying  bait  and  pro- 
visions in  your  ports,  possessed  by  the  Americans,  is  a  great  advantage 
to  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  this  privilege  is  given  by  the  Treaty  of 
Washington  ? — A.  I  do  not  remember  so  now  very  distinctly. 

Q.  How  is  it  generally  explained  to  you  by  your  public  men,  your 
statesmen,  and  the  members  of  your  legislature  ?  I  believe  you  are  a 
member  of  it.  Has  it  generally  been  stated  to  your  people  that  the 
Americans  secured  this  by  treaty  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  generally  so. 

Q.  And  it  is  generally  understood  in  the  island  that  this  is  something 
for  which  Americans  ought  to  pay,  and  that  it  comes  in  among  the 
rights  for  which  they  ought  to  pay  under  the  treaty  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  the  advantage  altogether  on  the  side  of  the  Americans  ?  Do 
the  people  of  the  island  sell  these  things  to  the  Americans  merely  to 
benefit  the  latter,  out  of  friendship,  or  is  It  a  convenient  transaction? — 
A.  The  advantage  obtained  in  selling  these  things  to  the  Americans  is 
not  very  great. 

Q.  Do  they  do  it  out  of  pure  friendship  ? — A.  In  most  cases  when 
they  call,  sometimes  in  harbors  and  sometimes  along  the  coast,  it  is  done 
at  a  season  of  the  year  when  the  farmers  are  very  busy,  and  the  loss  of 
time  incurred  in  providing  these  articles  does  not  pay  them  with  regard 


^ 


298 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


r 


to  what  they  sell.    They  never  get  a  high  price  for  them.    The  Aineii- 
cans  generally  buy  cheaply. 

Q.  Why  is  this?    Do  products  not  bring  their  value  here  as  in  other 
parts  of  the  world  ? — A.  Prices  are  pretty  low  in  that  region.    The  fisli- 
ermen  are  practically  unacquainted  with  rates,  and  therefore  the  Ainer 
leans  get  provisions  and  outfits  at  a  cheap  figure. 

Q.  The  people  of  the  island  must  have  a  motive  for  selling  tliem  ? 
They  do  not  do  so  out  of  benevolence,  do  they  ? — A.  No  man  likes  to 
refuse  a  seaman  when  he  calls  for  any  stuff  he  can  get  or  possibly  spare. 

Q.  It  is  done  rather  on  the  ground  of  humanity  than  for  'jominercial 
reasons  ? — A.  Yes,  to  a  certain  extent.  Of  course,  in  many  other  cases, 
people  make  •*;  a  point  to  trade  with  the  Amerioans. 

Q.  Then,  are  these  persons  who  sell  cheaply  to  Americans  on  the 
ground  of  humanity,  the  same  with  those  who  withhold  information  of 
the  grounds  from  want  of  friendship  ?  You  mentioned  yesterday  that 
some  had  an  u  jfriendly  feeling  toward  the  Americans,  owing  to  their 
being  on  the  coast.  Are  there  two  classes  on  your  island — tho^e  who 
like  the  Americans  and  sell  to  them  out  of  humanity,  and  those  who  dis- 
like and  wish  them  off  the  coast? — A.  Those  who  are  more  actively  en- 
gaged in  the  fisheries  have  more  enmity  against  the  Americans  than 
others  who  farm  exclusively. 

Q.  Who  sell  the  Americans  these  articles  ? — A.  The  farmers. 

Q.  And  they  are  fishermen,  too  ? — A.  Some  of  them  are. 

Q.  Do  they  hold  both  views — selling  cheaply  toplease  the  Americans 
and  on  grounds  of  humanity,  and  at  the  same  time  feeling  unfriendly  to 
them  and  wishing  them  oft'  the  coast? — A.  I  suppose  some  sell  clicapiy 
because  they  cannot  get  any  more  from  the  Americans.  They  take  no 
matter  what  it  may  be  in  some  cases,  where  they  are  far  from  shipping. 

Q.  Then  the  ordinary  rules  of  commerce  regarding  buyer  and  seller 
do  not  hold  in  your  Lsland  to  a  great  extent? — A.  In  some  quarters,  in 
ports  where  there  is  much  tralfic,  of  course  they  have  generally  fixed 
prices,  as  at  Souris,  Charlottetown,  and  Cascumpeque,  and  these  places. 

Q.  Is  n)nch  stuff  sold  them  on  the  south  side  of  the  island,  as  at 
Charlottetown,  &c.? — A.  Yes,  a  great  deal;  but  not  so  much  at  Char- 
lottetown as  elsewhere.  These  vessels  do  not  generally  go  to  Charlotte- 
town. 

il.  Do  not  the  Americanv^i  come  to  these  ports  ? — A.  They  do  not  run 
up  the  straits  very  often.  It  involves  a  good  deal  of  delay.  Sometimes 
they  come  and  refit  at  Charlottetown  and  send  their  mackerel  home, 
but  this  is  some  distance  from  the  fishing-grounds,  and  the  passa^^e  occu- 
pies a  good  deal  of  time. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  the  farmers  traffic  with  them  very  often  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  can  tbey  get  from  the  farmers  ? — A.  Butter,  milk,  potatoes, 
cabbages,  turnips,  parsnips,  beets,  beef,  mutton,  and  anything  of  that 
sort. 

Q.  They  do  not  Sill  bait,  do  they? — A.  Xo;  they  most  generally  go 
to  the  ports  for  it. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  the  merchants  are  governed  by  the  rules  of  trade? 
A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  They  sell  to  make  money  T — A.  Yes,  as  a  general  thing. 

Q.  Has  not  this  traffic  with  the  Americans  been  going  on  for  uuuiy 
years? — A.  Yes;  as  long  as  I  can  remember. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  this  trade  to  be  interfered  with  by  the  author- 
ities?— A.  They  are  not  allowed  to  go  on  shore  and  trade,  but  they  can 
buy  for  cash  anything  they  actually  want. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


299 


Q,  You  never,  from  your  boybood,  knew  of  this  purchasing^to  be  iu- 
tertered  witb? — A.  No;  some,  of  course,  carry  on  trading  speculation. 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  a  coast  ingtrade  ? — A.  Some  of  these  fisberraen  used 
to  carry  articles  of  trade  witb  tbem,  which  they  would  like  to  barter 

off. 

Q.  That  was  done  to  a  considerable  extent  ? — A.  I  think  it  was  likely. 

Q.  Would  you  be  willing  to  admit,  Mr.  McLean,  that  on  the  whole 
this  trade  was  of  some  advantage  to  the  islanders  ? — A.  The  advantages 
gained  were  very  small. 

Q.  You  would  put  them  very  low  ?— A.  Yes.  If  the  farmers  who 
sold  their  produce  to  the  Americans  kept  it  until  the  fall  or  spring,  I 
think  they  would  always  realize  more  for  it. 

Q.  Then  you  are  of  opinion  that  the  Prince  Edward  farmers  do  not 
understand  their  own  business?  It  amounts  to  that,  does  it  not? — A. 
I  would  not  say  that;  but  many  of  them  are  not  very  well  posted  in 
conainercial  matters. 

Q.  Have  you  not  said  as  much  ? — A.  I  will  say  this,  that  if  they  held 
over  their  produce  for  the  spring  or  fall  markets  they  would  get  more 
for  it  tbijn  by  trading  off  to  the  Americans. 

Q.  What  has  led  them  into  a  mistake  of  such  long  standing  ? — A.  I 
cannot  account  for  it. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  Americans  buy  bait  for  cod-fishing  to  some  ex- 
tent of  your  people  ? — A.  They  get  bait  on  the  Newfoundland  coast,  on 
tlie  cost  of  Anticosti,  and  at  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Do  they  buy  bait  for  cod-fishing  on  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  I 
do  not  think  that  they  purchase  a  great  deal  of  it  there.  When  they 
come  into  the  fishing  ports  they  sometimes  buy  bait,  if  it  is  scarce,  when 
parties  have  it  on  hand  for  sale. 

Q.  And  your  own  people  are  buying  bait  from  the  United  States! — 
A.  They  sometimes  do  so. 

Q.  You  said  that  they  very  often  bought  pogies  which  were  used  by 
your  people  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  mean  menhaden — it  is  the  same  thing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  the  merchants  get  their  pogies  ?— A.  From  the  States. 

Q.  Do  you  really  suppose  that  the  American  fishermen,  instead  of 
buying  menhaden  from  first  bands,  would  buy  them  of  your  merchants, 
paying  their  profit,  and  commissions,  and  freight,  and  all  that? — A. 
les.  I  have  seen  these  fishermen  buy  them  when  their  own  bait  had 
turned  sour  or  was  bad.  If  the  merchants  have  a  quantity  of  good  bait 
on  hand  they  can  generally  sell  it. 

Q.  Is  that  considered  an  article  of  trade? — A.  No;  not  to  a  great 
extent. 

Q.  Tlien  the  Americans  get  caught ;  their  bait  sometimes  turns  sour? 
—A.  Yes.  Consequently,  of  course,  it  out  with  other  vessels  fishing,  a 
vessel  having  bad  bait  could  not  secure  her  share  of  the  fish. 

Q.  Can  they  not  catch  something  else  to  be  used  in  place  of  it;  her- 
nng,  for  instance? — A.  Not  always.  The  mackerel-catchers  could  not 
wait  for  this.    Their  business  is  to  catch  mackerel. 

Q.  lUit  they  can  obtain  it  at  the  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  It  would 
take  too  much  time  to  cross  to  that  point. 

Q.  Your  own  fishermen  could  not  get  across  any  sooner?  -A.  No. 

Q.  If  you  could  fit  out  a  great  number  of  large  vessels  ior  mackerel- 
fishing,  you  would  want  to  import  a  good  deal  of  this  bait,  pogies  or 
menhaden,  would  you  not? — A.  Yes;  we  would  then,  likely,  import 
quite  a  lot  of  it.    They  could,  however,  use  herring,  if  no  mebadeu  or 


!i 


:i'i 


m 


\.n 


'm 


300 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


I 


pogies  were  thrown  into  the  fishing  ground.  Herrings  would  do  nearly 
as  well. 

Q.  But  the  fish  want  something  better  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  have  you  dealt  in  as  a  merchant  f — A.  Principally  in  dry- 
goods,  groceries,  and  hardware. 

Q.  You  import  these  goods  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  import  from  the  United  States? — A.  We  import  some 
hardware  and  glassware  from  there. 

Q.  You  do  not  deal  in  vegetables  ? — A.  Not  to  a  great  extent. 

Q.  Or  in  cotton  ? — A.  No ;  we  do  not  do  much  in  cotton  goods. 

Q.  You  do  not,  of  course,  import  woolen  or  flannel  goods  from  the 
United  States? — A.  No;  hardware  and  glassware  are  the  only  things. 

Q.  You  deal  in  them,  and  also  what  we  in  America  call  dry- goods  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  that  you  are  more  interested  in  that  trade  as  a  merchant  than 
in  any  other  way  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  as  a  merchant  sell  for  cash  altogethei  ? — A.  No ;  we  do 
not. 

Q.  You  barter  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  barter  for  hsh,  don't  you? — A.  Sometimes  we  take  fish,  but 
not  to  any  great  exten'..  We  generally  take  produce,  oats  and  pota- 
toes, in  exchange. 

Q.  To  whom  do  yon  sell  your  goods  ? — A.  To  the  people  residing  in 
the  village  and  surrounding  country. 

Q.  Do  you  never  sell  anything  to  the  vessels? — A.  Well,  very  little, 
of  late  years.    We  do  not  trade  much  with  them. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  lines  and  hooks  and  other  things  ? — A.  Sometimes 
we  sell  them. 

Q.  To  your  own  people  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  to  the  Americans  ? — A.  They  very  seldom  require  them.  They 
generally  fit  out  at  home ;  but  they  may  occasionally  come  on  shore  and 
get  a  few  hooks  and  lines. 

Q.  Your  place  of  business  is  at  Souris,  on  the  east  coast  ? — A.  On  the 
southern  and  eastern  coast. 

Q.  How  many  inhabitants  has  it  ? — A.  About  1,500.    It  is  not  large. 

Q.  There  are  other  stores  in  the  place  besides  your  own  ? — A.  Yes ; 
they  number  some  twenty-five  or  thirty. 

Q.  What  has  caused  so  much  trading  in  a  place  having  so  few  inhab- 
itants ? — A.  There  is  a  large  country  around  it. 

Q.  Has  the  presence  of  the  vessels  anything  to  do  with  it  ? — A.  I 
do  not  think  so ;  not  to  any  very  great  extent.  It  is  in  a  large  farming 
country.  The  soil  is  excellent,  and  of  course  a  good  many  articles  are 
required  by  the  population. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  purse-seining  on  the  American  coast  has,  during 
the  last  three  years,  diminished  the  number  of  mackerel  that  came 
north  into  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  and  around  your  island  ?— A. 
I  do  not  know  that.  I  am  aware  that  there  are  very  few  mackerel  this 
season  on  the  American  coast.  I  have  conversed  with  parties  that  have 
prosecuted  the  business  there,  and  they  were  of  opinion  that  seining 
is  clearing  out  the  mackerel  on  the  American  coast. 

Q.  Have  you  examined  into  the  question  to  ascertain  whether  this 
has  been  the  case  ? — A.  No.  I  have  nothing  more  on  this  point  than 
the  opinion  of  experienced  captains. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  how  largely  day-fishing  in  small  vessels  is  carried 
on  in  Massachusetts  Bay? — A.  I  am  not  aware.  I  have  only  fished 
once,  and  that  was  eight  years  ago— in  the  fall  of  1869.    I  went  in  a 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


301 


schooner  across  to  the  Middle  Bank  in  iNovember,  and  was  absent  on 
the  trip  a  short  time. 

Q.  You  said  tbat  you  would  be  able  to  command  the  American  mar- 
ket if  the  American  fleet  were  withdrawn  and  a  duty  imposed.  1  do 
uot  mean  a  $2  duty,  but  whatever  Congress  may  see  fit  to  put  on.  Of 
course  if  it  were  very  high  it  would  exclude  you  from  that  market. — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Suppose  it  remained  about  $2  a  barrel,  is  not  your  theory  that 
you  could  command  a  market  of  forty  millions  a  little  fanciful  when  you 
come  to  consider  tbat,  after  all,  your  resources  for  doing  that  business 
are  not  very  great? — A.  No;  I  think  uot.  I  will  give  you  an  instance 
of  it.  Last  season  the  potato  crop  in  the  United  States  was  very  short, 
and,  notwithstanding  the  duty  upon  potatoes,  these  were  shipped  there 
in  large  quantities  from  Prince  Edward  Island.  Of  course  the  duty 
came  out  of  the  pockets  of  the  consumers.  We  sold  at  very  high 
prices  and  speculated  in  them.  We  obtained  prices  making  it  self- 
sustaining,  and  the  parties  who  consumed  the  potatoes  would  have  to 
pay  the  duties. 

Q.  They  could  not  make  the  people  pay  whatever  they  choose  to  ask. 
They  had  to  govern  themselves  by  the  actual  state  of  the  market,  had 
they  not  ? — A.  The  speculators  would  not  pay  more  than  the  ruling 
value  on  the  island. 

Q.  But  the  man  who  has  to  sell  cannot  command  the  market  in  the 
sense  that  he  can  fix  his  price.  This  must  depend  on  the  state  of  the 
market? — A.  If  we  had  plenty  of  potatoes  and  this  was  uot  the  case  in 
the  United  States,  this  would  affect  the  price. 

Q.  It  does  not  follow  that  the  seller  will  never  pay  the  duties.  This 
depends  on  the  state  of  the  market.  There  must  be  a  great  demand? — 
A.  I  put  it  this  way :  The  United  States  require  a  certain  number  of 
fisb,  and  they  would  have  to  have  them,  but  things  might  get  into  such 
a  state  that  you  could  afford  to  pay  the  duty  and  still  command  the 
market.    There  is  a  probability  of  it. 

Q.  Has  that  event  occurred  in  your  lifetime  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  say  there  is  a  great  probability  of  it.  Is  that  not  a  little  fan- 
ciful; are  not  your  views  set  pretty  high  ?— A.  I  think  it  is  quite  a  rea- 
sonable view. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  the  mackerel  and  cod  fisheries,  &c.,  of  the 
United  States  are  ruined  ?  This  is  one  of  the  conditions  upon  which 
yon  arrive  at  such  a  conclusion? — A.  I  do  not  think  that  the  cod-fishery 
is  mined. 

Q.  But  the  American  mackerel  fishing  is? — A.  That  is  the  impres- 
sion. 

Q.  Yon  assume  that  this  is  the  case? — A.  Yes,  seining  has  done  great 
damage  to  it. 

Q.  And  yon  do  not  think  that  the  Americans  would  k>e  able  to  catch 
enough  fish  here  outside  the  limit  to  be  able  to  do  anything  towards 
supplying  their  market? — A.  I  do  not  think  they  coald  make  it  self- 
sustaining. 

Q.  And  if  the  Americans  cannot  catch  anything  here  or  at  home,  then 
somebody  has  got  to  supply  the  market? — A.  That  is  my  impression. 

Q.  These  conditions  are  necessary  to  your  commanding  the  market?>- 
A.  Which? 

Q.  The  conditions  relating  to  the  inability  of  the  Americans  to  catch 
the  mackerel  on  their  own  coast  or  here. — A.  They  cannot  catch  enough 
fish  on  their  own  coast,  in  my  opinion,  to  supply  their  market. 


302 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


i 


B 


( 


flmi 


Q.  And  if  they  did  not  come  within  the  three-mile  limit  they  could 
not  do  8o  here  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Or  on  your  banks  or  anywhere  else  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  if  all  those  conditions  were  fultilled,  and  you  were  able  to 
supply  the  requisite  amount  of  fish  by  means  of  your  boatmen,  or  ves- 
sels, you  think  you  could  command  the  market? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  You  would  have  a  pretty  bad  start  with  forty  fishing-vessels,  and 
l)oats,  with  regard  to  commanding  the  American  market! — A.  We  would 
soon  increase  their  number. 

Q.  You  would  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  have  capital  and  industrv  enough  to  do  it  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  you  have  never  tried  it  ? — A.  We  tried,  but  we  had  to  abandon 
it  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  Was  not  that  largely  due  to  want  of  capital! — A.  It  was  owing  to 
this  reason :  We  had  to  pay  $2  a  barrel  duty  on  the  mackerel  we  sent 
to  the  United  States,  and  the  men  would  not  stay  in  the  island  vessels 
when  they  saw  that  the  Americans  were  allowed  to  come  and  tish  side 
by  side  with  the  British  vessels,  and  catch  an  equal  share  of  the  fish ; 
of  course  this  was  the  result.  The  fishermen  consequently  went  on  the 
American  vessels ;  our  best  men  did  so,  and  some  of  the  very  best  fish- 
ermen and  smartest  captains  among  the  Americans  are  from  Prince 
Edward  Island  and  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  They  are  still  in  command  of  American  vessels? — A.  Some  of  them 
are. 

Q.  Did  not  a  good  deal  of  the  fish  caught  on  Prince  Edward  Island 
get  into  the  United  States  as  American  fish  ? — A.  No;  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  You  do  not  ? — A.  Not  as  American-caught  fish. 

Q.  Did  not  a  very  large  portion  of  the  fish  caught  get  into  the  United 
States  free  of  duty  between  the  expiration  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  and 
the  ratification  of  the  Washington  Treaty? — A.  I  do  not  know  what  were 
the  quantities. 

Q.  You  know  that  a  good  deal  did  ? — A.  I  am  not  aware  what  the 
quantities  were. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Can  you  explain  to  the  Commission  one  great  reason  why  the  peo- 
ple prefer  to  fish  in  boats  instead  of  in  vessels!  Has  the  cost  of  the 
fishing-vessel  anything  to  do  with  it,  and  the  facility  presented  for  pro- 
curing fish  on  shore  ? — A.  The  cost  of  outfitting  has  something  to  do 
with  it.  A  'Other  reason  is  this:  the  mackerel  generally  frequent  certain 
grounds  along  the  coast,  and  if  they  fish  in  boats  these  can  always  be 
easily  reached.  They  can  run  out  to  the  grounds  whenever  fish  are 
present  there,  whereas  schooners  might  be  busily  employed  today,  while 
to-morrow  a  heavy  breeze  would  take  them  away  and  they  might  have 
to  remain  in  sheUer  for  several  days.  They  could  not  return  until  the 
gale  is  over,  whdt  the  boats  might  take  large  catches  during  their  ab- 
sence. 

Q.  W^hile  the  larger  farmer  fishermen  employ  hundreds  and  hun- 
dreds of  boats  in  different  parts,  do  they  find  it  profitable  to  employ 
fishing- vessels  of  65  or  70  tons?— A.  Do  they  prefer  boats  !  They  pre- 
fer the  boats. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  will  explain  why.  Ir  it  cheaper? — A.  Yes;  they 
are  more  convenient  to  the  grounds.  Vessels,  however,  very  often  take 
large  catches  at  one  time ;  in  the  schools  they  often  get  large  decks. 

Q.  The  question  was  asked  you  as  to  the  probability  of  our  being 


^ 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


303 


able  to  supply  the  American  market  with  the  capital  invested  in  our 
fleet;  can  you  give  the  Commission  an  idea  as  to  the  increase  shown  in 
the  boat-fishiug  during  the  last  ten  years  ?  Has  it  increased  from  four  to 
five  hundred  per  cent.  ? — A.  It  has  increased  very  largely,  but  I  could 
not  say  exactly  how  much.    It  has  doubled  in  the  last  few  years. 

Q.  During  what  time  has  it  doubled? — A.  During  three  or  four  years. 

Q.  What  is  the  size  of  these  boats,  and  what  do  they  cost  ?— A.  Some 
are  what  we  call  dories,  with  two  men,  others  are  larger  and  are  manned 
with  four,  five,  or  six  men ;  these  are  the  largo  class  of  boats. 

Q.  Is  it  true  or  not  that  boat-fishing  has  an  advantage  over  vessel- 
fisbiiig  in  that  the  former  do  not  disturb  the  schools  of  mackerel  to  the 
same  extent  that  the  latter  do  ? — A.  The  boats  do  not  do  so. 

Q.  Or  frighten  the  mackerel  ? — A.  No ;  and  they  do  not  dress  fish  so 
mucli  on  the  grounds  as  the  vessels  do.  I  consider  that  the  dressing 
of  tlie  maclcerel  on  the  grounds  and  the  throwing  of  the  offal  overboard 
on  tilt'  spot  has  done  a  very  great  injury. 

Q.  Apart  from  that,  has  the  use  of  vessels  anything  to  do  with 
ft ijjhtLMiing  and  scaring  the  fish! — A.  Yes;  the  vessels  throw  over  so 
inucli  bait  that  the  mackerel  will  not  stay,  but  leave  the  grounds  sick. 
The  mackerel  will  school  away  from  the  grounds  under  these  circum- 
stances. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  supplies  being  furnished  to  American  fishermen  by 
farmers  on  the  island,  and  in  cross-examination  you  gave  it  to  be  under- 
stood that  it  was  of  very  problematical  advantage  to  the  farmers;  do 
these  supplies  chiefly  consist  of  fresh  milk,  butter,  and  eggs  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  intend  the  statement  to  extend  to  merchants  engaged  in 
trade,  implying  that  they  sell  for  any  other  than  commercial  reasons  to 
the  Americans? — A.  They  may  sometimes.  I  have  known  merchants 
at  times  give  fishermen  stores  which  were  then  very  scarce  with  them. 

Q.  Is  that  the  rule  ? — A.  No;  I  do  not  think  it  is  the  general  rule;  but 
there  are  some  instances  of  it.  Of  course,  merchants  as  a  class,  wher- 
ever they  are,  make  as  much  money  as  possible  out  of  the  articles  in 
which  they  deal.  I  have  put  myself  to  inconvenience  for  the  purpose 
of  supplying  these  fishermen. 

Q.  Have  the  supplies  of  late  years  been  expensive? — A.  They  have 
not  been  very  large. 

Q.  Have  the  supplies  with  which  the  Americans  have  been  furnished 
(luring  the  last  three  or  four  years  been  at  all  appreciable  ?  I  am  speak- 
ing with  reference  to  Prince  Edward  Island.  Is  it  an  appreciable  item 
in  our  trade  ? — A.  It  is  not  much  in  our  quarter  at  all,  but  there  is  one 
class  of  traders  that  may  appreciate  it  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  Suj)posing  there  were  advantages  which  the  colonists  derived  from 
the  trade  carried  on  with  the  American  fishermen,  are  you  under  the 
impression  that  these  advantages  are  to  be  considered  before  this  Com- 
mission under  the  treaty,  or  to  form  any  compensation  to  be  deducted 
from  the  compensation  which  we  have  a  right  to  claim? — A.  I  do  not 
consider  it  in  that  light. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  they  are  to  be  considered  under  the  treaty  ? — 
A.  I  do  not  think  they  are  to  be  considered  at  all. 

Q.  Then  they  are  not  to  form  a  subject  of  deduction  from  the  compen- 
sation we  claim? — A.  I  do  not  think  so. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg: 
Q.  What  are  the  dories;  do  they  run  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  in 
them  ?— A.  O,  no;  the  fishermen  go  off  in  them  a  mile,  a  mile  and  a  half, 
or  two  miles  from  shore. 


304 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  I  did  not  qnite  understand,  from  what  yon  said,  what  you  call 
ilshing-vessels  which  belong  to  the  island.  What  is  on  the  whole  the 
number  of  these  schooners? — A.  I  was  asked  that  question  yesterday; 
but  never  have  kept  any  run  of  the  number  of  these  vessels,  and  I  do 
not  wish  to  make  any  statement  without  having  a  foundation  for  it.  Ou 
this  point  I  have  not  paid  any  attention. 

No.  3. 

John  F.  Campion,  trader,  residingat  Souris,  in  Prince  Edward  Island, 
called  on  behalfof  the  Government  of  Uer  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and 
examined : 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  What  occupation  do  you  at  present  follow  ? — Answer.  I 
am  a  trader. 

Q.  In  what  articles  do  you  deal  ? — A.  I  deal  principally  in  fish. 

Q.  How  many  years  have  you  been  in  that  business  ? — A.  I  have  been 
80  engaged  more  or  less  since  1SG6. 

Q.  Previous  to  1866,  what  occupation  did  yon  follow  ? — A.  I  was  a 
fisherman. 

Q.  Were  you  in  English  or  American  vessels  f — A.  In  American. 

Q.  When  did  you  first  commence  the  business  of  fishing  in  American 
vessels?— A.  In  1862. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  name  of  the  American  vessel  in  which  you 
went  that  year! — A.  The  first  vessel  I  shipped  in  was  the  Louise  L.  Curtis. 

Q.  This  was  in  1862?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  join  her? — A.  In  Gloucester. 

Q.  And  were  you  the  whole  season  in  her  ? — A.  No ;  I  joined  her  very 
late  in  the  season.    I  think  it  was  about  the  15th  of  September. 

Q.  Then  you  only  came  down  for  the  fall  trip! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  to  ? — A.  To  the  Bay  of  St.  Lawrence ;  to  the 
east  point  of  the  island ;  we  began  fishing  on  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Near  Souris  ? — A.  Yes ;  east  of  Souris. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  cargo? — A.  We  got  about  180  barrels. 

Q.  In  that  trip  ? — A.  We  caught  80  barrels  between  East  Point  and 
St.  Peter's. 

Q.  What  distance  were  you  from  the  shore  ? — A.  From  half  a  mile  to 
two  and  a  half  miles. 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  the  best  ? — A.  Ofl'  the  Cape  Breton  shore. 

Q.  How  far  off?— A.  Not  over  a  mile ;  sometimes  half  a  mile ;  usually 
about  two  miles,  I  think. 

Q.  Were  any  of  this  cargo  you  got  in  1862  caught  outside  of  three 
miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  None  whatever. 

Q.  How  many  men  had  you  on  board  ? — A.  Fourteen. 

Q.  Were  many  of  the  American  fleet  out  that  summer? — A.  There 
■was  a  very  large  fleet  out,  but  we  were  very  late  in  getting  to  the  bay, 
BO  late  indeed  that  people  thought  it  foolish  to  go. 

Q.  You  did  not  leave  until  the  15th  of  September? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  what  number  of  vessels  were  in  the  fleet  in  the 
bay  that  yeau? — A.  There  were  probably  six  hundred. 

Q.  Does  your  recollection  enable  you  to  tell  about  what  was  the 
average  catch  of  these  vessels? — A.  I  could  not  for  that  year,  because  I 
then  only  began  the  business. 

Q.  Were  other  vessels  in  the  fleet,  cugaged  in  fishing  at  the  time  you 
were  there? — A.  Yes;  there  were  some  two  or  three  hundred  sail. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


306 


Q.  Where  were  tbey  taking  their  fish  ? — A.  All  io  our  vicinity.  We 
were  fishing  amongst  the  fleet.  The  majority  of  the  fleet  that  year 
tisbed  on  the  Cape  Breton  shore  late  in  the  season,  after  the  1st  of  Oc* 
tober,  and  tl>e  greatest  portion  of  the  fish  was  taken  that  fall  between 
Cheticarap  Hud  Port  Hood. 

Q.  Both  points  on  the  Cape  Breton  shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  was  the  fleet  engaged  fishing  ? — 
A.  They  fished  very  close  in.  They  never  catch  fish  at  any  distance 
off  shore. 

Q.  How  close  were  they  ? — A.  They  were  from  half  a  mile  to  a  mile 
and  a  half  from  the  shore.  The  water  is  very  bold  on  that  coast  and 
tbey  ciime  very  close  in. 

Q.  And  the  next  year,  18C3  ? — A.  I  was  also  then  in  the  fishing  busi- 


ness. 

Q. 
Q. 

Q 


In  what  vessel  ? — A.  The  schooner  Alferetta,  Captain  Rowe. 
Did  .von  begin  early  that  year  ? — A.  Yes;  we  started  in  July. 
Where  did  you  go? — A.  We  came  to  the  bay  of  the  St.  Lawrence. 
Was  she  a  Gloucester  schooner  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  go  that  season  to  the  southern  fishing  grounds  along  the 
American  coast  ? — A.  No ;  I  was  in  Gloucester  when  the  vessels  went 
out  there,  but  I  did  not  go. 

Q.  Why? — A.  Simply  because  I  did  not  think  there  was  any  money 
in  tbe  transaction.  I  remained  idle,  as  did  many  others  at  the  time 
that  year.  I  had  never  any  faith  in  the  southern  fisheries,  because  I 
saw  that  a  great  many  people  who  went  there  did  not  make  much. 

Q.  A  good  many  others  were  idle  as  well  as  yourself? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  waited  until  fishing  commenced  in  the  Bay  of  St.  Lawrence  f — 
A.  Yea. 

Q.  What  was  your  catch  in  the  Alferetta  that  year  ? — A.  During  the 
one  trip  that  I  was  in  her  we  caught  300  barrels. 

Q.  Were  they  caught  outside  the  three-mile  limit  or  close  inshore? — 
A.  Some  were  caught  between  East  Point,  Margaree,  and  the  balance 
around  the  island  and  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  What  distance  were  you  from  the  shore  ? — A.  One  third  of  that 
trip  was  caught  between  East  Point  and  the  Magdalen  Islands ;  and  the 
balance  close  to  the  shore  of  both  islands. 

Q.  One  third  was  caught  altogether  outside  the  limits  ? — A.  Yes ;  we 
went  home  with  that  trip.  I  think  it  was  in  August  we  returned  to 
Gloucester.    We  caught  about  300  barrels. 

Q.  Did  you  return  the  same  year  again? — A.  Yes;  I  went  in  the 
schooner  Rescue. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  captain  ? — A.  James  Bowie. 


Q. 


By  Mr.  Foster : 
It  was  a  Gloucester  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 


By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  ? — A.  We  came  to  the  north  side  of  the  island, 
but  as  we  could  not  find  any  fish  there  we  went  to  the  Magdalens.  We 
loand  none  there,  and  went  on  farther  to  Sydney  and  the  Cape  Breton 
coast,  fishing  there  for  the  balance  of  the  season.  We  filled  up  the 
schooner  with  all  she  could  carry. 

Q.  Around  the  Cape  Breton  coast  ? — A.  It  was  between  Flint  Island 
aiul  Sydney  Harbor. 

Q.  What  was  your  catch  ? — A.  335  barrels. 

Q.  Ot  what  distance  from  the  shore  were  they  taken  1 — A.  All  were 
20  F 


306 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


8 


I    f 


taken  inside  Flint  Island — between  Flint  lisland  and  Sydney  Harbor, 
within  a  mile  from  tbe  .shore. 

Q.  Was  there  a  lar^e  fleet  out  that  year  ? — A.  The  fishermen  esti 
mated  the  fishing  fleet  lying  off  Sydney  Hiirbor — thi*t  is,  around  Sydney 
alone — at  three  hundred  sail. 

Q.  Were  these  300  sail  fishing  at  the  same  place  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  All  got  fares  there  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  understand  that  they  got  their  fares  within  half  a  mile  and  two 
niih'S  from  the  shore? — A.  The  whole  of  them  caught  their  fares  inside 
of  Flint  Island,  at  a  mile  or  a  mile  and  a  half  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  an  idea  as  to  the  average  catc-b  of 
these  300  sail  ?  This  was  in  18G4? — A.  Yes.  I  would  say  that  it  was 
about  600  or  650  barrels,  for  those  who  fished  the  whole  season  have 
caught  as  mau^'  as  1,500  barrels.  I  should  say  that  650  would  be  a  fair 
average. 

Q.  For  the  season  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Y'^our  number  was  335  barrels  for  that  trip  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  whole  of  them  got  good  fares? 
— A.  The  whole  of  them,  so  far  as  I  knew,  filled  up  their  vessels. 

Q.  Why  did  yon  not  go  outside  the  limit  ? — A.  IBecanse  there  were  no 
fish  there.  Some  vessels  used  to  drift  off  the  land,  but  they  would  have 
to  sail  in  again.    They  could  get  no  fish  beyond  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Did  that  state  of  things  last  the  whole  season  ? — A.  Yrs. 

Q.  What  capacity  ('.id  you  act  in — as  sharesman  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  go  out  in  the  season  of  1864? — A.  Yes;  then  I  was  on  the 
Catalena. 

Q.  Was  she  an  American  vt'ssel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  was  she  from  ? — A.  Gloucester. 

Q.  Who  was  her  captain  ? — A.  Alfrt-d  Howard. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  leave  in  her  ? — A.  During  the  latter  p:u't  of 
June.  We  came  down  to  the  bay,  and  the  first  trip  was  taken  off  North 
Cape,  off  the  island  between  North  Cape  and  Bradley  Bank.  Some  of 
the  fish  were  caught  close  to  the  bend  of  the  island. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  get  ? — A.  Three  huiulred  barrels. 

Q.  How  many  hands  had  you  on  board  ?^A.  Fourteen. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  ? — A.  When  we  filled  the  vessel  up  we  returned 
home. 

Q.  You  returned  to  Gloucester  you  mean  ? — A.  No,  sir ;  we  landed  in 
the  Straits  of  Canso. 

Q.  And  transshipped  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  landed  the  trip  in  these  straits. 

Q.  That  was  for  the  first  trip  you  made  in  1864? — A.  Wlien  I  come 
to  think  about  it  I  remember  that  we  brougiit  the  first  trip  home  and 
landed  the  second  trip  at  the  straits. 

Q.  You  returned  with  the  300  barrels  to  Gloucester? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  then  came  back  to  the  fishing  grounds  1! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  the  same  ves.sel  ? — A.  Ye.s.  W<'  fished  around  the  bend  of  the 
island  and  off  the  Magdalen  Islands  We  caught  part  of  the  cargo  at 
both  places. 

Q.  How  many  ? — A.  We  caught  300  barreKs,  and  we  got  thorn  very 
close  in  to  the  shore.  The  fish  schooled  that  year  and  used  to  run  near 
the  shore.  It  was  warm  weather,  and  they  went  very  close  in  to  the 
shore. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  any  portion  of  that  cargo  of  300  barrels  outside  the 
three-mile  limit  ? — A.  We  caught  a  few  outside,  probably  80  binreis. 
We  filled  the  vessel  up  in  about  a  mouth,  and  then  went  to  the  Straits 
of  Canso,  leaving  .hem  there. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


307 


Q.  This  was  the  time  when  yon  landed  them  at  the  straits  ? — A. 
Yes;  on  the  second  trip  we  went  to  the  straits  and  had  the  fish  re- 
sliippt'd  to  Gloncester. 

Q,  You  tlien  returned  to  the  grounds,  I  suppose? — A.  We  waited 
tlit're  some  days,  fitted  out  and  returned  to  tiie  grounds. 

Q.  VVher*  did  you  flsii  on  the  third  trip! — A.  We  fished  for  a  short 
time  around  the  Magdalen  Island,  but  it  got  so  blowy  that  we  could 
not  stay  there.  In  consequence  of  the  heavy  winds  prevailing  we  had 
to  leave.  The  fish  were  scarce,  and  we  came  to  the  bend  of  the  island 
between  Snint  Peter's  and  East  Point,  and  took  the  balance  of  the 
cargo  there. 

Q.  This  was  the  third  trip.    Ditl  you  secure  a  cargo  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  ? — A.  On  the  whole  we  secured  1,000,  and  that  trip  we 
obtained  320  or  330  barrels. 

Q.  Your  catch  for  the  season  was  about  1,000  barrels  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  part  of  the  cargo  was  taken  within  and  what  without  the 
limits' — A.  The  whole  of  the  last  cargo  was  taken  within  the  limits. 
There  might  be,  perhaps,  forty  or  fifty  barrels  taken  outside,  but  not 
luon^  than  that.    It  was  late  in  the  fall. 

Q.  Late  in  the  fall  are  an^-  fish  taken  outside  the  limit? — A.  Not  that 
I  Hin  aware  of.    The  mackerel  work  inshore  after  the  15th  of  September. 

Q.  Where  do  you  catch  the  fish  during  the  first  trip  in  the  spring? — 
A.  Sometimes  on  Bank  Bradley,  when  they  come  uor'ard.  They  come 
up  tlieni  before  spawning. 

Q.  Which  are  the  better  fish,  the  fa  .  or  spring  ? — A.  The  fall.  They 
are  then  fat  and  large. 

Q.  How  many  of  the  American  fleet  were  in  the  bay  that  year? — A. 
They  had  a  lar;;e  fleet  there  that  year.  I  should  say  between  six  and 
seven  hundred  sail.  Six  hundred,  I  should  say,  would  be  a  fair  esti- 
mate. 

Q.  Are  you  enable«l  from  the  information  you  receive,  and  from  what 
you  see,  and  the  practical  knowledge  you  possess,  to  give  a  fair  state- 
ment regarding  the  average  number  of  the  American  fii-et  in  the  bay? — 
A.  I  should  say  there  would  be  six  hundred.  Of  course  we  talk  the 
matter  over  amongst  ourselves,  and  there  might  be  a  ditforeuce  of  opin- 
ion on  the  point. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  average  catch  of  each  vessel  ? — A.  It  was  very 
large.  It  was  not  less  than  600  or  700  barrels.  Some  vessels  took  as 
many  as  1,500  barrels  that  year. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  with  special  reference  to  the  places  where  you 
fished.  Did  the  rest  of  the  fleet  fish  in  the  vsame  places? — A.  No;  very 
raauy  vessels  did  not  fish  around  the  Magdalen  Island  that  year. 

Q.  Where  did  the  majority  of  the  vessels  ttsh  that  year? — A..  A  great 
many  were  around  the  Cape  Breton  coast  and  the  bend  of  the  island. 
A  great  many  followed  the  fish  around  to  Flint  Island  and  Sydney  for 
two  or  three  years  about  that  time. 

Q.  If  you  iiad  not  been  able  to  land  the  fish  at  Caiiso  and  transship, 
could  you  have  made  the  third  trip? — A.  No;  I  do  not  think  it  would 
have  been  possible. 

Q.  You  will,  perhaps,  explain  ? — A.  The  reason  why  is,  that  it  would 
he  iiani  to  do  so.  It  takes  al»out  three  weeks  to  make  a  trip.  In  those 
years  vessels  were  filled  up  in  20  and  25  days.  The  mackerel  were  very 
plenty,  and  they  considered  it  equal  to  the  loss  of  a  trip  to  go  home. 
Ill  fact,  the  captains  of  vessels  considered  it  folly  to  think  of  going  home. 
There  were  thousands  of  barrels  of  mackerel  on  the  wharves,  and  many 
vessels,  as  well  as  steamers,  to  carry  them  to  Gloucester. 


308 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


.■ 


r 


Q.  Did  maDy  avail  themselves  of  the  right  to  transship  f — A.  A  great 
many  did.  The  whole  fleet  did  so,  as  far  as  I  know.  Very  few  of  them 
went  home. 

Q.  It  was  generally  considered  by  those  engaged  in  the  buaiiie.ss  to 
be  equal  to  the  loss  of  a  trip  to  go  home  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  was  in  the  year  1865?— A.  I  was  then  in  the  Alferetta  still ; 
her  captain  was  named  Cash. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  From  what  port  did  she  sail  f — A.  From  Gloucester. 
By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Did  you  make  much  cash  for  yourself  that  year  ? — A.  I  did  very 
fairly. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  start? — A.  In  July ;  we  came  down  to  the 
bay  and  began  fishing. 

Q.  When  did  you  leave  Gloucester  f— A.  In  July  ;  about  the  4tli  ot 
July.  « 

Q.  Did  you  go  South  with  the  American  fleet  that  spring? — A.  No; 
I  was  waiting  for  the  Bay  of  St.  Lawrence  fishing  to  commence. 

Q.  You  remained  idle  again  ? — A.  Yes.  I  never  had  any  faith  in  the 
Southern  fishery.  I  never  saw  any  one  make  anything  but  very  little 
out  of  it.  You  had  to  do  considerable  work  for  not  much  value.  I  re- 
mained idle,  with  many  others. 

Q.  You  preferred  to  be  idle  to  going  there  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  when  the  bay  fishery  began  you  sailed  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  you  leave?— A.  About  the  4th of  July. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  the  fleet  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  that 
year? — A.  I  would  say  that  it  was  six  hundred  sail. 

Q.  Were  you  long  in  taking  the  first  catch  ? — A.  We  look  it  in  about 
six  weeks.  Some  of  the  fish  we  caught  about  the  Magdaleu  Islands, 
and  the  balance  between  Bustico  and  East  Point. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  take  ? — A.  320  barrels. 

Q.  What  portion  were  caught  within  the  three-mile  limit,'and  what 
portion  outside  of  it? — A.  We  caught  most  of  them  inshore— very 
close  in. 

Q.  Was  it  within  the  three  miles  or  not  ? — A.  Mostly  within  ;  there 
might  have  been  fifty  barrels  taken  outside. 

Q.  And  with  that  exception  ? — A.  The  balance  were  caught  betweeu 
two  and  a  half  miles  and  half  a  mile  from  the  shore ;  that  trip  we  carried 
to  and  landed  at  the  Straits  of  Canso. 

Q.  You  transshipped  again  ? — A.  Yes;  and  then  returned  to  the  bay. 
We  went  over  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  but  we  found  no  fish  there. 
From  there  we  returned  to  the  bend  of  the  island,  and  off  Malpeque  we 
filled  up. 

Q.  Were  there  many  vef^sels  fishing  in  the  bend  of  the  island  that 
season  ? — A.  Yes ;  about  three  hundred. 

Q.  Along  that  bend  alone  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  American  vessels? — A.  Yes;  they  took  very  large  quantities  of 
mackerel — from  100  to  500  barrels  each. 

Q.  At  what  distance  were  they  taken  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Our  trip 
was  all  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  shore.  About  two  miles  was  the 
average  distance  ott".  We  used  to  heave  the  vessels  to  and  rai.se  the 
fish  ;  and  after  a  certain  time,  we  would  lose  them  and  have  to  wake 
sail. 

Q.  In  the  first  place,  you  were  close  to  the  shore  when  you  comnieuced 
todrilt? — A.  We  would  be  in  two  or  three  fathoms  of  water.    In  the 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


309 


fall,  after  tbe  15th  of  September,  tbe  winds  blow  square  oft  the  laud,  and 
with  the  jib  down  and  the  mainsail  guide  out,  the  vessel  would  lay  still. 

Q,  At  what  distance  would  that  be  from  the  shore — where  there  were 
two  or  three  fathoms  of  water  ? — A.  Not  over  half  a  mile. 

Q.  You  would  haul  down  the  jib  ? — A.  At  a  mile  or  half  a  mile  off" 
shore,  the  vessels  would  usually  haul  down  the  jib  and  heave  to,  throw* 
jDg  out  bait.  After  a  time  the  nincUerel  would  come  up  and  the  men 
would  fish  for  a  certain  time,  drifting  off  shore  for  a  mile  or  a  mile  and 
a  half.  We  never  fished  in  the  bend  of  the  river  except  with  an  off 
wind,  because  the  vessels  would  be  blown  on  the  shore  if  the  wind  blew 
OD  tbe  land.  When  they  got  off  two  or  three  miles  they  usually  lost  the 
fish  and  would  have  to  make  sail  to  get  in  again. 

Q.  To  the  shore  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  bulk  and  nearly  all  of  your  catch  was  obtained 
well  within  tbe  limits — does  that  remark  apply  to  the  whole  fleet  f — A. 
Yes ;  as  far  as  I  know. 

Q.  Had  you  an  opi>ortunity  of  learning  whether  this  was  the  case  T — 
A.tWe  were  amongst  the  other  vessels  and  went  ;into  the  same  harbor. 

Q.  1  understand  that  you  make  for  the  harbor  every  night  f — A.  Not 
every  night,  but  during  the  period  of  the  trip  we  were  in  the  harbor  a 
dozen  times,  perhaps. 

Q.  Was  that  the  second  tripf — A.  We  were  two  trips  that  year. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average  of  the  fleet  for  the  season  f — A.  We 
did  not  consider  that  we  got  a  good  average  of  fish  that  year,  but  we 
secured  670  barrels,  I  think. 

Q.  And  [yon  thought  that  the  average  of  the  fleet  was  larger  f — A. 
Yes,  some  vessels  got  from  1,200  to  1,500  barrels  that  year. 

Q.  1  understand  you  to  say  that  you  only  made  two  trips  that  year! — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  transshipped  the  first? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tbe  second  you  carried  back,  I  suppose,  to  Gloucester  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Suppose  you  had  carried  the  first  cargo  to  Gloucester,  how  would 
it  have  fared  with  you? — A.  I  would  be  of  opinion  that  we  would  not 
have  likely  got  back  in  less  tbau  tbiee  weeks,  and  that  means  a  fishing 
trip;  tbe  loss  of  a  flsiiing  trip.  That  would  be  about  the  history  of  it. 
When  mackerel  were  plenty,  we  were  usually  not  more  than  three  or 
four  weeks  in  American  scliooners  in  making  a  trip. 

Q.  It  takes  about  the  same  time  to  go  home  as  to  make  a  trip  in  the 
bayf— A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Did  you  in  later  years  fish  in  Amciican  vessels  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  these  American  fishing  vessels  all  report  themselves  in  com- 
iiigthrou^ii  the  gut  and  pay  light  dues? — A.  No;  they  did  not.  A 
i;ieat  many  of  them  took  a  s|>ecial  pride  in  evading  the  light  dues. 
Mauy  used  to  come  through  at  night.  Sometimes  the  coast  of  Nova 
Scotia  was  very  foggy,  and  tliey  could  not  make  the  Straits  of  Canso, 
consequently  they  would  have  to  go  round  to  Cape  North,  off  Cape 
Breton. 

Q.  Would  others  go  through  the  gut  without  paying? — A.  If  they 
touUl  the.v  would. 

Q.  Did  they  ? — A.  Yes;  I  have  beard  fishermen  talk  about  having 
evaded  the  light  dues  after  they  got  through  tbe  Straits  of  Canso. 

Q.  You  bad  no  seines  at  that  time? — A.  No. 

Q.  Supposing  that  the  American  vessels  were  excluded  from  fishing 
^vithiu  three  miles  of  tbe  shore,  and  bad  only  the  right  to  fish  around 
the  Magdalen  Islands  and  outside  tbe  limit  in  tbe  gulf,  being  excluded 
trom  coming  within  three  miles  of  the  coasts  of  Cape  Breton,  Prince 


310 


▲WARD  OF  THE  FISHBRT   COMMISSION. 


Edward  Island,  and  Oasp^,  and  of  New  Brnuawiok,  what  would  be 
yoor  opinion  aa  a  practical  man  of  the  effect  of  this  proceeding  f  Could 
the  Americans  afford  to  come  to  &ah  in  tlie  gulf  1 — A.  My  opinion  of 
the  transaction  would  be  that  it  would  be  for  the  Americans  u  lotting 
•peculation.  I  do  not  think  that  the  Americans  would  then  entertaio 
the  project'  of  coming  here  to  fish,  for  a  moment.  I  think  tbey— I 
would  try  some  other  business. 

Q.  Would  you,  as  a  practical  man,  invest  money  in  it  if  you  were  8o 
excluded  f — A.  ^o,  sir;  I  would  not.  Am  fond  of  speculation,  but  that 
would  be  too  desperate  for  me. 

Q.  Are  you  in  a  position  to  state  that  this  opinion  is  entertained  by 
the  American  fishermen  f — A.  I  have  talked  with  a  good  many  of  tbem 
on  the  subject,  and  they  all  considered  that  the  privilege  of  coiuiog 
within  the  limits  as  of  especial  advantage  to  them. 

Q.  What  is  their  opinion ;  have  they  expressed  any  to  you  ?— A.  I 
have  had  conversation  with  them  on  the  point.  I  have  lived  more  or 
less  continuously  in  communication  with  the  American  fishermen,  and 
all  these  matters  are  talked  over  amongst  them.  Every  phrase  of  tlie 
fishing  question  is  discussed  by  them. 

Q.  And  what  is  the  opinion  of  the  American  fishermen  about  tbeir 
being  so  excludt  d?  Would  they  prosecute  the  business  at  all  under  these 
circumstances  T — A.  One  gentleman.  Captain  Binney,  last  year  said  tbat 
he  considered  the  privilege  of  fishing  within  three  miles  of  our  shore 
a  very  great  advantage.  I  asked  him,  ''Suppose  you  were  excluded 
from  this  limit,  would  you  like  to  send  vessels  down  t"  He  answered, 
"  I,  for  one,  would  not  be  inclined  to  have  anything  more  to  do  with 
the  fishing  business  if  I  did  not  have  the  benefit  of  fishing  where  I 
please."  He  said  fishing  was  precarious  enough  as  it  was,  and  tbat  he 
found  it  hard  enough  to  get  a  trip  with  this  privilege. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  catch  would  be  No.  1,  and  what  proper 
tion  No.  2,  and  what  proportion  No.  3f — A.  I  would  say  that  one-half 
would  be  No.  1,  one  quarter  No.  2,  and  one  quarter  No.  3.  That  was 
my  experience  during  the  four  .years  I  was  fishing. 

Q.  Since  then  )  on  have  been  constantly  engaged  in  the  fishing  busi- 
ness f-^A.  Yes;  more  or  less. 

Q.  And  your  experience  in  the  years  you  actually  fished  and  since 
tallies  f — A.  That  estimate  is  a  little  too  high  for  the  number  ooes 
taken  in  t)oat-fishing ;  the  fish  thus  caught  do  not  compare  with  those 
caught  in  our  own  vessels,  simply  because  more  care  is  taken  of  them 
in  the  latter. 

Q.  By  whom  i — A.  The  fishermen.  They  have  more  water  and  a  bet- 
rer  chance  to  take  care  of  them.  Tbe  fish  caught  in  the  boats  are 
equally  good,  but  they  are  not  as  well  taken  care  of;  and,  consequeutly, 
there  are  not  so  many  number  ones  amongst  them. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  tbe  prices  obtaiited  for  mackerel  during  the 
years  you  were  fishing? — A.  Tbey  were  very  large. 

Q.  What  did  number  ones  sell  atf — A.  Tbey  sobl  sometimes  as  higli 
as  $25. 

Q.  And  number  twos? — A.  Tbey  brought  about  $  JO.  Tb«'se  were  the 
highest  priceH.  Tbe  average  prices  would  be  about  $18  for  number 
ones,  about  $10  for  number  twos,  aud  about  $12  for  number  threes. 

Q.  And  tbe.v  did  range  at  times  as  high  as  $25  f — A.  We  got  ^-')  for 
some  of  our  trips. 

Q.  Tbe  prices  for  mackerel  Huctuate  considerably? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  the  catch  is  not  large,  tbe  price  goes  up? — A.  Exactly.  It  i* 
governed,  of  course,  by  the  quantity  on  baud  and  tbe  fishing  prospects. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FI8HRBY  COMMISHION. 


311 


Q.  Sup|K)8iDg  thht  tbe  AmerioaDs  were  altogether  excluded  from 
coming  into  and  flahing  ou  oar  coasts,  what  would  be  tbe  effect  of  this 
measure  as  regards  our  owu  fishermen  f— A.  I  think  that  it  would  be  a 
benefit  to  them. 

Q.  Even  supposing  we  paid  a  duty  of  $2  a  barrel  on  fish  sent  to  the 
United  States!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  VVhyf  Explain. — A.  I  for  one  would  not  consider  it  a  hardship 
to  bave  to  pay  the  duty,  because  we  would  have  the  monopoly  of  the 
market ;  we  would  pay  the  duty,  but,  of  course,  we  would  not  be  the 
consumers  of  the  fish. 

Q.  Why  would  you  have  a  monopoly  f — A.  Because  our  own  vessels 
and  boats,  and  not  the  Americans,  would  supply  the  American  market. 

Q.  Would  not  tbe  Americans  catch  enough  fish  in  their  waters  to  sup- 
ply their  market? — A.  £  consider  the  American  waters  almost  worthless 
for  fishing  purposes.  Sometimes  there  may  be  a  certain  amount  of  fish 
caught  there,  but  the  history  of  this  fishery,  as  far  as  I  am  aware,  shows 
that  they  do  not  count  ou  it  themselves  as  a  means  of  finding  sufficient 
busiuess  for  their  vessels. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  for  the  last  two  years  the  catches  taken  there 
have  been  large  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  with  a  knowledge  of  that  fact,  this  is  your  opinion? — A.  These 
are  tbe  only  years  in  my  recollection  when  anything  like  enough  fish 
have  been  caught  to  correspond  with  the  expenditure  rendered  neces- 
sary by  the  trips. 

Q.  Do  you  know  at  what  distance  from  the  shore  the  American  catches 
are  taken  f  Do  they  come  in  as  close  to  their  shore  as  they  do  to  ours  f 
—A.  As  far  as  I  know,  they  do  not.  I  have  never  fished  on  the  Amer- 
ican shore,  but  still  I  have  seen  them  fishing,  and  they  do  so  fifty  or  sixty 
miles  out  from  the  shore,  on  the  banks. 

Q.  On  what  banks! — A.  The  banks  that  lie  between  Thatcher's  Island 
and  southeast  ot  Thatcher^s  Island. 

Q.  With  respect  to  these  two  extraordinary  years,  do  you  know  whether 
tbe  Hsh  were  taken  outside  of  three  miles  from  the  coast — far  out — or  in- 
side that  limit ! — A.  Ou  this  point,  I  only  know  what  I  have  been  told 
by  tbe  fishermen  themselves. 

Q.  You  speak  from  hearsay  ! — A.  Yes ;  it  is  the  only  way  I  know  any- 
thing about  it.  They  told  me  that  they  caught  most  of  their  fish  on  the 
American  shore  in  very  deep  water. 

Q.  In  what  way  ! — A.  With  purse  seines. 

Q.  At  wliat  distance  from  the  land  ? — A.  Out  of  sight  of  the  land — 
some  of  them.  I  was  talking  some  time  ago  with  Capt.  Neil  McPbee, 
who  is  an  island  man,  bnt  captain  of  one  of  the  Americiu  vessels,  and 
I  got  this  information  from  him. 

'.'  Where  is  he  ? — A.  Be  has  gone  to  the  Grand  Banks.  He  was  in 
Halifax  yevSterday. 

Q.  NVhat  schooner  does  he  command  now  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  exactly. 
I  believe  that  lier  name  is  Carl  Schurz. 

Q.  U  is  an  Ann  rican  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg: 

Q.  What  «lo  you  mean  by  an  island  man  ? — A.  A  native  of  I't iuce  Et!- 
ward  Island. 

By  Mr.  Davies: 

Q.  What  did  yon  do  in  1860! — A.  I  was  purchasing  fish  during  that 

year. 

Q.  You  did  not  go  with  the  fleet!— A.  I  caught  fish  in  1865. 


.)'; 


312 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


>4^ 


Q.  Aud  then  you  commeuced  trading  for  flsb  f  — A.  Yos. 

Q.  Purchasing  tbem  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Wliere  were  you  stationed  ? — A.  That  year,  I  was  at  a  point  about 
three  miles  east  of  Souris. 

Q.  Of  course  you  are  interested  in  tlie  Qshing  trade  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  attention  to  the  fleet  that  year? — A.  Yes 5  I  liavf 
done  so  more  or  less  ever  since  I  entered  the  business. 

Q.  What  number  of  vessels  came  in  the  fleet  to  the  gulf  that  .vpai  — 
1866? — A.  It  was  about  the  same  as  when  I  was  Ashing,  as  far  an  I  aiii 
aware.  I  saw  a  great  many  of  the  vessels,  and,  in  conversation  with 
men  I  knew,  1  was  told  thai  there  was  a  very  large  fleet  in  the  gulf. 
They  used  to  call  the  fleet  which  came  to  the  bay,  the  year  J  was  fishing, 
a  pretty  large  one. 

Q.  About  six  hundred  came? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yon  fix  that  as  about  the  number? — A.  I  cannot  be  so  positive  lor 
that  year  as  for  the  other.  I  saw  some  of  the  vessels,  however,  and  I 
conversed  with  a  great  many  of  the  captains,  who  told  nie  that  the  tiflet 
was  about  the  same  in  number.  Probably  it  numbered  about  six  Ituii- 
dred. 

Q.  What  proportion  put  in  to  Price  Edward  island  that  year ?~A. 
Probably  250  sail. 

Q.  Did  yon  see  tl^ein  fishing? — A.  They  fished  so  nuich  that  we  used 
to  have  to  ^et  out  of  their  way  sometimes,  when  we  would  be  ctit  in 
boats  not  half  a  mile  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Did  they  not  get  out  of  your  way  ? — A.  They  make  it  a  i>oiiit  to 
compel  us  to  get  out  of  their  way. 

Q.  Did  the  Americans  make  good  catches  that  year? — A.  I  think  thev 
were  pretty  fair.  I  myself  saw  them  taking  very  large  decks  right  vvl>  siV 
I  was  fishing.  They  took  as  many  as  ninety  barrels  in  one  day  right  in 
amongst  our  boats.  1  have  seen  them  take  very  large  quantities  of  fish 
right  amongst  our  boats. 

Q.  In  1866  were  vou  prosecuting  the  fisherv  busin-'iss  on  shore  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  of  the  year's  fishing,  as  far  as  the  shore  M\- 
ing  in  boats  was  concerned  ? — A.  A  very  large  <iuantit.v  of  mackerel  was 
taken. 

Q.  Hy  the  shoremen  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  do  the  boats  generally  fish  ? — A,  As  far 
as  I  know,  touching  this  fishing,  they  never  go  over  a  mile  and  :i  IihH 
from  the  shore,  and  they  often  fish  within  a  mile  and  a  half  of  it. 

Q.  Ar6  the  best  fishing-grounds  considered  to  be  within  a  mile  and  11 
mile  and  a  half  of  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  boat-fishing,  captain,  can  you  give  the  (V>ni 
mission  any  information  as  to  the  increase  in  the  number  of  boats  and 
men  engaged  in  it,  say  «luring  the  past  ten  jears? — A.  I  think  that  tin' 
number  has  very  materially  increased  during  this  i)erio(l,  [trubaldy  lOo 
l)er  cent.    The  increase  has  been  at  least  7")  per  cent. 

Q.  1  want  some  idea  as  ♦o  the  size  mid  character  of  these  boats,— A. 
They  vary  from  10  to  30  feet  in  length,  and  they  are  manned  by  from 
two  to  five  men.  In  the  large  boats  there  are  soinetinjes  as  many  as 
seven  iven. 

(^  What  do  the^  cost?— A.  From  $:i')  to  $500,  The  former  is  a  vory 
cheaj)  kind  of  dory. 

Q.  Are  boats  used  more  extensively  at  the  other  end  of  the  island  ?— 
A.  Small  boats  are  very  much  in  use  there,  owing  to  their  haviii},'  no 
br.  bors;  they  haul  the  boats  on  shore.    At  the  northern  end  of  the 


engaaed  ( 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


313 


iitlaiiil  tliey  are  iniicli  larger.    lu  this  part  I  suppose  that  their  average 
cost  is  f.'iOO.    Wc  have  to  haul  them  on  shore. 

{}.  Where  thi-re  are  harbors  the  fishermen  use  larger  boats? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  understand  that  from  the  year  186«>  downwards  you  have  been 
("iijraped  in  tliis  fishing  ? — A.  Yes,  with  the  exception  of  three  years, 
wbcii  I  was  absent  from  the  island. 

Q.  What  years  were  these?— A.  1870,  IS71,  and  1872.  I  was  also 
aitsent  tiurlng  the  winter  of  18(J1). 

().  Hut  leaving  out  tiiose  years  ? — A.  Ijeaving  them  (Uit,  I  h»ve  l>een 
iM)$;H[>i'd  ever  since  1802  in  the  fishing  business. 

Q.  Were  the  American  mackerel  fishing  vessels  kept  ott'  the  coast 
diuiiiM"  «">■  <>1  these  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  y»)ur  experience  in  this  respect! — A.  That  this  was  a 
very  great  annoyance  to  them.  They  often  watched  for  au  opportunity 
to  Jnjoy  good  fishing  inshore. 

Q.  liiii  the.N  absolutely  abstain  from  coming  within  the  limits  or  not? — 
A.  There  were  not  enough  cutters  to  keep  them  oflF. 

Q.  [m  some  instancies  they  did  come  inside  the  limit  ? — A.  Yes.  When 
tilt'  ciiUer  came  to  one  place,  they  would  go  to  some  other  place. 

ii.  Vou  .sir  that  the  number  of  boats  and  men  engaged  in  the  shore 
fishery  has  in  ueased.  Has  the  catch  increased  to  any  appreciable  ex- 
tent ?~A.  It  )ias  increased  in  the  same  ratio  as  the  boats. 

(^.  111  <(rtite  the  same  ratio? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  what  extent  did  you  say  the  number  of  boats  had  increased — 
1(K»  per  cent.! — A.  1  would  say  that  tliis  has  been  the  case  within  the 
last  ten  years. 

Q.  And  you  vsay  that  the  fish  caught  by  these  boats  have  been  ob- 
tained within  thiee  miles  of  hind  ? — A.  Y'es. 

(,}.  The  pi'iviSege  enjoyed  by  the  Americans  under  the  tieaty  of  pur- 
chasing supplies  iu  the  harbors  «»f  Britisli  North  America,  and  of  trans- 
shipping tish,  is  valued  very  highly  by  them,  is  it  not? — A.  I  oousider 
it  next  to  the  privilege  of  fishing  iu  these  waters.  It  is  one  of  the  best 
priviJeges  they  have ;  it  is  the  next  best. 

(l  I'erhaps  you  will  explain  why  ? — A.  When  they  come  down  with 
a  certain  amount  of  provisions  and  begin  taking  fish,  after  a  certain 
time  their  provisions  and  wood  and  water  are  exhausted,  and,  of  course, 
iflbeyc(udd  not  resort  to  Dominion  harbors  to  replenish,  they  would 
have  to  return  home,  and  they  then  might  as  well  carry  their  trips 
I'Oine. 

Q.  heaving  out  watfr,  wood,  and  fuel,  because  they  have  a  right  to 
l»i%'ure  these  in  our  harbors  outside  of  the  clauses  of  this  treaty,  and 
assniiiiiig  that  they  had  only  the  right  to  obtain  these  supplies  on  our 
shoreh,  what  would  be  the  result  * — A.  They  are  under  the  same  ne- 
cessity to  get  their  supplies  here  as  to  land  their  mackerel  when  they 
liave  liiletl  up  their  vessels.  Of  C(nu.se  they  require  supplies,  and  this 
i>as  much  benefit  to  them  as  the  jiglit  to  laisd  iiiackiivl. 

<4>.  Wiiut  sii|)plieK  do  they  require  ? — A.  The  provisiriis  they  must 
necessaiily  use  on  their  fishing  voyage.^,  such  as  pork,  butter,  flour,  beef, 
iiiid  potatoes.  They  get  a  very  great  (juantiiy  of  vegetables  tiiomid  our 
island. 

<J.  Are  they  considered  necessary  to  these  fishermen  ? — A.  The  own- 
ers ot'tiiese  vessels  have  to  furnish  the  uieii  with  the  best  possible  kind 
ot  provisions ;  if  the  men  are  put  on  what  Miey  call  salt  provisions, 
thev  pu'tty  soon  rebel  against  it.  The  consequence  is  that  tlie  captains 
have  to  look  for  fresh  meats  and  vegetables  atid  all  that  kind  of  thing 
tor  them. 


314 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


.    'I,      J     ;' 


Q.  Is  this  privilege  of  parcbasing  supplies,  which  the  AmericaQ  fish- 
ermeu  uow  eujny,  highly  prized  by  tbeui  f — A.  Yes,  very  highly  indeed. 

Q.  By  themselves  f— A.  Yes,  and  very  highly. 

Q.  What  bait  is  used  by  the  island  fishermen  i — A.  They  use  their 
own  bait.  Sometimes  they  purchase  American  bait ;  they  use  herriuirs 
&ad  clams  for  this  purpose. 

Q.  Which  bi^it  is  it  they  use  most  generally  ? — A.  I  think  that  tbe 
island  fishermen  use  our  own  more  than  American  bait. 

Q.  Where  do  they  procure  the  herring  t — A.  in  our  own  waters. 

Q.  Where  does  a  vessel  fitted  out,  say  from  Gloucester,  secure  salt, 
supposing  that  she  makes  more  than  one  tript — A.  It  is  furnished 
wherever  they  transship. 

Q.  Can  they  carry  enough  salt  with  them  ? — A.  In  refitting,  they  take 
with  them  everything  required  for  a  second  voyage,  including  salt  aud 
barrels,  provisions  and  outtittings. 

Q.  Is  the  cod  fishery  carried  on  to  any  extent  around  the  coasts  of 
Prince  Edward  Island  aud  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  It  is,  to  a  considoiablf 
extent. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  pursue  it  in  these  waters  f — A.  Yes ;  ofi' (Jape 
North,  there  are  very  large  numbers  of  Amerit-an  trawlers. 

Q.  Cape  North  is  off  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  it  is  the  north  rapt^  ut 
Breton. 

Q.  Where  do  these  trawlers  get  their  bait? — A.  Tliey  catcli  it  amuut. 
the  coast  of  Newfoundland  ;  aud  sometimes  at  St.  I  VK'r's  Island  aiul  at 
Tignish  Bay.    St.  Peter's  island  is  nearCharlottetowu. 

Q.  In  the  Hillsborough  Bay  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  bait  do  trawlers  use? — A.  Herring. 

Q.  I  believe  that  herring  are  very  plentiful  around  the  -o:  v  ot 
Prince  Edward  Island,  Ctipe  Breton,  and  Nova  Scotia  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  are  large  quantities  of  them  on  these  shores  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  the  co4l  fishery  be  carried  on  without  herring  bait  ? — A. 
I  consider  this  absolutely  impossible. 

Q.  How  many  trawlers  would  be  engaged  fishing  for  cod,  say  around 
Cape  North  I — A.  There  would  probably  be  45  or  50  sail. 

Q.  Do  they  get  all  their  herring  fiom  our  British  American  waters  7— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  tonnage  of  the  cod  trawlers? — A.  They  aver 
age  about  seventy  tuns,  I  think. 

Q.  is  there  any  halibut  fishing  abonl  these  coasts  ? — A.  It  is  not 
followed  much  in  the  bay  of  the  Saiut  Lawrence,  but  they  catch  suine 
halibut  there. 

Q.  Are  many  engaged  in  tbis  fishery  f — A.  I  am  not  aware  of  many 
being  specially  engaged  in  this  business. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  the  tiumber  of  the  tleet  en^^aged  in  the  haliltiu 
fishery? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  these  cod  trawlers  who  use  herring  bait  require  anythiii};  else- 
where do  they  get  their  ice  ? — A.  Around  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia,  ami 
sometimes  around  the  island. 

Q.  Is  that  a  necessary  article  for  the  lishernien  to  have? — A.  Tlicy 
can  only  keep  their  tish  by  means  of  ice. 

Q.  They  must  have  it? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  they  catch  herring  themselves  ? — A.  I  tliiiik 
that  they  do  sometimes.  I  am  sure  they  do  so.  1  have  seen  them  eateli- 
ing  herring. 

Q.  For  bait  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  as  a  general  rule  they  purchase  this  bait? — A.  Yes;  the}  tlo 


AWABD   OF   THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


315 


DOt  reqaire  to  buve  the  outfit  necessary  to  catob  herring  if  they  buy 
them.    Tbey  do  not  need  to  have  seines  for  the  purpose,  or  so  many  men 

as  otherwise  would  be  requisite. 

Q.  Is  it  a  fact  that  the  American  fleet,  by  dressing  on  board  the  maclc- 
erel  caught  by  rbem,  and  throwing  the  ofl'al  directly  into  the  water  ou 
the  mackerel tlMliing  grounds,  injure  the  fishing  in  your  opiiiiou  f — A.  I 
tbinli  it  does  the  grounds  material  injury. 

Q.  Where  do  the  boats  dress  the  mackerel  tbey  catch  1 — A.  They  take 
the  fl»h  on  shore  and  dress  them  at  the  stages. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  dress  them  on  the  grounds! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Materially  injuring  them  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Explain. — A.  The  stuff  thus  thrown  oti'  goes  to  the  bottom  ;  it  is 
in  shoal  water,  where  tbey  usually  catch  the  fish ;  there  is  not  much  tide, 
and  the  mackerel  do  not  like  it. 

Q.  Is  there  much  of  this  offal  thrown  overboard  ? — A.  Very  great 
quantities,  when  the  fleets  are  large ;  about  one-fourth  uf  a  mackerel  is 
offal. 

Q.  What  is  thrown  overboard  sticks  to  the  bottom  7 — A.  Yes.  Some- 
times these  vessels  catch  something  like  75  barrels  a  day ;  and  some- 
times two  or  three  hundred  sail  are  fishing  together  in  the  same  neigh- 
borhood. 

Q.  After  a  fleet  has  dressed  the  da>'s  catch  and  tlirowu  the  offal  over 
l)uard,  will  the  boats  find  fish  there  the  next  day  1 — A.  Not  usually 
The  American  fishermen  usually  make  it  a  point  when  they  have  caught 
tush,  tu  get  under  weigh  and  set  sails  in  the  position  called  jogging,  and 
thuH  the  vessel  works  out  of  the  quarter  where  the  fish  have  been  taken. 
Conscqueutly  the  offal  is  thrown  over  in  a  different  place.  Usually 
when  the  fish  are  dressed,  they  sail  back  to  the  spot  where  they  had 
been  fishing.  I  have  known  Arnerican  captains  keep  the  offal  on  deck 
until  they  were  a  sufficient  distance  away  from  the  grounds,  and  then 
throw  it  overboard. 

Q.  This  was  done  from  fear  of  injuring  the  fishing  i — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  large  quantity  of  blood  mixed  with  the  offal  t — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  effect  has  this  on  the  mackerel? — A.  The  usual  effect,  save 
when  the  fish  are  biting  well,  is  to  cause  the  mackerel  to  sink  and  go 
away. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  cod  trawlers  do  the  same  thing  If — A.  They 
have  a  place  specially  built  on  deck  to  kee[>  the  offal  in  during  the  voy- 
age. Wht'n  they  make  what  they  call  a  berth,  sailing  from  one  spot  to 
another,  they  throw  it  overboard,  but  they  make  it  a  point  to  keei>  it  on 
deck  when  fishing  in  one  particular  locality. 

Q.  This  throwing  of  ottal  overboard  has  a  prejudicial  effect? — A.  Yes ; 
this  is  proven  by  .-xperieiice.  The  fishermen  oaniiot  catch  fish  when 
they  throw  the  oh\i\  overboard. 

().  It  injures  the  particular  spot  where  it  is  thrown  ? — A.  Certainly. 
The fisluMinen  would  not  think  for  a  inonien  of  '  .Sr,.~ij  where  they  have 
tliiowii  it  overboard.     They  then  sail  to  ancrlier  ,  .a.t*. 

<i.  As  tar  as  that  plaee  iw  coneerned  it  is  mined  tor  fishing'  piiipos's, 
as  far  as  anybody  else  is  concerned  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  M>ii  were  four  or  five  years  in  Gloneester  witli  American 
V(.'.s.-els,  (lid  you  notice  whether  they  made  such  larjje  c;»telies  when 
^ueh  high  i>rices  prevailed,  and  whether  the  wealth  of  the  |»lace  was 
^Teatly  increased  in  i'oiise<meiMM'  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  was  materially  incivased; 
^oine  men  who  were  poor  when  1  went  there  were  owners  ot  firtns  when 
I  left. 


316 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


m 


Q.  Were  tbey  engaged  Id  the  bay  fishing  T— A.  Capt.  Andrew  Lay- 
ton  was  reported  to  be  part  owner  of  a  vessel  in  1862 ;  and  when  I  left 
there  he  was  established  with  seven  or  eight  vessels,  with  a  firm. 

Q.  Dae  to  his  prosecution  of  the  bay  fishery  ? — A.  Yes.  In  1863,  lie 
had  a  vessel  bailt  .ta  cost  of  $14,000;  he  sold  her  that  fall  at  St. 
Peter's  for  the  same  amount  of  money,  and  he  declared  that  he  cleared 
in  the  business  that  year  the  pr  ice  he  had  paid  for  this  vessel.  Other 
men  I  also  knew  made  money. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  In  what  year  was  this  ?— A.  In  18G3  or  1864. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Is  that  the  only  instance  !— A.  When  I  went  there  Capt.  Joseph 
Bowe,  also  a  fisherman,  was  part  owner  in  a  firm  of  the  schooner  Ells- 
worth, and  when  I  left  there  he  ran  a  mackerel  firm  owning  seven  or 
eight  vessels,  and  well  established.  I  knew  several  others  who  were 
similarly  snccessful,  but  I  have  forgotten  their  names. 

Q.  What  do  you  call  a  mackerel  firm  f — A.  An  establlHiiment  fitting 
out  seven  or  eight  vessels  for  the  purpose  of  following  the  fishery  busi- 
ness in  the  bay  or  wherever  desired. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  there  are  more  instances  to  your  knowledge 
than  those  you  have  mentioned  f — A.  Yes  ;  but  I  do  not  recollect  their 
names. 

Q.  Was  this  distribution  of  wealth  general,  or  not  f — A.  I  think  that 
in  this  year  Gloucester  was  built  up  100  per  cent.  It  increased  in  wealth 
to  nearly  100  per  cent. 

Cj.  From  what  did  it  proceed? — A.  From  this  fishing. 

Q.  Where  T — A.  In  the  bay  of  St.  Lawrence.  They  considered  fish- 
irg  on  the  American  shore  in  those  years  to  be  worthless.  Gaptains  ot 
vessels  could  not  get  crews  to  go  fishing  on  the  American  shore. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  In  what  years  did  wealth  increase  100  per  cent,  in  Gloucester  ?— A. 
From  1862  to  1866. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Does  your  experience  enable  you  to  give  us  any  information  about 
the  habits  of  mackerel — their  spawning  or  feeding  places? — A.  Well, 
from  the  time  they  leave  Cape  May,  I  know  more  or  less  about  their 
course. 

Q.  Describe  it. — A.  They  make  their  first  appearance  oflF  Cape  May, 
where  the  American  fishermen  go  to  catch  them,  starting  out  ahout  the 
Ist  of  May  and  following  them  along  until  about  the  Ist  of  Jiiuo. 
Then  they  come  off  Cape  Cod,  and  from  there  they  strike  on  Cape 
Sable  and  down  the  Nova  Scotian  shore. 

By  Mr.  I'^oster : 
Q.  When  f — A.  They  usually  strike  thereabout  the  first  of  June. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  When  are  they  caught  ott  Cape  May?— A.  In  May.    The  fisher 
men  commence  operations  toward  the  latter  end  of  April  or  the  1st  of 
May,  and  the  shoal  is  then  nioviug  along  toward  Cape  Cod,  .iiul  from 
there  they  strike  over  toward  Cape  Sable. 

Q.  When  are  they  found  near  Cape  Cod  ? — A.  Towards  the  lattoi 
part  of  the  fishing  season  and  about  tlw  1st  of  June — between  the  1st 
and  lOih  of  June. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


317 


Q.  And  when  do  they  strike  Cape  Sable  f — A.  Very  shortly  after- 
ward ;  and  they  follow  the  Nova  Scotian  shore  down.  They  seem  to 
keep  moving  right  along. 

Q.  And  where  do  they  follow  them  up  ? — A.  The  fish  seem  to  keep 
right  along ;  some  moving  around  Gape  North  and  more  through  the 
Straits  of  Canso,  coming  thence  into  the  bay. 

Q.  When  they  are  running  alottg  the  American  coast  are  they  as 
close  inshore  as  they  are  on  our  coast,  or  not  ? — A.  They  are  not  usu- 
ally so  close  in.  They  have  no  particular  places  of  resort  there,  as  far 
as  I  know,  but  move  along  from  fifty  miles  out  to  within  close  limits  of 
the  shore.    They  are  caught  from  ten  to  fifty  miles  from  the  shore. 

Q.  When  do  they  reach  the  Gulf! — A.  About  the  first  of  June.  It  is 
later  than  at  that  date. 

Q.  At  about  what  date  f — A.  Th'  whole  of  them  do  not  come  together. 
Of  course,  they  take  two  or  throf  weeks  to  arrive. 

Q.  Do  they  move  straight  onwards,  or  stop  on  their  way  f — A.  They 
seem  to  move  onward  all  the  time.  The  proof  of  that  is  that  when  the 
American  fishing  vessels  are  oflf  Cape  May  they  have  to  follow  the  fish 
toward  the  north,  or  Gloucester,  coming  in  this  direction. 

Q.  And  they  get  into  our  bay  at  about  what  date  f — A.  Between  the 
5tb  and  15th  of  June. 

Q.  And  where  do  they  go  ?— A.  They  follow  bay  up  to  Bay  Chaleurs, 
and  seem  to  spawn  up  there  about  the  first  of  July,  or  along  there ;  per- 
haps they  do  so  earlier  than  the  first  of  July. 

Q.  When  do  you  find  little  mackerel  in  the  waters  of  the  Gulf  i — A. 
About  the  first  of  September. 

Q.  Are  they  very  numerous? — A.  Yea;  some  years  they  are. 

Q.  Give  us  some  idea  of  it. — A.  They  are  as  thick  as  they  possibly 
could  be;  the  water  is  full  of  them.  They  are  then  some  two  or  three 
inches  in  length. 

Q.  And  when  do  they  leave  the  Gulf? — A.  They  commence  to  do  so 
in  October,  and  some  of  the  last  school  do  not  leave  until  November. 

Q.  And  where  do  they  go? — A.  They  return,  and  seem  to  trace  the 
same  course  right  back — and  they  are  caught  off  the  Nova  Scotian  coast 
on  their  way  back  with  nets,  and  sometimes  with  seines.  The  fishermen 
sometimes  follow  them  as  far  as  Flint  Island,  down  at  Scatari,  on  the 
southeastern  part  of  Gape  Breton. 

Q.  When  did  you  leave  Prince  Edward  Island  th:8  year? — A.  I  think 
it  was  on  the  27th  of  July. 

Q.  What  are  the  indications  with  regard  to  the  fishing  this  year? — A. 
The  indications  are  that  there  is  a  very  large  body  of  mackerel  in  the 
bay.    Immense  <iuantities  of  them  school  every  day. 

Q.  Huve  the  catches  on  the  boats  been  large  ? — A.  Very  large.  The 
boats  with  three  men  each,  have  landed  on  the  north  side  of  the  island 
as  many  as  2,.'>(K)  mackerel  in  a  day. 

(^  Is  this  in  the  bay? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  mackerel  would  go  to  a  barrel  ? — A.  I  suppose  proba- 
bly 200  or  225  at  this  time  of  the  year. 

Q.  Has  the  American  fleet  put  in  an  appearance  on  the  bay  this 
spring  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  very  large  numbers.  Most  of  them  this  year  have 
seines. 

Q.  What  number  of  this  fleet  would  be  there  this  year,  do  you  sup- 
pose i — A.  I  have  not  formed  any  idea  save  from  what  has  been  told  me. 
■^onie  of  them  with  whom  I  conversed  say  that  the  whole  fleet  is  coming. 
"  a  captain  of  a  vessel  how  many  there  were,  and  I  was  told  the 


318 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


fleet  numbered  nine  hnndred  sail.    They  said  they  were  doing  nfthing 
on  their  own  shore,  and  that  most  of  them  have  seines. 

Q.  How  many  have  arrived  at  the  island  so  far? — A.  They  were 
arriving  there  fast  when  we  left.  The  evening  previons  to  our  di'part 
urc,  there  was  a  strong  wind  to  the  north,  and  quite  a  number,  forty  or 
fifty,  came  in  for  shelter  where  I  live,  and  seven  eights  of  them  had 
seines.  Some  of  tliem,  in  a  week,  caught  three  hundred  barrels  ot  tish 
in  the  bav  with  seines.  One  vessel  threw  a  seine  around  a  very  large 
school  and  found  it  so  large  that  they  had  to  cut  it.  It  w^as  estimated 
to  contain  1,000  barrels.  This  was  off  St.  Peter's.  The  seine  got  caught 
in  the  bottom  and  they  could  not  purse  if.  Tliey  had  to  go  to  St.  Peter's 
Harbor  to  mend  it.  Off  East  Point,  within  half  a  mile  of  the  shore,  CajU. 
Charles  Lee  took  IHO  barrels  with  one  haul  of  a  seine.  I  do  not  kiiuw 
the  length  of  his  schooner,  but  she  was  in  at  Souris. 


Q. 


By  Mr.  Foster: 
He  is  a  Gloucester  man  ? — A.  Yes. 


By  Mr.  Da  vies: 

Q.  Has  anything  been  done  this  season? — A.  When  I  left  there  three 
or  totir  vessels,  loaded  by  means  of  seines,  had  passed  througli  the 
gut. 

Q.  They  had  gone  home  loaded? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  Gloucester  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  an  idea  of  the  probable  effect  whii  li 
seining  will  have  on  our  tlshing? — A.  We  have  such  still  currents  and 
still  water,  that  I  believe  their  use  will  end  in  the  total  destruction  ot 
our  fisheries. 

Q.  We  have  such  still  water? — A.  We  have  such  shoal  water  and 
still  currents  that  the  fish  play  inside  near  the  shore.  As  a  conse(iueiice. 
seining  will  drive  the  whole  of  them  off  and  keep  them  out  of  the  bay 
altogether. 

Q.  What  are  these  seines  like? — A.  A  seine  is  a  large  net.  It  is 
supposed  to  be  about  liSO  fathoms  in  length.  I  have  asked  a  great 
many  American  fishermen  what  their  average  length  was,  and  they 
said  180  fathoms ;  they  are  regulated  by  the  character  of  the  vessel,  and 
a  running  string  is  placed  around  them,  and  this  is  the  principle  un 
which  they  are  made.  They  haul  the  bottom  tight,  and  everytlmig  in- 
side the  iniilosure  is  secured,  whatever  it  may  be. 

Q.  They  haul  the  bottom  tight? — A.  Yes;  with  a  running  string. 
That  is  the  principle  of  it.  The  ropes  are  reeved  on  a  block  in  tiie  sein- 
ing boat.  The  ciew  haul  one-half  on  each  rope,  and  the  bottom  lu'in^ 
drawn  tight,  all  the  tish  entangled  are  inclosed — cod,  mackerel,  herring, 
or  whatever  else  there  may  be  inside. 

Q.  When  inclosed,  how'do  they  gather  the  fish  up? — A.  By  means 
of  boats. 

i).  And  do  they  lump  the  fish  together?— A.  The  fish  are  all  tho 
time  getting  into  a  smaller  inidosure. 

Q.  What  is  the  size,  of  the  meshes  of  these  seines?— A.  The.v  are 
smaller  than  the  uuickerel.  This  makes  it  hatulier  to  haul  the  seine 
into  the  boat.  The  meshes  are  made  one  and  a  quarter  inches  wide,  or 
inside  of  two  inches  at  least. 

i).  When  tliey  haul  the  seine,  do  they  gather  in  the  fish — large  and 
small  i — A.  They  stuMire  everything  tai.en  in  the  seine. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  these  fish  ?— A.  They  take  out  the  mack- 
erel and  let  the  rest  go. 


AWARD   OP   T17E   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


319 


Q.  Do  the  rest  get  off  alive t — A.  They  are  dead,  of  course;  they  are 
choked,  and  they  die,  if  not  then,  inside  of  a  few  hours. 

Q.  Yon  consider  that  the  use  of  nets  will  in  a  short  tim*^  utterly  de- 
stroy our  fisheries  f — A.  Yes.  In  onr  still  waters,  owinj;  to  their  want 
of  ciirrtMit.  the  flsh  are  more  easily  seen.  I  have  thought  the  matter 
over  a  good  deiil,  and  I  think  the  use  of  seines  is  one  reason  why  the 
fish  have  left  the  American  shore,  and  I  believe  that  their  eniployment 
will  have  a  still  more  injurious  efTect  on  our  shores,  owing  to  our  shoal 
water,  and  the  fact  that  our  currents  are  not  so  strong  as  these  on  the 
AiiHM'ican  coast. 

Q.  ('(Hiseciuently  the  flsh  are  more  easily  seen. — A.  Yes.  Some  of 
the  American  captains  told  me  they  would  not  have  a  bit  of  trouble  in 
getting  up  flsh  here,  were  their  seines  not  too  long  and  deep. 
"  Q.  For  our  shoal  water  I — A.  Yes.  Some  take  the  central  portion  of 
the  seine  right  out  and  sew  the  arms  together,  and  they  seem  to  catch 
the  fish  much  faster  now. 

Q.  What  chance  for  catching  flsh  will  the  boat-fishers  have  along 
shore  in  the  presence  of  the  seitiesf — A.  I  think  the  latter  will  utterly 
destroy  the  fishing  and  break  up  the  schools,  driving  them  seaward. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  abont  the  manner  in  which  the  herring 
tisliery  is  prosecuted  at  the  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  Y^^s. 

Q.  I)i>  the  fishermen  go  on  shore  there  to  carry  it  on? — A.  Until 
witiiiM  the  last  three  years  they  used  to  catch  the  flsh  there  by  hauling 
seines,  throwing  the  seine  around  a  school  and  having  lines  attached  to 
the  siiore.  A  number  of  crews  would  haul  them  on  shore;  but  now 
tliey  are  caught  with  purse  seines  away  out  in  the  bay,  similar  to  mack- 
erel. The  majority  of  the  flsh  taken  on  the  Magdalen  Islands  were 
caiiuiit  by  hauling  seines  on  shore. 

Q  With  reference  to  the  privilege  offered  to  the  colonists  to  flt  out 
vessels  and  flsh  in  American  waters — would  you  give  the  Commission 
yoiu'  opinion  as  to  whether  it  is  a  boon  or  privilege  of  any  value  to  us, 
or  iidt  ?— A.  I  consider  the  American  flshing  grounds  wholly  valueless. 
Anybody  who  knows  anything  about  this  flshing,  knows  that  it  is  better 
to  tisli  in  our  own  waters  than  to  flt  out  vessels  to  go  four  or  flve  hun- 
dred miles  with  th-j  chances  of  cat'^hing  less  flsh  there  than  they  would 
at  home.  Besides,  from  my  knowledge  of  American  waters,  I  consider 
that  there  are  more  vessels  in  those  waters  now  than  there  is  room  for, 
independent  of  the  fleet  that  is  in  the  bay.  There  is  a  lot  of  small 
craft  (;at(;liing  fresh  flsh  in  that  quarter.  There  are  an  immense  quan- 
tity ot  little  hookers  of  30  and  4U  tons  along  that  shore  in  every  con- 
ceivable pla<!e  catching  all  kinds  of  flsli.  I  think  that  a  British  vessel 
would  have  no  chance  at  all  amongst  them. 

Q.  You  think  that  their  waters  are  overstocked  with  craft  ? — A.  More 
vessels  are  there  than  there  is  room  for.  This  was  the  case  until  this 
year. 

(j.  As  to  the  menhaden  bait  caught  olf  the  American  shore,  how 
ami  where  are  they  taken  ? — A.  I  have  not  much  kiiowlcdije  of  them. 

(}.  ("an  you  tell  me,  captain,  what  the  price  of  mackerel  is  this 
year ".  lias  the  failure  of  the  American  flslieries  had  any  effect  on  it  ? — 
A.  Yes;  1  think  that  it  has  had  considi-raltle  effect  on  their  value; 
mackerel  which  were  worth  $0  an*  now  worth  $1."».  It  is  only  reason- 
aide  to  suppose  that  this  is  dne  to  the  failure  of  the  American  flsheries. 
Fish  wliit'h  were  quoted  at  $()  at  the  commencement  of  the  season,  are 
now  (jiioted  at  $15.  Of  course,  maiikerel  are  of  a  little  better  quality 
now.    Nuujber  threes  will  now  probably  bring  $12,  when  at  the  begiii- 


320 


AWARD   OF  THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


niDg  of  the  season  they  sold  for  $6,  and  uumber  twos  are  quoted  as 
high  as  $15. 

Q.  What  are  number  ones  worth  T — A.  I  have  not  as  yet  .seen  a  (|iio- 
tation  for  ones^ 

Q.  Is  the  codfishing  on  the  island  coasts  very  extensive  ?— A.  Vks: 
very. 

Q.  Is  this  fishery  prosecuted  to  any  large  extent  ? — A.  A  very  large 
number  of  people  are  employed  on  the  codfishing  vessels. 

Q.  Around  our  shores  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  many  boats  employed  in  this  fishing  *. — A.  Yes ;  a  very  <rreat 
uumber,  probably  1,200. 

Q.  Around  the  island?— A.  Yes;  and  the  number  is  even  i>;reater 
than  that. 

Q.  What  distance  from  the  shore  are  they  taken  i — A.  They  are  taken 
half  a  mile  to  four  miles  off.  Most  of  them  are  taken  within  a  mile  and 
a  half  from  the  shore. 

Q.  In  very  large  quantities  f — A.  Very  large  quantities  of  codtisli. 

Q.  Are  those  codfishing  boats  larger  than  mackerel-fishing  boats  !— 
A.  About  the  same  size.  The  majority  of  the  fish  are  taken  within  a 
mile  and  a  half  from  the  shore.    The  main  school  is  there. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  during  the  first  trip  you  made  iu 
1862  there  was  not  any  i)ortion  of  the  mackerel  caught  more  than  three 
miles  from  the  shore. — A.  No ;  that  was  the  fall  trip. 

Q.  That  you  took  particular  notice  of,  I  suppose  f — A.  There  was 
nothing  particular  about  it.  I  remember  where  we  were  fishing,  which 
is  about  all  the  particular  notice  I  took  of  it. 

Q.  You  started  fishing  where  you  found  evidence  of  the  presence  of 
the  school  of  fish,  and  you  let  the  vessel  drift,  I  suppose  f — A.  We  went 
to  the  Magdalen  Islands  and  caught  nothing ;  we  then  came  back  to 
the  bend  of  the  island  and  fished  for  part  of  the  season. 

Q.  You  caught  nothing  at  the  Magdalen  Islands?—  A.  No. 

Q.  When  you  were  fishing  at  the  bend  of  the  island  you  found  tish 
and  let  your  vessel  drift  f — A.  Drift  for  a  short  time. 

Q.  But  yon  could  not  fish  inshore  unless  the  wind  was  offshore  !— A. 
Exactly. 

Q.  How  far  would  you  drift  ?— A.  For  an  hour,  probably. 

Q.  How  far  would  you  drift  in  one  hour  f — A.  Not  more  than  one 
mile  or  one  mile  and  a  half;  it  would  altogether  depend  on  the  strength 
of  the  wind. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  very  small  distance  to  drift  in  one  hour  ? — A.  Not 
when  there  is  no  tide.  Sometimes  a  vessel  will  fish  from  morning  to 
night  and  drift  not  more  than  ten  miles  in  the  twelve  hours. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  pretty  small  distance  to  drift,  one  mile  and  a  half  in  an 
honrf — A.  No;  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  Do  not  they  usually  drift  more  than  that  ? — A.  It  is  about  a  fair 
rate ;  that  is  what  a  vessel  will  usually  drift,  taking  one  day  with  another. 
Sometimes  they  will  not  drift  200  yards  in  an  hour. 

Q.  How  often  a  day  did  you  have  to  stop  fishing  and  tack  inshore  ?— 
A.  About  five  or  six  times  in  the  fall,  sometimes  oftener,  but  never  less 
than  five  or  six  times. 

Q.  How  niany  hours  do  you  fish  t — A.  We  tish  while  it  is  daylight. 

Q.  From  daylight  to  dark  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Which  in  July  here  would  be  bow  many  hours  ? — A.  10  hours. 

Q.  Vou  would  be  fishing  10  hours  and  would  have  to  come  back  half 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


321 


a  dozen  tiincR  iusbore,  aiul  you  still  think  that  you  did  all  that  inside 
tbree  miles  of  thu  shore? — A.  Speaking  about  that  trip,  I  am  certaia 

of  it. 

Q.  That  it  was  all  done?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  had  no  motive  to  notice  the  distance  from  shore? — A.  No. 

Q.  There  was  no  prohibition  at  that  time? — A.  There  was  no  reason 
why  we  should  not  fish  where  we  pleased,  as  far  as  I  know.  We  could 
not  find  fish  anywhere  else. 

Q.  You  are  prepared  as  a  matter  of  recollection  to  say  that  you  never 
caught  fish  thatsummer  more  than  three  miles  from  shore? — A.  That  is 
80,  if  my  memory  serves  me  right. 

Q.  And  your  mind  is  clear  and  satisfied  about  it? — A.  Quite  clear. 

Q.  What  bait  did  you  have  that  summer? — A.  Pogies. 

Q.  Did  you  bring  them  with  you  from  Gloucester? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  think  we  have  not  got  the  name  of  the  captain  of  the  vessel  T — 
A.  It  was  Martin  Whalen. 

Q.  Was  what  you  say  of  yourself  true  of  the  whole  of  the  fleet  fishing 
alongside  of  you? — A.  There  was  a  considerable  number  fishing  with  us. 

Q.  How  many  ? — A.  At  Cape  Breton  there  was  a  very  large  fleet, 
probably  300  saM  at  a  time.    They  all  fished  in  the  same  locality. 

Q.  And  hU  during  the  l(i  hours  you  kept  within  3  miles? — A.  As  it 
got  later  in  llu'  year  the  days  got  shorter. 

Q.  During  the  whole  of  the  days,  long  or  short,  the  fleet  kept  within 
three  miles  of  the  sliore  ? — A.  They  had  to  do  so,  for  in  the  fall  they  can- 
not cntch  fish  outside. 

Q.  You  remember  that  the  American  fleet  of  300  sail  kept  through 
the  whole  long  summer  days  within  three  miles  of  the  sliore,  do  you  ? — 
A.  To  the  best  of  my  memory;  my  memory  is  clear  on  the  point. 

Q.  So  that  none  of  that  American  fleet  off"  the  bend  of  the  island,  of 
MIsail,  caught  any  mackerel  outside  three  miles  from  the  shore  ? — A. 
I  iiin  speaking  especially  of  our  own  vessel.  I  have  good  reason  to  re- 
iiii'iiiber  the  action  of  our  own  vessel  more  than  the  action  of  the  fleet. 
1  remember  there  was  a  large  number  of  vessels  around  with  us.  It  is 
tiie  rule  for  vessels  to  fish  together. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  are  not  so  i»08itive  as  to  the  rest  of  the  fleet  as  to 
your  own  vessel  ? — A.  I  would  not  be  positive  as  to  the  exact  number, 
Imt  a  considerable  number  lam  satisfied. 

Q.  Then  some  vessels  may  have  taken  a  few  mackerel  outside  the 
three  mile  limit  that  summer,  though  fishing  in  company  with  you  ? — 
A.  It  would  not  be  possible  for  them  to  do  so. 

Q.  Tiien  you,  according  to  your  recollection,  are  confident  that  the 
whole  of  the  American  fishing  fleet  flshitig  in  the  bend  of  the  island,  in 
the  summer  and  autumn  of  18G2,  caught  no  mackerel  except  withiu 
three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  I  had  not  such  a  good  knowledge  regard- 
ing those  fishing  round  us  as  of  our  own  vessel. 

Q.  You,  of  course,  noticed  your  own  vessel,  but  you  saw  the  rest  ? — 
A.  I  (lid  not  say  1  saw  300  sail  in  the  bend  of  the  island.  I  saw  about 
ol|l>  sail  on  Cape  Breton  shore. 

Q.  There  were  300  in  company  with  you,  and  vou  observed  their  opera 
tioiis  ?_A.  Yes. 
Q.  And  all  those  vessels  kept  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  and  did 

not  go  outside  ? — A.  Yes ;  that  is  my  testimony,  on  the  Cape  Breton 

shore. 
Q.  And  the  reason  you  give  is  that  along  that  shore  the  water  is 

very  bold  ?— A.  It  was  bold  and  it  was  still. 
Q.  Then  you  began  in  1862  with  Captain  Samuel  Rowe,  of  Glou- 
21  F 


322 


AWARD  OF  THE  FI8HEBY  COMMISSION. 


cester,  and  you  made  your  first  visit  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  at  that 
time  and  caught  300  barrels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tou  caught  100  barrels  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  f — A.  Probably 
100  or  150  barrels.  We  caught  the  trip  between  the  Magdalen  iHlands, 
East  Point,  arid  Saint  Peter's. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  f — A.  From  KM) 
to  150  barrels.  I  could  not  state  the  particular  number  of  barrclH;  it 
was  between  100  and  150. 

Q.  All  you  did  not  catch  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  you  caught  where?— 
A.  Between  Saint  Peter's  and  East  Point. 

Q.  All  the  rest  within  the  three-mile  limit  f — A.  The  greater  portion 
of  them.    Some  of  the  tri|>  was  caught  outside  the  limits  at  both  {Haces. 

Q.  Of  the  portion  not  caught  at  the  Magdalen  Lslands,  what  portion 
was  caught  outside? — A.  Probably  80  barrels  outside. 

Q.  Then,  according  to  your  statement,  as  I  have  it  now,  you  caught 
at  the  Magdalen  Islands  from  100  to  150  barrels ;  we  will  call  it  11^5,  and 
that  wouUl  be  fair  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  the  rest  of  the  trip  you  caught  80  barrels  outside  the 
three-mile  limit.  That  would  be  205  barrels.  So  that  during  the 
trip  you  caught  5  barrels  more  than  two-thirds  outside  the  liniitH  ?— A. 
I  don't  think  I  have  said  anything  like  that. 

Q.  lietnniing  to  the  bend  of  the  island,  what  ])roportion  did  you 
catch  outside  the  three-mile  limit  I — A.  One  third  in  deep  water  between 
East  Point  and  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  You  caught  300  barrels  in  all  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  We  have  175  barrels  caught  at  the  bend  of  the  island,  and  one 
third  of  175  barrels  was  caught  in  deep  water  more  than  3  miles  Iroiu 
shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  you  have  180  barrels  out  of  300  as  being  caught  that  trip  out- 
side the  three-mile  limit  ? — A.  I  cannot  make  it  out  so. 

Q.  Then  explain  it  in  your  own  way. — A.  We  went  to  the  Ma},Mlalen 
Islands  first,  and  between  Magdalen  islands  and  Saint  Peter's  and  East 
Point  we  caught  the  wlude  trip.  One-third  of  that  trip  we  caught  in  deep 
water  between  East  Point  and  Magdalen  Islands,  which  would  maiie 
about  100  barrels  caught  in  deep  water.  The  rest  were  taken  in  proba- 
bly equal  quantities  at  both  places,  close  inshore. 

Q.  You  regard  part  of  the  catch  made  close  in  to  the  Magdalen  Islands- 
as  having  been  within  the  limits! — A.  That  may  be  the  difi'erence. 

Q.  It  never  made  an\  difierence  at  Magdalen  Islands  how  close  to  the 
shore  Americans  fished? — A.  That  may  be  the  explanation  of  my  state 
ment. 

Q.  How  much  of  the  three  hundred  barrels  of  mackerel  caught  by 
you  that  year  did  you  catch  in  places  where,  but  for  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty  being  then  in  force,  Americans  could  not  have  gone  ? — A.  Figur- 
ing on  that  basis,  we  probably  caught  two  hundred  barrels  outside  our 
own  waters, 

Q.  After  that  trip  you  returned  to  Gloucester  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  came  again  in  the  Rescue? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  went  first  to  the  north  side  of  the  island  and  then  to  the 
Magdalen  Islands,  and  found  no  fish? — A.  Yes;  and  then  went  to 
Sydney. 

Q.  Between  Flint  Harbor  and  Sydney  Harbor  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  filled 
the  vessel  ui). 

Q.  They  were  all  caught  inshore!— A.  The  whole  fieet  fished  inshore 
that  year. 

Q.  You  are  sure  about  that! — A.  1  am  quite  positive  about  that. 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


323 


Q.  There  were  three  hundred  vesflels  fishing  with  yon  f — A.  J  said 
there  were  probably  300  vessels  there  at  one  time. 

Q.  It  is  based  upon  your  distinct  recollection  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  wh<»Ie  were  fishing  insi«lo  ? — A.  The  whole  of  them. 

Q.  Now,  you  say  tliat  the  average  catch  of  these  vessels,  so  far  as 
voii  can  juilfje,  for  the  entire  season,  was  (ir»0  barrels? — A..  Yes. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  very  larfje  average  ? — A.  How  I  make  the  average  is 
this:  I  know  a  great  many  vessels  caught  l,r>00  barrels,  and  1  know  that 
we  were  not  catching  more  than  the  avarage  quantity,  and  our  own 
avenige  was  tliat  number. 

Q.  But  is  not  that  a  very  large  average  T — A.  They  caught  very  large 
averages  in  those  years  1  have  given  you. 

Q.  So  it  was  a  very  large  average  f — A.  Yes;  it  was  a  fair  average. 

Q.  050  barrels?— A.  It  was  an  exceptionally  good  season. 

Q.  In  the  next  year,  1804,  you  were  on  the  Calalina,  Captain  Powell ; 
started  at  the  latter  jtart  of  June,  and  fished  between  North  Cape  and 
Bank  Bradley  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  Bank  Hra<lley  is  off  the  shore,  of  course? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Uuw  nuinv  miles  from  shore  ? — A.  The  outside  part  is  a  large  piece 
ott'. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  catch  did  you  take  outsi<le  three  miles  of 
shore  ? — A.  We  took  about  two-thirds  of  that  catch  olf  shore.  It  was 
very  earl>  in  the  season,  and  mackerel  were  well  (»ut.  During  the  latter 
part  ot  the  trip  we  kept  right  in  the  bend  of  the  island,  off  Kustico. 

Q.  Bank  Bradley  is  an  excellent  fishing  place,  I  believe.'' — A.  Yes,  in 
spring  lor  a  short  time. 

Q.  Then  two-thirds  of  the  .'iOO  caught  during  that  trip  were  caught  off 
8imre? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Those  300  barrels  you  landed  atOanso  ami  transshipped? — A.  No. 

i}.  You  went  back  to  (iloucester  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  go  back  took  you  how  long  ? — A.  About  tliree  weeks  to  go  and 
come  in  the  fall. 

Q.  How  long  does  it  take  to  refit  at  (rloucester  ? — A.  Usually  about 
one  week. 

Q.  About  the  same  length  of  time  as  to  relit  here  I  sup|)o:)e — one 
week? — A.  They  are  usually  in  more  hurry  here.  The  men  are  not  iu 
such  a  hurry  when  they  arrive  home  ait  Gloucester. 

Q.  Your  second  trip  was  round  the  bend  of  the  island  and  to  Magda- 
len Islands  ? — A    Yes. 

Q.  How  many  mackerel  di<l  you  get  on  the  second  trip? — A.  Three 
hundred  l)arrels. 

Q.  How  many  at  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  We  would  probably  take 
half  of  those  there. 

Q.  Then  you  said  you  got  80  barrels  outside? — A.  In  deep  water,  I 

OlL'HUt. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  you  took  80  l)arrels  in  deep  water  off  the  bend  of  the 
islaiKJ  ♦ — A.  Between  the  island  and  Magdalen  Islands. 

^.  Besides  one-half  caught  at  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  In  that  1  in- 
cludeil  the  80  l>arrels. 

Q.  Except  150  barrels  caught  at  Magdalen  Islands  and  on  the  way, 
ilid  .vou  yet  any  mackerel  outside  of  tiie  three-mile  limit? — A.  One-half 
at  Magdalen  Islands  and  in  deep  water,  ami  the  rest  in  the  Itend  of  the 
island,  most  of  them  inshore. 

Q.  After  the  second  trip  you  unloaded  at  Canso,  refitted,  and  tried  the 
Magdalen  Islands  again,  and  did  not  succeed  ? — A.  Did  not  do  any- 
tbing  there. 


▼ 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


/. 


1.0 


I.I 


ifllM    112.5 
"  »12 


Mi 


m 


12.2 


2.0 


1.8 


1.25 

1.4      1.6 

■* 6"     

► 

Hiotographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  873-4503 


,«', 


is 


^&£>  MW  ^W 


(p 


'M, 


324 


AWAED   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  You  came  then  to  the  bend  of  the  island  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  get  all  the  third  trip  inshore  ? — A.  The  whole  of  it. 

Q.  What  did,  you  say  about  40  or  50  barrels  having  been  caught 
out.side? — A.  ^  don't  think  I  said  anything  about  having  caught  any 
fish  outside  the  three-mile  limit  on  the  last  trip.  I  have  no  recollection 
of  doing  so.  So  far  as  I  can  now  recollect,  we  did  not  catch  any  out- 
side.   It  may  be  that  we  caught  some  outside,  but  I  don't  remember  it. 


By  Sir  Alexandtr  Gait : 
Q.  You  are  now  referring  to  the  Catalii.^? — A. 


Yes. 


By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  It  is  reasonable  to  make  a  good  deal  of  allowance  for  the  length  of 
time  which  has  elapsed  since  then  ? — A.  In  the  fishing  business  it  is  the 
sole  thing  we  have  to  think  about,  and  anybody  with  a  tolerahly  re- 
tentive memory  ought  to  remember  where  he  has  been  fishing. 

Q.  You  cannot  be  sure  that  your  recollection  has  not  changed  40  or 
80  barrels  in  the  space  of  an  hour  ? — A.  I  could  not  be  positive.  In  this 
matter  I  speak  as  1  feel — I  speak  as  my  impression  is.  I  don't  want  to 
color  my  statement,  or  anything  of  that  kind. 

Q.  Your  memory  can't  carry  you  accurately  back  to  things  occurring 
in  1864? — A.  I  don't  claim  that  it  is  perfectly  correct. 

Q.  When  you  estimate  the  fleet  at  600  sail,  did  you  include  the  pro- 
vincial vessels? — A.  I  estimate  the  American  fleet  at  that  number. 

Q.  And  you  think  that  the  average  catch  per  season  of  each  of  those 
600  sail  would  be  600  barrels  ?— A.  About  600  barrels. 

Q.  That  is  supposing  all  made  three  trips,  as  you  did  ? — A.  No;  some 
of  them  probably  did  not  make  thn-e  trips;  but  sone  of  them  caught 
1,200  and  1,500  bairels.  Captain  Leighton  caught  that  number  that 
year. 

Q.  What  Captain  Leighton  is  it  ? — A.  Captain  Andrew  Leighton,  ot 
Gloucester. 

Q.  How  manj  trips  on  the  average  do  you  estimate  the  000  sail 
made? — A.  They  would  average  about  two  trips.  Quite  a  number  made 
three  trips.    Two  trips  is  a  fair  average. 

Q.  In  1865  you  left  Gloucester  about  4th  July,  which  would  bring  you 
in  the  gulf  about  the  middle  of  July?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  found  600  American  sail  there  you  think  ? — A.  I  think  not 
that  many  at  that  particular  time.  There  was  that  number  duiiug  the 
season. 

Q.  Your  first  catch,  I  understand,  was  made  in  six  weeks.  How 
many  was  it? — A.  325  barrels,  I  think. 

Q.  Some  of  them  were  caught  round  the  Magdalen  Islands;  how 
many  ? — A.  We  did  not  fish  much  round  Magdalen  Islands  witb  Cap 
tain  Cash.    Probably  125  barrels  we  caught  there. 

Q.  And  the  rest  of  them  at  Cape  North? — A.  In  the  bend  of  the 
island,  between  East  Point,  St.  Peter's,  and  along  at  llustico. 

Q.  And  most  of  the  rest  within  three  miles  of  the  shore? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  Fifty  barrels  were  caught  outside? — A.  Speaking  about  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands,  I  mean  50  barrels  were  caught  outside  the  Magdalen 
Islands. 

Q.  How  many  were  caught  more  than  three  miles  from  the  shore  on  the 
first  trip  in  1865? — A.  Most  of  them  weie  caught  in  the  bend  ot  tbe 
island,  within  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  What  proportion  was  caught  outside  t — A.  We  did  not  catcb 
over  25  barrels  outside,  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


325 


[  Hiijjbt  have 


Q.  Then  you  transshipped  at  Canso  ? — A.  We  went  to  Ganso  and  re- 
fitted. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  the  second  trip  begin  in  1865  f — A.  I  think  we 
made  the  flrst  trip  in  six  weeks. 

Q.  How  many  was  the  second  catch ! — A.  Three  hundred  and  thir'.y- 
five  barrels. 

Q.  Where  was  the  second  catch  taken  ? — A.  All  taken  in  the  bend  of 
the  island — all  taken  close  inside. 

Q.  After  your  second  catch,  what  did  you  do? — A.  That  was  the 
end  of  tliat  voyage. 

Q.  At  the  end  of  1865  you  left  the  business,  I  believe  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  engage  in? — A.  I  went  into  the  flsbiiigboat  busi- 
ness and  purchasing  tisb. 

Q.  You  had  done  well  as  a  sharesman  ? — A.  I  had  done  fairly  well. 

Q.  Yoii  made  unusually  good  voyages  and  did  very  well  ? — A.  I  did 
very  fairly. 

Q.  You  did  far  above  the  average? — A.  In  giving  these  figures,  I 
liave  given  what  I  thought  was  the  average. 

Q.  Did  you  not  have  a  pretty  distinct  reason  for  giving  up  the  busi- 
ness at  the  end  of  1805  ?— A.  Nothing  particular.  In  the  fall  of  1865  I 
canio  home.     I  believed  I  could  do  just  as  well  at  home. 

(J.  Had  not  tlie  fact  of  the  lieciprocity  Treaty  being  about  to  come  to 
an  end  something  to  do  with  it  ? — A.  That  did  not  enter  my  mind. 

Q.  Did  you  not  think  that  would  att'ect  you  t—A.  N( 
had  an  opinion  about  it,  but  I  never  thought  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  never  think  whether  the  exclusion  of  the  Americans  in 
1806  from  your  inshore  fisheries  would  not  make  it  better  for  the 
ishuiders,  or  whether  the  imposition  of  a  tariff  on  mackerel  would  make 
it  worse  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Irrespective  of  that  consideration,  you  concluded  to  come  and  live 
at  home  and  fish  in  boats  and  buy  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Which  do  you  do  most  at  ? — A.  I  do  better  by  staying  at  home. 

Q.  Which  do  you  do  most  at — buying  fish  or  catching  fish  ?— A.  I  do 
most  at  buying  fish. 

Q.  You  buy  froMi  tlie  farmers  who  fish  in  boats  ? — A.  No ;  I  buy  it 
from  fishermen. 

Q.  From  parties  who  are  engaged  in  the  fishing  business  solely  ? — A. 
From  those  who  are  in  the  business  solely  and  do  it  for  a  living. 

Q.  Are  they  fishermen  from  whom  you  buy,  or  farmers  who  fish  part 
of  the  year? — A.  They  are  fiirmers,  but  they  live  rather  by  the  fishing 
than  by  the  farms,  and  they  have  done  so  for  the  last  thirty  years. 

Q.  Hut  they  raise  crops  ? — A.  Yes  ;  but  they  are  very  slight.  They 
do  not  raise  enough  to  sustain  them;  they  raise  a  little  hay. 

Q.  Those  are  not  the  farmers  who  make  the  island  a  garden  ? — A. 
Those  arc  people  who  are  more  given  to  fishing  than  to  farming,  and 
who  are  most  suitable  for  it. 

Q.  It  is  not  true  of  the  islanders  generally  ? — A.  Of  course  we  have  an 
agricultural  pojiulation. 

<^  Were  you  connected  in  business  with  any  one  when  you  began  to 
Hvi'  on  the  island  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Vou  have  told  us  that  your  home  was  at  Sonris  ? — A.  Yes. 

(i-  What  have  you  done  with  the  fish  you  bought  ? — A.  I  sold  them 
to  island  people. 

Q,  To  whom  ?— A.  To  Mr.  (Jarvell,  of  (Jharlottetown  ;  and  lion.  Dan- 
iel Davies. 

Q.  Any  one  else  ? — A.  No  one  else. 


i 


326 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Are  they  engaged  in  exporting  fish  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  I 
think  Mr.  Carve4I  was  at  that  time.  I  don't  think  Mr.  Davies  is ;  be  is 
engaged  largely  in  fish,  but  I  don't  think  he  sends  any  to  the  United 
States. 

Q.  What  did  he  do  with  the  fish  he  bought  from  you  ? — A.  I  don't 
know;  he  must  have  exported  it  somewhere.   I  presume  he  shipped  it. 

Q.  Did  he  sell  to  Mr.  Hall  ?— A.  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  What  fish  was  it  ?— . A.  Mackerel  and  codfish. 

Q.  Of  which  was  there  most  ? — A.  Mackerel.  Mr.  Carvell  bought  the 
mackerel ;  I  don't  know  what  he  did  with  them. 

Q.  Did  he  buy  the  whole  of  the  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Captain  Binney,  whose  opinion  you  gave  iu  regard  to  the  value  of 
the  inshore  fisheries,  where  is  he  from  1? — A.  He  was  in  a  Gloucester 
vessel. 

Q.  What  vessel  w  as  he  in  ? — A.  He  was  in  a  large  topmasted  schooner, 
but  I  don't  remember  her  name. 

Q.  When  had  you  that  conversation  with  him? — A.  Last  summer. 

Q.  You  have  said  that  the  mackerel  caught  by  boats  do  not  compare 
with  those  caught  by  vessels,  because  those  in  boats  are  not  so  well 
taken  care  of? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  difference  in  the  size? — A.  On  the  south  side  there 
is  a  slight  difference ;  on  the  north  side  they  are  about  the  same. 

Q.  Then  as  a  rule,  are  the  fish  the  boatmen  catch  as  large  as  those 
caught  by  vessels? — A.  The  mackerel  caught  in  the  vessels  are  better 
only,  I  think,  iu  the  way  of  saving  them. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  very  great  difference  in  the  value  after  they  are 
cured  ? — A.  Considerable  difference. 

Q.  When  you  spoke  of  a  catch  being  No.  1  fish,  did  you  speak  of  boat 
fish  or  vessel  fish  ? — A.  I  had  special  reference  to  vessel  fish  at  that 
time. 

Q.  How  about  the  boat  fish  ? — A.  The  proportion  of  No.  1  fish  is  a 
little  less. 

Q.  Please  explain  to  the  Commission  the  difference  between  No.  1, 
No.  2,  and  No.  3;  what  makes  a  No.  1  mackerel  and  a  No.  3  mackerel?— 
A.  Of  No.  3  there  are  two  qualities.  Small  No.  3  is  anything  inside  13 
inches,  and  are  poor.  It  is  altogether  a  matter  of  thickness  of  body 
and  fatness. 

Q.  It  does  not  depend  entirely  on  the  length  of  the  fish  ? — A.  The 
length  has  not  so  much  to  do  with  it  as  the  quality,  the  condition  of  the 
fish,  and  whether  it  is  fat  or  poor.  Thirteen  Inches  make  a  No.  1  ttsli; 
some  that  would  be  a  No.  3  would  make  a  No.  1  if  tat  enough.  It  is 
pretty  hard  to  describe,  the  difference,  because  it  rests  with  the  season. 
They  are  all  No.  3  in  spring,  and  as  they  get  fatter  they  get  better;  this 
is  after  1st  September.  There  are  extra  No.  1,  which  are  14  or  15  inches 
in  length. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  duty,  do  you  think  ir  would  be  no  hardship  toi>a.v 
the  duty  if  American  seamen  were  excluded  from  the  inshore  fisheries  ?— 
A.  That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  Then,  as  you  think,  you  would  have  a  monopoly  of  the  markets 
for  forty  millions  of  i)eople  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  understood  you  in  another  part  of  your  testimony  to  say  that  the 
summei'  price  of  mackerel  had  gone  up  from  fO  to  $15  per  barrel  incou 
sequence  of  the  failure  of  the  American  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Must  there  not  be  a  consi<lerable  American  catch  when  its  failure 
during  a  particular  year  has  such  an  effect  on  the  price  ? — A.  It  so  hap- 
pened that  the  failure  of  the  American  fishing-grounds  has  found  the 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


327 


American  market  in  a  very  bare  condition,  and  that  has  to  be  taken  into 
consideration. 

Q.  There  has  been  a  good  deal  of  mackerel  caught  in  the  worthless 
Ainericau  waters  ? — A.  There  has  been  for  the  last  few  years. 

Q.  Pretty  much  all  that  was  caught  for  the  American  market  for  the 
two  years  previous  were  caught  in  American  waters,  were  they  not  T 
Your  island  fishery  was  a  failure  last  year  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Was  it  not  declared  by  the  reports  made  to  the  government  to 
have  been  a  couiplete  failure?  It  fell  off  very  muchf — A.  They  were 
not  quite  as  plentiful  as  previous  years. 

Q.  Tbat  is  the  way  you  want  to  put  it  ? — A.  That  is  the  way  I  want 
to  put  it. 

Q.  Not  quite  so  good,  but  nearly  as  good  ? — A.  Very  nearly  so.  Our 
boats  did  nearly  as  well  last  year. 

Q.  Did  the  American  vessels  come  here  nearly  as  much  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  So  far  as  they  were  concerned  it  was  nearly  a  failure  ? — A.  I  think 
tbey  did  not  do  nearly  as  well  as  before. 

Q.  Not  nearly  as  many  of  them  came  ? — A.  Not  so  many. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  immense  quantities  of  mackerel  were  taken  in 
1874  and  1875  in  the  American  waters  by  purse  seines  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  your  opinion,  as  it  is  of  others,  that  Americans  intercepting 
a  school  of  mackerel,  as  they  come  north,  with  purse  seines,  is  one 
cause  of  the  diminution  of  the  quantity  here? — A.  That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  So  tbat  if  they  had  purse  seines  enough  and  used  them  in  the 
same  reckless,  extravagant  way  they  liave  done,  you  would  not  get  any 
mackerel  up  here? — A.  I  think  the  tendency  would  be  to  wholly  destroy 
them. 

Q.  If  GOO  or  900  American  vessels  devoted  themselves  to  seining 
aloug  the  American  coast,  would  it  not  very  largely  diminish  the  sup- 
ply of  mackerel  in  your  waters? — A.  That  would  depend  on  the  course 
the  macherel  might  take.    This  year  they  had  taken  an  outside  course. 

Q.  If  the  seiners  took  the  same  course  as  the  mackerel,  they  would 
get  a  large  proportion  of  them  ? — A.  If  they  could  find  them.  Of  course, 
if  they  did  find  them  they  might  do  so. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  mackerel  in  American  waters  keep  outside  the 
three-mile  limit  as  a  rule,  and  that  in  Canadian  waters  they  keep  in- 
side?— A.  1  said  I  was  not  so  well  acquainted  with  the  nature  of  the 
fisb  in  American  waters,  but  from  information  I  had  obtained,  they 
keep  outside. 

Q.  The  boat  fishing  of  the  island,  you  think,  in  1875,  had  increased 
100  per  cent,  on  the  previous  ten  years;  has  it  not  increased  that 
amount  in  the  last  four  years? — A.  1  think  not. 

Q.  Ten  years  ago  there  was  comparatively  little  fishing,  was  there 
not? — A.  In  some  places  there  was  nearly  as  much  as  there  is  now.  At 
other  places  it  has  materially  increased. 

Q.  You  were  one  of  the  earliest  men  in  the  business,  I  believe? — A. 
Not  at  all.  There  have  been  many  people  engaged  in  it  during  30  or  40 
years. 

Q.  I  had  the  idea  that  the  boat  mackerel  fishing  was  not  carried  oa 
to  !iny  great  extent  as  far  back  as  ten  years  ago  ? — A.  I  was  only  speak- 
iufr  from  my  personal  observation. 

Q.  That  goes  back  more  than  ten  years? — A.  As  long  as  I  can  recol- 
lect, mackerel  fishing  has  been  carried  on  in  boats  from  the  island. 

Q.  To  80  large  an  extent? — A.  Not  to  so  large  an  extent  as  at  pres- 
ent; but  a  considerable  quantity  was  taken. 

Q.  What  quantity  would  be  taken  ten  years  ago  by  each  boat  f — A. 


m 


328 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


To  a  boat  on  the  south  side  there  woald  probably  be  20  barrels.  Od  the 
north  side  there  would  be  probably  a  ^reat  deal  more  to  a  boat. 

Q.  How  manj}  boats  would  you  estimate  were  round  the  island  tea 
years  ago  ? — A.  About  400  or  500. 

Q.  Do  you  think  ten  years  ago  there  were  400  or  500  boats  which 
would  average  20  barrels  of  mackerel  each  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  there  are  now  twice  as  many  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  catch  more  ! — A.  They  catch  more. 

Q.  How  much  did  the  boats  average  on  the  north  side  ? — A.  Some  250 
barrels. 

Q.  They  are  not  the  same  kind  of  boats  as  at  the  south  side  ? — A.  They 
are  larger  boats.  When  I  spoke  of  20  barrels  I  was  speaking  of  small 
boats. 

Q.  You  were  absent  in  the  winter  of  1869,  and  in  the  years  1871  and 
1872 — where  were  you  then  ? — A.  In  California. 

Q.  You  have  si»oken  of  what  you  called  the  right  of  buying  supplies?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  are  people  who  make  a  business  of  selling  American  tisher- 
men  the  supplies  they  need  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  advertise  that  tiiey  keep  stores  and  sell  such  supplies. 
They  seek  customers  as  other  traders  do  ? — A.  1  presume  they  do. 

Q.  They  advertise  in  the  Gloucester  newspapers? — A.  I  have  never 
seen  any  of  their  advertisements,  but  they  may  do  so. 

Q.  They  try  to  do  all  the  business  they  can,  as  other  traders  do  t—^, 
I  am  not  aware  that  they  go  outside  the  limits. 

Q.  They  make  an  effort  to  do  a  good,  thriving  business?— A.  1  can- 
not tell  you ;  1  presume  they  do.  It  is  only  reasonable  to  suppose  they 
would  do  so. 

Q.  They  don't  sell  their  supplies  to  the  American  fishermen  at  a  less 
I'licethan  they  could  get  elsewhere?  They  are  not  animated  with  a 
desire  to  benefit  the  fishermen,  but  to  reap  profits  for  themselves  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  They  do  profit  pretty  well  ? — A.  1  don't  think  they  have  prospered. 

Q.  Have  they  not  made  money  ? — A.  I  was  last  fall  in  the  Straits  of 
Ganso,  and  the  place  did  not  look  very  prosperous. 

Q.  They  had  bad  times  last  year;  it  is  well  known  that  they  snii'ered 
distress  at  Canso  ?-  -A.  1  knew  they  had  been  affected  by  the  trade  de- 
pression. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  of  the  fact  that  there  was  distress? — A.  I  aui 
not  aware  of  the  fact.  I  was  speaking  of  the  look  of  the  houses ;  where 
I  saw  a  prosperous  business  a  year  ago,  there  was  nothing  doing. 

Q.  The  prosperous  business  of  a  year  ago  you  say  had  declined  to 
nothing;  don't  you  think  that  had  something  to  do  with  the  absence  of 
the  American  fleet  in  1875  and  1870? — A.  It  may  have  had. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  it  had  ? — A.  I  am  not  positive  of  that.  It  is 
my  opinion  that  a  great  many  who  e.xtended  their  business  in  order  to 
do  trade  with  American  fishermen,  ruined  themselves  now  that  the  l)usi- 
ness  has  declined.  They  have  ruined  themselves  in  order  to  do  that  busi- 
ness. 

Q.  You  have  been  speaking  now  of  traders  who  sold  what? — A.  Gen- 
eral supplies. 

Q.  Such  as  ice;  and  what  else? — A.  Well,  a  general  stock  of  provis- 
ions; whatever  they  require  for  the  voyage. 

Q.  Food  and  fresh  vegetables? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  farmers  of  the  island  want  to  sell  their  produce  ? — A.  Cer- 
tainly. 


AWABD   OF   THE   ;  ISUERY   COMMISSION. 


329 


Q.  They  export  a  great  deal  to  the  United  States,  do  they  not  ? — A. 
Very  little  nntil  last  fall ;  a  very  small  proportion. 

Q.  They  export  potatoes  and  pay  a  duty  of  15  cents  a  bushel,  which  I 
tbiDk  is  a  great  hardship  ? — A.  I  don't  think  they  considered  it  a  hard- 
ship last  fall. 

Q.  They  don't  think  it  a  hardship  to  have  a  duty  placed  on  potatoes 
they  send  into  the  United  States? — A.  They  don't  think  so.  Business 
men  sold  potatoes  to  the  Americans,  and  they  (the  Ame:icans)  paid  the 

duty. 

Q.  What  I  want  to  get  at  is  this,  whether  you  do  not  think  it  desira- 
ble for  the  farmers  of  Prince  Edward  Island  to  have  people  come  there 
and  buy  their  potatoes,  vegetables,  butter,  milk,  and  egg j,  and  all  other 
produce  they  raise,  instead  of  their  being  obliged  to  send  those  sup- 
plies into  the  United  States? — A.  I  don't  think  our  farmers  are  obliged 
to  send  their  produce  out  of  the  island.  They  have  a  market  at  home 
for  all  those  things,  and  it  is  increasing  continually.  What  they  sell  to 
the  American  fishermen  does  npt  amount  to  much.  Some  of  the  ves- 
sels get  potatoes  and  produce  of  that  kind,  but  they  don't  get  their  full 
supplie-  at  the  island. 

Q.  Take  Charlottetown  :  this  summer  you  are  expecting  an  Americau 
fishing  fleet  of  900  sail ;  if  they  come,  will  they  not  improve  business  ? — 
A.  It  will  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  Will  it  not  give  the  farmers  better  prices  for  their  produce  ? — A. 
I  think  not. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  customers  are  a  good  thing  when  people  have 
anything  to  sell  ? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  about  American  customers  which  makes  them 
more  undesirable  than  other  customers? — A  No;  but  what  the  Amer- 
ican fishermen  principally  buy  the  farmers  cannot  furnish,  viz,  barrels 
and  salt. 

Q.  Do  the;  uot  buy  fresh  vegetables  and  meat? — A.  That  is  a  very 
small  i)roport'on  of  their  outfit. 

Q.  But  does  it  not  make  a  good  deal  for  each  vessel? — A.  It  is  an 
item  in  the  account;  that's  all  we  make  of  it. 

Q.  Is  it  not  an  item  which  it  is  an  object  to  you  farmers  to  secure  ? — 
A.  I  don't  consider  the  privilege  of  supplying  vegetables  to  the  Amer 
lean  fleet  is  anything  more  than  common  trade.  The  same  vegetables 
would  bring  the  same  price  if  sold  to  our  own  people.  The  Americans 
do  not  pay  any  more  than  the  farmers  could  get  from  the  people  on  the 
island.    We  bave  a  market  for  everything  of  that  kind. 

Q.  Let  us  know  whether  the  sale  of  meat  and  fresh  vegetables  by  the 
farmers  to  American  fishermen  on  their  trips  is  not  an  advantage. — A. 
It  may  be  a  slight  advantage,  but  I  don't  consider  it  is  a  very  great 
boon  to  the  island  people,  for  they  do  not  get  more  for  their  provisions 
than  they  get  from  their  own  people. 

Q.  Of  course  the  Americans  do  not  pay  more,  but  the  farmers  have 
more  customers? — A.  We  are  very  fortunately  situated;  we  have  a 
market  for  everything  we  can  raise. 

Q.  You  have  sutticient  markets  for  your  produce  without  these  8,000 
or  10,000  people  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Prince  Edward  Island  could  get  along  by  itself  with  no  communi- 
cation with  the  rest  of  the  world  ? — A.  I  cannot  second  that  statement. 

Q.  You  don't  state  that  the  American  fishermen  who  fish  off  North 
Cape  catch  a  considerable  amount  of  codfish  inside  the  three-mile 
limit!- A.  No. 

Q.  Is  there  any  doubt  that  the  cod-fishery  is  a  deep-sea  fishery  ? — A. 


'',i\ 


330 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


They  sometimes  fish  pretty  close  in,  bat  as  a  general  thing  it  is  a  deep- 
sea  fishery. 

Q.  Cod-bait  is^  herriDg,  which  sometimes  Americans  fish  for,  but 
asnally  cannot  afford  to  Ssh  for,  and  therefore  buy  it? — A.  It  is  a  mat- 
ter of  economy  with  them. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  matter  of  profit  to  the  people  who  have  caught  herriug 
to  sell  them  f — A.  I  presume  it  is. 

Q.  It  is  a  benefit  direct  to  those  who  catch  the  herring  to  sell,  as  well 
as  to  the  Americans  who  buy  it  for  bait? — A.  I  suppose  it  would  be  so. 

Q.  Every  business,  buying  and  selling,  is  a  profit  on  both  sides,  is  it 
not  ? — A.  Sometimes  the  business  is  pretty  one-sided. 

Q.  About  throwing  offal  overboard ;  that  was  said  to  be  injurious, 
but  it  turned  out  that  the  cod- fishermen  keep  the  offal  barricaded  up 
and  don't  throw  it  overboard  until  they  are  through  their  fishing  at  a 
particular  spot  ? — A.  Between  the  time  of  making  the  trips,  when  the 
fishermen  are  moving  from  one  locality  to  another. 

Q.  It  turned  out  also  that  the  American  mackerel-fishers  do  not  drop 
the  offal  into  a  school  of  fish,  because  they  have  no  desire  to  spoil  their 
own  fishing,  but  that  was  when  they  were  passing  from  one  ground  to 
another  they  throw  it  overboard  ? — A.  Sometimes  while  passing  from 
one  ground  to  another,  but  I  have  known  them  throw  it  overboard  wbeu 
they  bad  done  fishing. 

Q.  The  American  captains  don't  intend  to  spoil  their  own  fisheries  !— 
A.  Certainly  not. 

Q.  So  they  take  pains  not  to  drop  offal  into  a  school  of  mackerel  ?— 
A.  Very  few  seem  to  take  much  pains  in  the  matter  or  consider  the 
matter. 

Q.  They  are  a  reckless,  ignorant  set,  you  think  ? — A.  They  don't 
seem  ignorant,  but  they  don't  give  the  matter  that  consideration  they 
should  give  it. 

Q.  Do  they  injure  their  own  fishing  by  throwing  offal  overboard  ?— A. 
They  injure  their  own  as  well  as  the  fishing  of  the  other  boats. 

Q.  About  Gloucester:  is  it  the  opinion  that  fortunes  are  in  the  fishing 
business? — A.  I  was  only  there  from  1862  to  1866. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that,  though  probably  for  a  short  time,  wbeu 
everything  was  going  up  early  in  the  American  war  it  was  so,  yet  for  a 
good  many  years  in  this  business  it  has  been  difficult  to  get  a  new  dol- 
lar back  for  an  old  one  ? — A.  No ;  I  have  neiver  heard  it ;  still  it  may 
be  so. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  anything  about  it? — A,  Every  year  I  have  had 
conversations  with  business  men. 

Q.  Have  .you  heard  anything  of  the  profits  of  the  mackerel-fishing 
since  1866  ? — A.  No ;  I  have  not. 

Q.  So  you  don't  know  whether  it  is  a  losing  or  gaining  business?— A. 
No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  the  business  has  been  on  your  own  island  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Some  have  met  with  misfortune  ? — A.  Yes ;  but  on  the  whole  I 
think  they  have  advanced. 

Q.  I  think  you  said  you  had  seen  some  Americans  fishing  for  herring 
for  bait?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  was  it  ? — A.  Around  the  Magdalen  Islands  and  in  our  own 
harbor  at  Souris. 

Q.  When  did  you  see  American  fishermen  fishing  for  herring  for  bait 
in  your  harbor  ? — A.  No  later  than  this  spring. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


331 


Q.  How  many  were  there  and  how  long  did  they  remain  ? — A.  Three 
or  tour  were  settiug  nets  for  three  or  four  days  right  in  the  harbor. 

Q.  That  was  rather  nuasnal  ? — A.  They  go  to  St.  Peter's  island 
very  often  to  catch  bait.  It  is  at  the  mouth  of  Hillsboro  Bay  at  the 
entrance  to  Charlottetown. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  seining.  There  has  not,  I  believe,  been  a 
great  deal  done  yet  in  seining  in  British  waters? — A.  Not  till  this 
summer. 

Q.  Has  there  not  been  some  trouble  found  by  those  usinii;;  seines  in 
British  waters ;  have  they  not  spoiled  their  seines  a  good  deal  1 — A.  It 
was  in  consequence  of  their  being  too  deep,  but  that  has  been  remedied 
by  cutting  out  the  center.    They  now  claim  that  the  seines  are  all  right. 

Q.  Tbe  experiment  has  not  been  much  tried  in  these  waters  ? — A.  It 
has  been  tried  enough  to  fill  three  or  four  vessels  in  a  week. 

Q.  I  believe  you  said  it  was  Captain  Lee,  of  Gloucester,  who  got  180 
barrels  of  mackerel  at  one  haul  ? — A.  Along  with  the  mackerel  he  had 
his  seine  filled  with  herring. 

Q.  Where  was  that  catch  made  ? — A.  At  North  Lake,  3  or  4  miles 
from  East  Point. 

No.  4. 

Joseph  Campbell,  3S  years,  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  called 
on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  ex- 
amined. 

By  Mr.  Da  vies : 

Question.  Have  you  been  engaged  in  the  fishing  business  during  your 
life? — Answer.  Yes;  since  I  was  able,  until  within  a  few  years  past. 

Q.  What  branch  of  the  fishery  business  did  you  follow  ? — A.  Boat 
fishing. 

Q.  From  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Up  to  what  date  were  you  engaged  in  this  branch  ? — A.  Up  to 
1855. 

Q.  Were  the  boats  very  numerous  then — that  is^  the  island  boats  f — 
A.  Not  so  numerous  as  now. 

Q.  Were  you  fishing  on  the  north  or  south  side  ? — A.  On  the  north 
Hide,  in  a  small  boat. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  catch  in  those  days  ? — A.  Twenty-five  or 
thirty  barrels. 

Q.  That  would  be  a  season's  catch  ? — A.  Yes ;  of  mackerel.  Besides 
these  we  caught  codfish. 

Q.  Were  they  taken  in  about  the  same  distance  ? — A.  We  took  the 
codfish  outside  the  limit  within  which  we  caught  the  mackerel. 

Q.  Where  would  you  take  the  mackerel  ? — A.  In  boat  fishing,  gener- 
ally from  a  mile  to  a  mile  and  a  half  or  two  miles  out.  Codfish  would 
generally  be  beyond  the  limit. 

Q.  How  far  out? — A.  From  three  to  six  miles — that  is,  on  the  north 
side.    In  the  spring  of  the  year,  of  course,  they  would  be  inside. 

Q.  Was  there  much  of  an  American  fleet  about  where  you  were  fish- 
ing in  1855  ?  Take  that  particular  locality. — A.  There  were  a  good 
many  of  the  American  fleet  after  the  middle  of  August. 

Q.  How  many  would  there  be  ? — A.  From  250  to  300  sail. 

Q.  Where  would  those  vessels  catch  mackerel? — A.  On  the  same 
ground  that  we  used — from  half  a  mile  to  2  miles  or  2^  miles  from  the 
coast. 

Q>  Did  the  fleet  remain  any  length  of  time  off  tbe  shore,  any  distance 


332 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


— that  is,  outside  the  three-mile  limit  altogether? — A.  We  did  not  cou- 
sider  there  was  much  fishing  doing  outside  the  three  miles. 

Q.  Well,  in  1J%6  and  1857,  where  were  you  ? — A.  On  the  Labrador 
fishery. 

Q.  In  1858  where  were  you  ? — A.  I  went  down  in  a  vessel  to  Seven 
Islands  for  mackerel. 

Q.  How  are  the  fish  caught  down  at  Seven  Isles  ?  I  ask  because  it  is; 
different  from  other  places. — A.  We  caught  ours  in  seines. 

Q.  Did  you  use  the  purse-seines  I — A.  No ;  a  drag-seine. 

Q.  Up  above  Seven  Islands,  how  far  from  the  shore  are  mackerel 
taken  ? — A.  We  sometimes  go  within  100  yards,  aometimes  closer.  We 
anchor  the  vessel  and  go  in  a  dory. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  catch  in  that  visit  ? — A.  We  got  200  barrels. 

Q'  You  got  200  barrels  f — A.  We  got  200  barrels  ;  some  got  a  good 
many  more;  I  would  say  that  would  be  about  the  average. 

Q.  Tbey  were  all  taken  within  this  space? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Ill  the  year  1859  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  ? — A.  In  the  Daniel 
Webster,  from  Gloucester,  Eobertsou,  master. 

Q.  What  time  of  the  year  did  you  come  down  ? — A.  Some  time  in  July 
— late  in  July. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  ? — A.  To  the  Bay  of  Ohaleurs. 

Q.  What  quantity  did  you  catch? — A.  110  barrels. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  They  were  all  within  three  miles 
altogether — what  we  caught  there  ;  we  then  came  out  and  fished  Irom 
Miscou  Island  ;  that  is,  the  island  at  the  mouth  of  the  bay.  TLere  we 
caught  outside  of  the  limits — 8  or  0  miles  out. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  there  ? — A.  Between  CO  and  70  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  from  that? — A..  We  followed  the  shore  to  Escu- 
miuac.  We  picked  up  considerable  mackerel,  more  or  less  everj-  day. 
We  then  struck  across  to  North  Cape,  Prince  Kdward  Island,  and  fol- 
lowed the  shore  down. 

Q.  What  was  you  entire  catch  ? — A.  310  barrels  was  the  entire  catch. 

Q.  Off  the  coast  of  Prince  Edward  Island  do  you  go  within  or  out- 
side?— A.  With  the  exception  of  ten  barrels,  we  got  all  inside. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  From  half  a  mile  to  two  miles  off 
the  coast  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Is  that  the  only  trip  you  made  ? — A.  That  is  the  only  trip  we 
made. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  whole  catch  did  you  get  outside  ?— A. 
About  70  or  80  of  the  300  barrels  were  taken  outside. 

Q.  What  time  did  you  return  to  Gloucester  ? — A.  We  left  in  September 
some  time. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  the  fleet  in  the  bay  ? — A.  About  150  sail. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  what  the  average  catch  of  the  fleet  was  ? — A.  I 
could  not  tell  you. 

Q.  In  1860  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  ?— A.  The  Daniel  McPhee,  from 
Gloucester.     Master,  Daniel  McPhee. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go? — A.  We  went  to  the  bay.  We  lauded  and 
took  dories  and  went  up  to  the  Seven  Islands  again.  There  we  got  80 
barrels  at  the  same  place  as  before.  Prom  that  we  went  farther  up  to  a 
place  called  Bonbon,  and  got  20  or  30  barrels  there  close  to  the  shore. 
We  then  crossed  to  the  southern  side,  to  Grittin's  Cove,  and  picked  up 
about  20  or  30  barrels  there.  We  then  crossed  to  Gasp(^,  then  to  Bay 
Chaleurs,  picking  up  more  or  less  every  day.  We  were  line  fishing  then. 
We  gave  up  the  boats  after  leaving  Seven  Islands.    We  went  to  North 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


333 


Cape,  Price  Edward  Island,  to  finish  our  trip.    We  made  only  one  trip, 
and  went  borne. 
Q.  What  was  your  catch? — A.  We  got  280  barrels;   that  was  in 

1860. 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  of  these  outside  the  linnt;  and,  if  so,  in  what 
proportion?— A.  We  did,  some. 

Q.  What  portion  of  the  280  barrels  did  you  take  outside  ? — A.  G5  or 
70  barrels,  at  the  outsfde. 
Q.  What  was  thw  average  catch  that  year? — A.  I  do  not  know. 
Q.  In  1861  what  did  you  doV—  A..  I  was  in  the  R.  H.  Oates,  Gaptaiu 
Nason. 
Q.  What  time  did  you  come  down  ? — A.  The  15th  of  July. 
Q.  Was  that  early  ? — A.  It  is  not  early.    It  is  a  fair  time.    We  did 
Dot  find  them  bite  where  we  first  fished,  and  we  then  went  up  to  Bay 
Chiilenrs.    We  got  about  120  barrels  there — about  90  barrels  inside 
aud  the  rest  outside. 

Q.  That  would  be  thirty  barrels  outside? — A.  Yes,  about  that.    We 
fished  off  Miscou  and  got  about  20  or  30  barrels  off  shore.    We  then 
came  down  the  shore  to  Escuminac  and  picked  up  more  or  less  every 
day  along  the  shore. 
Q.  Close  in,  or  off? — A.  Close  in. 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  your  next  catch  ? — A.  We  got  five  or  six  bar- 
rels along  the  shore  to  the  bend  of  the  island  (Prince  Edward  Island). 
There  we  got  seventy  or  eighty  barrels  in  one  day  close  in. 
Q.  Within  the  limits  ? — A.  Between  two  and  three  miles. 
Q.  What  was  the  total  result  ? — A.  310  barrels. 
Q.  What  did  you  do  with  them  ? — A.  W^e  took  them  back  to  Glou- 
cester. 

Q.  Did  you  make  only  one  trip? — A.  I  made  only  one  trip  in  her.  I 
left  her  at  Gloucester. 

Q,  What  werti  fish  bringing  then  1 — A.  They  were  low.  In  1861 
mackerel  brought  from  $12  to  $13  and  $14  a  barrel.  That  was  the  year 
the  war  broke  out. 

Q.  After  leaving  this  vessel  what  did  you  do  ? — A.  I  went  to  the 
American  shore  in  a  vessel  with  Captain  Hunter. 

Q.  What  time  of  the  year  did  you  start  ? — A.  It  was  a  fall  trip.  We 
started  about  October. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  ? — A.  We  fished  in  different  i)art8  of  the  bay. 
We   shed  oft"  Cape  Cod  and  got  80  barrels. 
Q.  What  time  did  you  return  ? — A.  About  the  10th  November. 
Q.  Is  that  considered  a  fair  catch  ? — A.  It  is  for  that  year. 
Q.  Was  it  considered  an  average  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  What  distance  off  the  shore  did  you  take  those? — A.  Sometimes 
we  got  them  fifteen  or  twenty  miles  oft'  the  land  ;  some  more  times  within 
seven  or  eight  miles. 

Q.  Nothing  like  the  same  distance  as  here  ? — A.  No ;  they  do  not  at- 
tend the  shore  the  same  as  they  do  here. 
Q.  That  ended  the  season's  fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  go  fishing  in  1862?— A.  Yes;  in  the  C.  0.  Davis,  Captain 
Sinclair. 

Q.  When  did  you  leave? — A.  About  the  15th  July.  We  went  to  the 
Gnlf  of  Saint  Lawrence. 

Q.  What  was  the  result? — A.  We  started  with  Seven  Islands  again. 
We  did  not  do  anything  there,  did  not  catch  a  mackerel.  We  then 
tJtruck  across  to  the  southern  shore,  and  did  not  get  anything  there. 
We  then  came  down  to  Bay  Cbaleurs  and  got  considerable  mackerel — 


334 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


120  barrels  in  the  Bay  Ohalenrs.  Then  we  oame  to  Bradley  Bank,  where 
yre  got  about  30  or  40  barrels.    We  then  went  back  to  Bay  Cbalenrs. 
We  came  out  without  any  more  trials,  and  went  across  to  North  Cape 
finishing  our  trip,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  that  we  caught  at  Marg- 
aree  Island. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  get  on  the  north  side  of  Prince  Ed  ward  Island  T— 
A.  We  caught  308  or  310  barrels,  as  nearly  as  I  can  remember.  Ncurlv 
all  these  were  taken  within  the  limits.  We  got  about  90  or  100  bai- 
rels  of  our  whole  catch  outside. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  the  American  fleet  in  the  bay  that 
year? — A.  They  were  increasing;  there  were  more  than  in  the  previous 
year. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  catch  they  made ;  do  you  remember  ?— A. 
About  400  barrels.    That  was  in  1862. 

Q.  Did  you  flsh  any  more  that  year? — A.  I  went  home  and  fished  on 
the  home  shore,  that  is  the  American  shore,  in  the  fall  of  18G2,  in  the 
Daniel  McPhee. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  there? — A.  We  caught  40  barrels. 

Q.  Only  40  barrels!  That  was  in  1861  that  you  got  80  barrels  there 
in  the  fall  trip,  and  in  1862  you  got  40  barrels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  considered  a  fair  trip  or  not  f — A.  We  were  not  very 
long  out.  We  went  home  in  October  and  went  out  for  about  three 
weeks. 

Q.  Where  were  those  taken  ? — A.  They  were  taken  pretty  much  the 
same  as  the  year  before,  outside. 

Q,  That  ended  that  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  next  year? — A.  I  did  not  go  fishing  in  1863  or 
1864.  In  1865  I  went  from  Gloucester  with  Captain  Beatty,  in  the 
Galena. 

Q.  When  did  you  come  down  ? — A.  We  left  in  the  latter  part  of  June. 
I  was  enrly  on  the  ground. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  in  the  Galena  ? — A.  We  took  a  fair  catch.  We 
got  up  to  the  first  of  September  600  odd  barrels.  We  then  went  to 
Ganso  and  resliipped  them,  as  we  call  it.  Then  we  returned  to  the  bay 
and  got  about  310  barrels  more.  We  made  in  the  roun<i  season's  work 
between  900  and  1,000  barrels — something  more  than  900  barrels. 

Q.  Where  were  thej' caught;  in  what  proportion  inside  and  what 
outside  ? — A.  We  got  about  300  barrels  up  Bay  Ohalenrs,  of  which  80 
barrels  were  outside.  We  then  came  down  and  fished.  We  went  to 
Magdalen  Islands,  and  from  that  to  the  east  point  of  Prince  Edward 
Island,  from  which  we  worked  up  to  the  bend  of  the  island.  A  large 
part  of  what  we  took  was  taken  in  the  bend  of  the  island  and  in  the 
Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  In  the  bend  of  the  island,  did  you  get  any  outside?— A.  Some;  I 
could  not  say  exactly,  but  we  got  more  or  less  outside. 

Q.  But  half  were  got  inside  ? — A.  More  than  half;  considerably  more 
than  halt;  we  al way 8  do. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  in  the  fall  trip? — A.  We  transshipped  in  Canso. 
In  I  he  tall  trip,  after  transshipping,  we  returned  to  the  bend  of  the  island. 
We  got  some  there,  and  worked  out  to  the  North  Gape.  We  picked  up 
200  barn-Is  and  returned  to  Margaree  Island,  fishing  between  that  island 
and  Port  Hood. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  300  barrels  taken,  in  the  fall  trip  were 
within  the  limits? — A.  We  got  about  80  or  100  outside. 

Q.  Supposing  you  had  not  transshipped,  what  would  have  been  the 
result ;  would  you  have  been  able  to  make  your  second  trip? — A.  Yes; 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


335 


bnt  we  would  have  lost  considerable  time.    We  ended  the  first  trip  in 
September. 

Q.  How  long  would  it  take  to  go  to  Gloucester  and  get  back? — A. 
Twelve  or  fourteen  days. 

Q.  Do  you  put  any  value  upon  this  right  of  transshipment  1 — A.  Yes ; 
itlHA  beiieflt  in  preventing  the  loss  of  time. 

Q.  You  cannot  estimate  to  what  extent? — A.  No. 

Q.  Is  it  worth  another  trip  or  not? — A.  Not  the  whole  trip. 

Q.  Wliat  (lid  the  fleet  do  generally  that  year  that  you  made  this  large 
catch  f — A.  This  was  one  of  the  biggest  years  we  had.  Everybody  did 
well  that  year. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  catch  ? — A.  I  would  say  it  was  600  barrels. 

Q.  You  were  a  long  way  above  the  average? — A.  Yes;  we  got  be- 
tween 900  aiui  1,000. 

Q.  You  think  the  average  of  the  whole  would  be  about  600  barrels? — 
A  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  next  year? — A.  1  went  to  the  gulf,  Ashing  again, 
in  the  William  8.  Baker. 

Q.  You  came  to  the  Bay  Saint  Lawrence  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  catch  did  you  make? — A.  We  came  in  late;  it  was  August. 
We  made  only  one  trip  and  got  415  barrels.     We  had  a  large  vessel. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  them,  inside  or  outside? — A.  This  year  we 
got  more  outside  than  in  any  vessel  I  was  in.  We  next  went  to  Bay 
Ohaleurs.  1  do  not  know  how  many  we  got  there.  W^e  ret'irned  down 
and  tished  ofi'Miscou.  We  came  along  towards  Escuminac  picking  up 
gome  mackerel  and  finished  oif  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  You  got  more  outside  this  time  than  you  did  in  any  other  vessel? 
Wliat  proportion  of  the  410  (414)  barrels  did  you  get  outside? — A. 
About  160  or  170  barrels. 

Q.  That  was  the  largest  proportion  you  ever  got  outside  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  the  fleet  about  this  time  ? — A.  It  was  in- 
creasing.   There  were  about  500  vessels. 

Q.  That  was  in  1866;  what  average  would  the  fleet  make? — A.  Pretty 
nearly  the  same  as  the  year  before;  about  600,  or  something  like  that. 

Q.  Then  in  1867  you  went  too? — A.  Yes;  in  the  same  vessel. 

Q.  Did  you  make  more  than  one  trip  ? — A.  Only  one. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  of  the  season's  trip  ? — A.  About  500  barrels 
this  year  and  a  few  over. 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  them  ? — A.  We  got  300  barrels  late  in  the  fall 
off  Margaree  Island;  close  into  Margaree  Island,  between  that  and 
Broad  Cove. 
Q.  At  what  distance? — A.  Sometimes  within  one  and  a  half  miles, 

sometimes  less  than  a  quarter  of  a  mile,  all  within  three  miles. 
Q.  Where  did  you  get  the  balance  ? — A.  Some  outside,  some  inside. 
Q.  What  proportion  did  you  get  outside?— A.  One  hundred  barrels 

outside. 
Q.  That  is  out  of  the  500  barrels  odd  ?— A.  Yes. 
Q.  What  was  the  number  of  the  fleet  in  the  bay  that  year,  1867  ? — 

A.  Ahout  450  to  500. 
Q.  What  was  the  average  catch  ? — A.  About  400  or  less. 
Q.  Did  you  go  on  in  1868  ? — A.  Yes ;  1  went  in  the  Isaac  Rich,  Cap- 
tain Bryant. 
Q.  What  time  did  you  go  down  to  the  bay  ? — A.  In  the  latter  part  of 

July. 

Q.  What  catch  did  you  make  ? — A.  About  210  barrels.    We  then 
went  to  Charlottetowu. 


336 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  When  was  that? — A.  That  was  in  September  or  the  latter  part  of 
August.    We  traiisshipped  tbeui  and  refitted. 

Q.  Those  210  barrels,  where  did  you  catch  them  ? — A.  We  caught 
some  in  the  southern  part  of  the  island,  about  70  barrels  oif  George- 
town, outside  of  the  limits.    That  was  the  last  trip. 

Q.  But  let  us  contine  ourselves  to  the  first  trip.  You  got  about  210 
barrels.  What  proportion  of  these  did  you  get  inside  and  what  out- 
side ? — A.  I  can  hardly  call  to  my  memory.  We  fished  up  the  Bay 
Ghaleur  a  good  deal. 

Q.  Give  us  a  general  idea  of  the  distance  from  the  shore.  What 
proportion  did  you  get  inside  and  what  outside  ? — A.  Pretty  nearly  the 
same  as  before.    About  two-thirds  inside  and  one-third  outside. 

Q.  Then  you  transshipped  them.  What  did  you  make  on  your  sec- 
ond trip  ! — A.  About  210  barrels  more. 

Q.  Did  that  finish  the  season's  trip  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Of  the  second  trip  what  proportion  did  you  catch  outside !— A. 
one  hundred  barrels. 

Q.  Nearly  half  outside  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Whereabouts  did  you  fish  them  on  the  second  trip ! — A.  We 
fished  off  Georgetown,  on  the  south  side  of  the  island. 

Q.  You  were  not  up  on  the  north  bend  at  all  ? — A.  Not  as  yet.  We 
then  came  along  and  came  up  the  island.  Wo  got  about  50  barrels  at 
the  bend  of  the  island. 

Q.  The  fleet  was  about  the  same  ? — A .  Yos ;  there  were  not  as  niauy 
as  in  1865  or  1866.    They  were  getting  more  into  codflshing. 

Q.  Would  you  say  that  the  proportion  of  fish  taken  by  other  vessels, 
as  regards  the  three-mile  limit,  was  the  same  as  your  own  ? — A.  As 
nearly  as  I  could  tbrui  an  opinion. 

Q.  That  brings  to  the  end  of  1H68.  Where  did  you  then  go  ? — A.  I 
d'd  not  go  anywhere  on  the  American  coast  that  fall.  In  1809 1  was  in 
the  Isaac  Rich.  We  came  down  in  August  and  fished.  We  did  not 
transship  this  year.    We  went  home  in  the  fall,  having  got  450  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  them,  with  regard  to  the  shore  line  ? — A.  We 
got  about  120  barrels  in  Pleasant  Bay,  Magdalen  Islands,  the  rest  in 
the  bend  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  In  the  bend  were  they  got  within  three  miles  ? — A.  With  the  ex- 
ception of  a  very  few,  say  20  barrels,  they  were  inside. 

Q.  Now,  in  1869,  was  the  fleet  numerous f— A.  Yes;  about  400  this 
year. 

Q.  Was  the  average  catch  as  large  as  the  catch  in  the  vessel  yoa 
were  in  ? — A.  Not  exactly.    It  would  not  be  as  large. 

Q.  Whatever  the  catch  was,  were  the  proportions  taken  within  the 
limit  as  great  as  yours  I — A.  Yes ;  I  would  judge  so. 

Q.  What  was  the  proportion  of  yours  taken  outside? — A.  Of  the  450 
barrels,  110  were  taken  outside  including  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Did  you  go  in  1870  ? — A.  I  went  in  a  vessel  of  my  own,  a  British 
vessel.    I  have  remained  since  then  in  my  own  vessels,  British  vessels. 

Q.  Where  have  you  fished  ? — A.  Principally  in  the  Bay  Ohaleur. 

Q.  Have  you  been  successful  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  have  made  pretty  good 
catches. 

Q.  Where  have  you  taken  them,  within  what  distance  from  the 
shore  ? — A.  Every  year  about  the  s^ame. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  a  general  question  :  From  your  long  experience,  what 
proportion  do  you  say  are  taken  (not  by  boats,  but  by  fishing  vessels) 
within  the  limits,  and  what  proportion  outside  ? — A.  Fully  two-thirds 
are  taken  within  the  limits,  according  to  my  experience,  and  the  otber 
third  are  taken  outside. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


337 


Friday,  August  3. 
The  Conference  met. 
Examination  of  Mr.  Campbell  continued. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 
Question.  Yesterday  we  came  down  to  18G9,  and  yon  stated  that  was 
the  last  year  you  were  engaged  in  the  mackerel  fishing  in  an  American 
vessel  ?— Answer.  Yes. 
Q.  Ill  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  1870  ?— A.  In  the  Athlete. 
Q.  Of  what  nationality  was  she  ? — A.  A  British  vessel,  belonging  to 
St.  John,  New  Brunswick,  sailing  from  the  island. 

Q.  Where  did  yon  fish  ? — A.  Up  in  Bay  Chaleur  at  the  first  start, 
then  from  Miscou  to  Escuminac;  there  we  fished  only  a  short  time. 
Leaving  there  we  fished  from  North  Cape  to  East  Point,  Prince  Edward 
Island. 
Q.  How  many  fish  did  you  catch  ? — A.  316  or  318  barrels. 
Q.  Will  you  state  what  proportion  you  took  within  three  miles  of  the 
shore? — A.  We  fished  principally  within  the  limits;  we  got  60  or  70 
barrels  outside. 

Q.  Those  360  barrels  were  all  taken  inside  the  limits,  except  50  or  60 
barrels?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  you  estimate  as  the  number  of  the  American  fleet 
that  season — the  season  of  1870  ? — A.  About  400  sail. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  was  the  average  catch  they  made  ? — A.  The 
average  catch  would  be  about  400  barrels,  between  that  number  and  350. 
Q.  Where  was  the  catch  taken   by  the  American  fleet  ? — A.  We 
caught  principally  with  the  fleet  in  the  bay. 

Q.  They  caught  their  fish  at  the  same  places  where  you  ^ook  your 
catch? — A.  They  principally  went  together — a  large  portion  of  them. 

Q.  lu  1871  what  vessel  were  you  in  ? — A.  In  the  Odell,  of  Charlotte- 
town. 
Q.  Is  she  an  island  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her? — A.  Three  trips  j  they  were 
sbort  trips.    We  got  600  barrels. 
Q.  That  is  the  total  of  the  three  trips  ! — A.  Yes. 
Q.  In  what  places  were  they  caught? — A.  We  went  to  the  bay.    We 
went  to  Bank  Bradley  and  didn't  get  anything  there.    Then  struck  off 
and  went  to  Bay  Chaleur.    We  got  our  first  trip  altogether  there  with- 
out coming  out. 
(J.  How  many  barrels  was  that  ? — A.  Something  over  200  barrels. 
Q.  And  the  second  trip  where  did  you  go  ? — A.  We  went  to  Miscou 
and  caught  some  mackerel  there,  and  followed  them  down  to  Escumi- 
nac, and  picked  up  about  100  barrels.    We  came  across  to  the  island 
and  finished  the  trip  between  North  Cape  and  East  Point. 

Q.  And  the  third  trip  ? — A.  We  got  a  portion  of  the  mackerel  on  the 
south  shore  of  the  island. 

Q.  Of  these  600  barrels  how  many  were  caught  close  inshore,  and 
within  the  limits,  and  how  many  outside? — A.  Two  hundred  barrels  were 
taken  outside— 180  or  200,  as  near  as  I  can  tell. 
Q.  And  420  barrels  were  taken  in  the  limits  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Were  many  American  vessels  in  the  bay  in  the  season  of  1871  ? — 
A.  About  the  same  number,  and  the  catch  was  about  the  same  as  the 
year  before. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  places  where  the  mackerel  were  taken,  was 
there  any  dift'erence  as  to  the  distance  from  the  shore? — A.  We  princi- 
22  p 


338 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


pally  fished  with  ,the  fleet;  we  generally  went  together  and  fisbed  to- 
gether on  one  of  the  shoals. 

Q.  In  your  opinion  what  portion  of  the  catch  that  season  would  be 
taken  inside  the  limits,  and  what  outside  ? — A.  I  could  not  give  an  exact 
estimate.  I  should  say  pretty  nearly  the  same  proportion  as  our  uwd 
catch. 

Q.  Did  you  go  fishing  in  1872  ?— A.  I  went  only  a  short  time  in  a 
small  vessel  both  cod  and  mackerel  fishing ;  I  went  trading  after  that. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  vessel  ? — A.  The  Whisper. 

Q.  You  only  did  a  little  fishing  in  1872? — A.  Only  for  a  short  time  in 
the  bay. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  composed  the  American  fleet  frequenting  the 
bay  that  year? — A.  I  was  not  much  among  the  fleet  thatyear.  I  learned 
from  the  fleet  that  there  were  not  as  many  in  the  bay  that  year. 

Q.  I  think  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  were  on  two  vessels  fish- 
ing in  American  waters  f — A.  Yes,  after  leaving  the  bay. 

Q.  In  what  depth  in  American  waters  do  you  generally  fish  when  you 
use  purse  seines  ? — A.  Thirty  or  forty  fathoms  and  deeper. 

Q.  Do  you  use  purse  seines  in  deep  water  ? — A.  Yes ;  you  cannot  use 
them  very  well  in  shoal  water. 

Q.  When  Americans  come  down  here  with  purse  seines,  how  do  they 
manage  to  use  them  in  our  shoal  waters? — A.  They  make  a  change  iii 
the  seines,  they  generally  cut  them  shorter.  I  know  particularly  that 
one  man  has  two  seines — one  for  shoal  and  the  other  for  deep  water. 

Q.  Do  they  use  these  cut  seines  in  American  waters? — A.  i^ot  that  I 
know  of;  there  is  no  need  for  them.  The  deeper  the  seines  there  the 
better. 

Q.  What  is  the  depth  of  the  general  fishing  in  British-American 
waters  ? — A.  From  3  to  7,  8,  and  10  fathoms. 

Q.  Are  purse  seines  allowed  to  go  to  the  bottom? — A.  Yes;  but  they 
don't  do  as  well  it  allowed  to  go  to  the  bottom. 

Q.  Will  you  give  the  Commission  your  opinion,  as  a  practical  dsher- 
man,  of  the  result  of  this  mode  of  catching  fish  with  seines  on  the  fish- 
eries ? — A.  From  my  experience  and  from  what  I  have  found  out,  seining 
is  an  injury  to  fishing  wherever  it  is  carried  on. 

Q.  To  what  extent  and  in  what  way  ? — For  several  reasons.  They  are 
taking  fish  in  large  quantities  and  a  great  many  they  take  are  not  able 
to  be  cured,  and  there  is  something  about  it  that  appears  to  destroy  the 
fish  more  than  hooks. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  conversation  with  American  skippers  who  use 
seines  ? — A.  Yes,  considerable. 

Q.  What  is  their  opinion  ? — A.  It  is  their  opinion  that  seining  destroys 
the  fish,  of  course.  But  they  are  bound  to  get  them  whatever  way  they 
can. 

Q.  Can  you  give  any  information  with  regard  to  the  season's  fishing 
on  the  island  ? — A.  Not  a  great  deal,  except  what  I  have  heard  from  a 
few  American  vessels  lying  out ;  they  are  doing  very  well  around  the 
island.  One  man  in  particular.  Captain  Leo,  of  Gloucester,  who  oue  day 
hauled  in  140  barrels  of  mackerel  in  a  seine.  He  bad  then  240  barrels 
taken  in  small  catches.  He  had  a  lot  of  herring  among  the  mackerel 
and  he  gave  them  away  to  the  boats. 

Q.  Did  you  ascertain  what  was  the  probable  number  of  the  American 
fleet  there  f — A.  There  were  not  a  great  many  vessels  in.  As  far  as  I 
coald  find  out,  they  were  coming  in  very  fast. 

Q.  Did  you  find  out  the  number  of  vessels  which  intended  coming  Y- 
A.  They  say  there  will  be  from  500  to  600  in  the  American  fleet  in  the 


AWAHD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMISIISSION. 


33a 


bay  this  year,  on  account  of  the  failure  of  their  own  fisheries  this  year. 
The  mackerel  fishing  in  their  home  waters  has  not  been  very  successful. 
Q.  You  have  given  us  the  number  of  the  fleet  engaged  in  catching; 
mackerel ;  can  you  give  us  the  number  of  American  vessels  engaged  in 
cod  fiabiug  1 — A.  Yes ;  I  think  fully  more  were  engaged  in  catching  cod- 
fish than  catching  mackerel. 

^.  I  understootl  you  to  say  that,  approximately,  there  would  be  400 
American  vessels  engaged  in  the  mackerel  fishing — would  the  number 
be  the  same  in  cod  fishing; ! — A.  Fifty  or  one  hundred  more  are  engaged 
in  the  cod  fishing. 

Q.  Where  do  these  cod  fishers  get  their  bait? — A.  They  get  their 
winter  bait — frozen  herring — at  Newfoundland,  some  at  Grand  Mauan. 
lu  the  spring  they  come  up  the  Bay  of  Fundy  and  get  the  bait  there  prin- 
cipally. At  this  time  of  the  year  they  strike  into  the  Nova  Scotia  shore 
and  get  bait  there.  In  the  spring  some  go  to  Magdalen  Islands  and 
Newfoundland. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  are  these  herring  taken  ? — A.  The 
herrings  are  all  taken  inshore. 

Q.  Could  the  American  fishermen  prosecute  this  cod  fishing  without 
getting  this  herring  bait  ? — A.  I  cannot  see  how  they  could  go  fishing 
without  getting  their  bait  here. 

Q.  Are  codfish  caught  to  any  extent  along  the  coasts  of  British 
America! — A.  Considerable  cod-fish  are  caught,  but  not  many  by 
Americans. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  there  are  any  trawlers  off  Cape  North,  Cape 
Breton  ?— A.  There  is  more  or  less  fishing  every  year  there  by  Ameri- 
cans. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  speak  of  the  number  of  the  fleet  engaged  there? — 
A.  Not  of  these  late  years. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  duty  wh  ich  was  imposed  some  years  ago  on 
British  codfish.  What  is  your  opinion  as  a  practical  fisherman  with 
respect  to  that  duty,  if  your  waters  were  kept  to  yourselves  and  Ameri- 
can vessels  were  excluded? — A.  We  should  have  all  the  fish  to  our- 
selves. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect  in  regard  to  the  duty  if  we  sent  them  to 
the  States  and  paid  $2  per  barrel  duty  ? — A.  We  could  set  up  the  price 
if  we  had  all  the  mackerel  to  ourselves. 

Q.  Do  the  American  fishermen  take  enough  mackerel  in  their  own 
waters  to  supply  their  own  markets  ? — A.  Not  every  year.  Last  year 
and  the  year  before  they  did  very  well.  They  took  a  large  portion  of 
the  supply  for  their  own  market  from  their  own  waters,  but  previous  to 
that  they  could  not  do  it. 

Q.  This  year  did  they  do  it  T — A.  I  don't  think  it  by  their  own  re- 
ports. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  boat  fishing  in  Prince  Edward 
Island  1 — A.  Not  a  great  deal  since  I  worked  at  the  boat  fishing  my- 
self. 

Q.  How  far  off  shore  do  the  boats  catch  mackerel  ? — A.  From  half  a 
mile  to  two  miles. 
Q.  Do  they  go  outside  three  miles  ?— A.  Not  for  mackerel. 

Has  that  branch  of  industry  increased  to  any  extent  of  late  years  f 

It  has  been  increasing  more  or  less  every  year. 

Do  you  know  whether  the  presence  of  the  fleet  among  the  boat 

is  an  advantage  or  disadvantage  ? — A.  During  my  time  of  boat 

it  was  a  disadvantage  to  a  certain  extent.    When  they  used  to 

i  among  them  we  would  have  to  clear  the  way  for  them. 


-A. 


340 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  would*  have  to  clear  away  ?— A.  We  would  have  to  clear 
out  of  the  way. 

Q.  What  would  ! — A.  The  boats.  In  boat  fishing  we  fish  at  anchor, 
and  as  their  ships  would  drift  they  would  consequently  have  an  advant- 
age and  come  down  on  us.  When  among  the  flsh  they  are  not  partic- 
ular whether  they  come  over  us  or  not,  and  we  would  have  to  keep  oat 
of  the  way.  I  know  one  case  particularly.  I  saw  a  vessel  run  a  boat 
down.    It  was  the  Marengo. 

Q.  Is  it  looked  upon  by  the  boat  fishermen  as  an  advantage  or  a  dis- 
advantage to  have  the  fleet  come  in  among  them  ? — A.  They  look  on  it 
as  a  disadvantage,  certainly. 

Q.  You  have  said  Americans  do  not  prosecute  cod  fishing  very  much 
in  British  waters ;  tell  mewhere  cod-flsh  are  caught  by  British  flsbermeu  ? 
— A.  In  the  spring  they  fish  inshore.  The  first  school  strikes  along 
shore  and  follows  bait ;  but  at  this  season  they  go  out  further,  to  the 
Banks,  probably  six,  seven,  or  eight  miles.  In  the  spring  they  are  in- 
shore, a  different  school  from  that  which  goes  to  the  Banks. 

Q.  Where  do  you  take  them  in  spring  ? — A.  From  one  to  one  mile 
and  a  half  from  the  shore ;  some  part  of  the  season  they  are  close  in. 

Q.  And  later  in  the  season  they  go  off? — A.  Yes ;  at  this  time  of  the 
year. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  From  what  you  last  stated,  I  understand  that  codfish  in  the  spring 
are  found  mostly  inshore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  them  in  boats  ? — A.  We  have  trawls. 

Q.  And  catch  them  in  trawls  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  follow  the  cod  out  to  seal — A.  When  they  go  out  to  sea 
Vfe  take  in  the  trawls  and  go  out  with  hand-lines. 

Q.  Explain  the  mode  of  fishing  with  trawls. — A.  A  trawl  consists  of 
long  lines  made  fast  to  one  another,  and  hooks  placed  five  feet  a5)art. 
We  have  sinkers  on  them  and  floaters  to  keep  them  four  feet  from  the 
bottom,  so  that  the  hooks  do  not  strike  the  grouud.  We  have  a  length 
of  half  a  mile  or  a  mile  with  hooks  on,  with  an  anchor  at  each  end,  and 
buoys  to  haul  them  up  by. 

Q.  Is  this  plan  used  in  deep  water  ? — A.  Yes.  When  used  in  deep 
water  we  do  not  put  floaters  on  them. 

Q.  What  sort  of  British  vessels  are  engaged,  in  the  cod  fishery  in  the 
spring  ? — A.  We  have  not  got  very  large  vessels — about  50, 60,  or  40  ton 
vessels.    Boats  are  principally  engaged  in  it. 

Q.  What  months  do  you  find  cod-fish  plenty  inshore  ? — A.  In  the 
month  of  June.  About  1st  June  they  strike  in  and  continue  there  till 
the  middle  of  July. 

Q.  When  do  they  take  to  deep  water  ? — A.  In  the  latter  part  of  Jnly 
and  August. 

Q.  Is  the  American  cod  fishing  carried  on  in  deep  water  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  say  it  is  a  different  class  of  fish  inshore  in  the  spring  ?— A. 
They  are  larger  fish  than  we  catch  outside. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  the  spring  fish  are  larger? — A.  Yes ;  what  we 
call  set-line  flsh. 

Q.  When  do  the  cod-fish  grow  so  large  and  fat — is  it  in  winter,  or  is  it 
a  different  kind  of  fish  ? — A.  It  is  a  different  school  of  fish. 

Q.  What  becomes  of  the  large  fish  that  are  found  inshore  at  the  early 
part  of  the  season  before  Americans  come  up?  What  becomes  of  those 
not  caught  ?  Do  you  know  where  they  go  ? — A.  They  go  straight  off 
to  the  Banks. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


341 


Q.  Yoa  don't  follow  them.  If  yoa  did  follow  them,  would  you  not 
have  the  same  chance  to  get  them  as  Americans  ? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  You  have  not  many  large  vessels  ? — A.  I  did  all  my  cod  fishing 
inshore  and  with  boats. 

Q.  You  have  not  really  a  fleet  of  schooners  to  follow  the  fish  T — A, 
There  are  only  a  few  schooners  from  the  island. 
Q.  The  best  bait  for  cod-fish  is  herring  ? — A.  Herring  principally. 
Q,  Do  the  Americans  buy  bait  for  cod  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  You  get  herrings  at  5  cents  per  barrel  ? — A.  Sometimes  less  and 
fioinetiiues  a  little  more. 

Q.  It  would  not  pay  the  American  fleet  when  they  can  buy  herrings 
for  5  cents  per  barrel  to  go  herring  fishing  ? — A.  They  would  have  to 
pay  more  than  that  for  them  in  the  winter  season. 

Q.  Where  do  the  Americans  buy  bait  for  the  cod  fishing? — A.  Along 
the  Nova  Scotia  shore  and  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  ;  sometimes  they 
seine  it  themselves,  but  not  often. 

Q.  Dou't  you  think  it  is  a  benefit  to  those  having  herring  to  sell  that 
the  American  cod-fishermen  should  buy  it  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  have  superabundance  of  herring,  so  they  have  to  throw  them 
away  in  large  quantities  when  the  season  is  ended  ? — A.  No.  They  may 
about  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Is  it  not  very  well  known  that  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  the  her- 
rings they  cannot  either  use  or  sell  they  throw  away  in  great  quantities 
attlieeud  of  the  season  ? — A.  I  don't  know  of  any  case  when  they  caught 
80  many  as  to  throw  them  away. 
Q.  Have  you  been  there  much? — A.  Several  springs. 
Q.  American  cod-fishermen  get  bait  also  from  the  Bay  of  Fundy, 
Grand  Manan,  and  other  places? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  Newfoundland  ? — A.  Yes.  Those  who  go  to  the  Grand  Banks 
get  their  bait  in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  You  think  that  the  presence  of  a  fleet  of  schooners  is  a  disadvan- 
tage to  the  fleet  of  boats  ? — A.  Yes,  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  It  is  owing  to  the  fact  that  they  are  very  much  larger,  and  drift 
down  among  the  boats  which  are  at  anchor,  and  it  is  difficult  for  the 
boats  to  contend  with  the  vessels  drifting,  and  have  to  take  up  anchor 
and  get  out  of  the  way  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  would  be  so  with  any  fleet  that  fished  there,  no  matter  whether 
French,  American,  or  British  ? — A.  Most  certainly ;  if  it  was  a  large  fleet, 
it  would  be  the  same. 

Q.  What  is  the  reason  you  assign  for  there  not  being  more  schooners 
from  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  I  cannot  give  any  sufficient  reason. 

Q.  Partly  the  want  of  capital,  is  it  not  ?  It  requires  capital  to  invest 
in  large  vessels.  Is  it  partly  want  of  capital  and  partly  want  of  men ; 
how  is  that  ? — A.  It  certainly  requires  capital.  In  regard  to  the  number 
of  men,  we  have  a  good  many  fishermen ;  nearly  as  many  as  other  coun- 
tries in  proportion. 
Q.  A  great  many  are  engaged  in  the  American  fleet  ? — A.  There  are. 
Q.  For  two  or  three  years  Americans  have  supplied,  have  they  not, 
substantially  the  markets  in  the  United  States  from  their  own  mackerel 
fisheries  ?— A.  During  the  two  last  years  they  did  remarkably  well. 

Q.  Is  it  your  experience  that  the  mackerel  catch  is  a  rather  uncertain 

matter,  both  as  to  quantity  and  as  to  locality,  taking,  say,  twenty  years 

bad!— A.  They  have  not  failed  so  much  with  us  as  they  have  failed  in 

American  waters.    They  are  more  certain  with  us. 

Q<  Oil  the  American  coast  it  is  somewhat  a  matter  of  uncertainty; 


342 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


u 


8ome  years  they  db  very  well,  and  some  years  very  ill  ? — A.  Some  years 
they  do  nothing  at  all  worth  speaking  of. 

<i.  But  some  years  they  catch  enough  to  supply  their  own  markets!-- 
A.  I  don't  think  it — not  to  supply  their  whole  markets. 

Q.  Mainly  so ;  so  as  to  have  given  them  control  of  the  market  during 
the  last  two  or  three  years  ? — A.  During  the  last  two  years  they  have  got 
large  quantities. 

Q.  Have  there  not  been  seasons  when  there  was  great  distress  among 
your  fishermen  because  mackerel  was  very  scarce,  not  enough  to  make  a 
living ;  have  they  not  petitioned  the  government  for  aid  and  a  bounty  to 
enable  them  to  get  along  ? — A.  During  my  time  fishing  has  been  very 
successful  here. 

Q.  You  have  been  so  f — A.  It  has  been  so  at  the  island  generally. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  cases  where  there  has  been  great  distress  among 
fishermen  for  want  of  an  adequate  catch,  and  that  they  have  petitioned 
government  to  aid  them  by  bounties  and  other  modes  of  helping  tbem 
along,  even  from  starvation  I — A.  It  would  not  be  for  want  of  tisU,  but 
from  some  other  cause. 

Q.  Have  they  not  been  in  great  distress  for  want  of  fish  ?  Have  you 
not  seen  reports  of  officers  of  the  government  stating  these  facts?  Don't 
you  know  of  large  public  meetings  for  the  relief  of  the  fishermen  because 
their  catch  was  so  very  small  ? — A.  That  was  some  time  ago. 

Q.  How  many  years  ago  ? — A.  I  don't  recollect,  on  account  of  the 
fishing  alone,  seeing  any  great  want. 

Q.  Was  there,  among  what  are  called  the  fishing  population,  great 
distress  for  want  of  a  catch  in  this  part  of  the  world — in  Prince  Edward 
Island,  Nova  Scotia,  Cape  Breton,  and  New  Brunswick  ? — A.  Of  course, 
some  catches  are  not  as  large  as  others. 

Q.  They  have  good  years  and  bad  years  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  not  bad  years  prt  tty  bad  years,  so  that  they  have  sniferedf— 
A.  I  don't  remember  that  Lhey  have  suffered  a  great  deal  for  want  of 
heavy  catches  of  fish. 

Q.  I  mean  your  neighbors ;  take  the  people  of  Nova  Scotia,  both  sides 
of  the  Gut  of  Canso,  along  the  coasts  of  New  Brunswick,  and  so  forth— 
have  they  not  had  very  bad  years,  when  they  have  suffered  for  want  of 
a  catch  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  recollect  of  a  poor  fishing. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  question  of  distress  among  the  fishermen,  did  yon 
ever  hear  of  any  petition  being  presented  from  Prince  Edward  Island, 
New  Brunswick,  or  Nova  Scotia,  with  regard  to  distress  among  the 
fishermen  ? — A.  I  don't  recollect  it. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hei  r  of  it  ? — A.  I  don't  remember  that  I  do. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  he  ir  of  the  existence  of  actual  want  and  distress 
among  the  people  known  as  the  fishermen  class  in  Prince  Edward  Isl- 
and 1 — A.  I  don't  remember  that  I  do. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  meetings  being  held  in  the  island,  Nefl 
Brunswick,  or  Nova  Scotia,  called  on  accouut  of  distress  among  the 
fishermen? — A.  It  is  something  new  to  me ;  I  never  heard  of  it  before. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  fishermen  catch  a  large  quantity  of  fish 
every  year — that  the  average  catch  is  good  in  these  waters?— A.  Yes; 
we  consider  we  have  been  very  successful  in  our  fishing  as  regards  fair 
catches. 

i^.  Has  any  year  been  marked  out  when  the  fishery  has  signally  failed, 
80  as  to  cause  distress  ? — A.  I  don't  recollect  of  any. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  has  the  class  now  engaged  in  fishing  increased 
In  wealth,  say  during  the  past  fifteen  years  ? — A.  I  think  they  have. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISUEBY   COMMISSION. 


343 


Q.  Are  they  pretty  well-to-do  now  ? — A.  Yes,  pretty  comfortable. 
Q.  They  have  made  money?— A.  They  make  a  very  good  living,  and 
raise  up  more  or  less  capital. 

Wm.  8.  McNeill,  Eustico,  Prince  Edward  Island,  called  by  the  Gov- 
ernment of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  You  reside  at  Rnstico,  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  are  a  jus- 
tice of  the  peace  I — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  And  have  been  a  member  of  the  local  legislature  for  some  years  ? — 
A.  I  was. 

Q.  For  how  long  ? — A.  Thirteen  years. 

Q.  RuHtico  is  very  nearly  the  center  of  the  bend  of  the  island  ? — A. 
lu  the  deepest  part  of  the  bight  of  the  island. 

Q.  Have  you  resided  there  for  many  years  ? — A.  I  was  born  about 
four  miles  from  Bustico,  but  I  have  resided  in  Rustico  for  34  years. 

Q.  Do  you  live  close  to  the  sea-shore  ? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  Bordering  on  it? — A.  On  Bustico  Bay. 

Q.  Have  you  been  engaged  in  fishing  any  length  of  time  ? — A.  Yes ; 
a  considerable  time. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  a  considerable  time? — A.  Since  1852,  but 
more  particularly  during  the  last  12  or  14  years. 

Q.  Eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two  was,  I  believe,  the  year  of  the 
American  gale? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  the  American  fleet  frequenting  the  waters 
of  the  island  at  that  date — 1852  ? — A.  Well,  I  have  no  data  to  go  upon, 
but  tbey  visited  our  waters  in  great  numbers.  At  the  time  of  the 
American  gale  I  counted  40  schooners  close  in  the  harbor;  so  closd 
that  I  suppose  they  were  in  three  or  four  fathoms  of  water.  They  all 
tacljed  in  the  evening  as  the  gale  was  coming  on.  That  was  only  part 
of  tlie  fleet,  of  course. 

Q.  Does  your  recollection  enable  you  to  state  the  number  of  the 
xVmerican  fleet  frequenting  the  island  about  that  time  ? — A.  I  should 
say  that  100  to  150  vessels  were  always  in  that  locality. 

Q.  Describe  where  they  were. — A.  I  am  not  speaking  of  what  fre- 
quented East  Point  or  North  Cape,  but  of  what  fished  from  Malpeque 
to  Tracadie.  That  is  about  the  center  of  the  bend  of  the  island ;  it  is 
reckoned  the  best  fishing  ground  on  the  north  side. 

Q.  That  number  were  within  sight  of  your  residence  ? — A.  O,  yes ; 
they  were  inshore  most  of  the  time. 

Q.  The  number  would  be  how  many  ? — A.  Altogether,  150  vessels. 
We  often  counted  that  number. 

Q.  Did  that  number  continue  down  to  1852?  Can  you  tell  me  any 
year  when  there  was  any  sensible  increase  or  decrease,  or  did  it  con- 
tinue at  that  number  year  after  year  in  that  locality  ? — A.  I  don't  think 
there  were  so  many  after  the  gale  for  some  years. 

Q.  What  time  of  the  year  was  the  gale  ? — A.  On  5th  October,  1851. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  were  lost  in  it  ? — A.  I  think  I  have  seen  ru 
account  showing  that  160  vessels  were  lost  altogether.  I  rather  be- 
lieve that  included  American,  Nova  Scotian,  and  vessels  belonging  to 
all  nations. 

Q.  Were  that  number  lost  on  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A .  I  think 
not;  I  think  Gape  Breton  was  included.  It  was  the  number  ii*st  in  the 
gulf. 

Q.  Were  they  all  fishing  vessels  ? — A.  I  don't  think  they  were  all  fish- 


344 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


!! 


ing  vessels ;  the  lacge  proportion  were.    There  were  three  lost  with  all 
bands  about  one  mile  each  way  from  where  I  reside. 

Q.  Coming  down  to  1860,  what  was  the  number  of  the  American  fleet 
frequenting  that  portion  of  the  shore  f — A.  I  should  not  like  to  say  how 
many. 

Q.  Could  you  give  any  idea  at  all? — A.  There  was  a  considerable 
number  always  in  sight.    I  have  no  means  of  knowing  the  number. 

Q.  Did  you  often  count  them  ? — A.  I  often  counted  how  tnany  were 
in  sight  at  one  time.  I  often  saw  50  or  CO  come  out  of  Malpeqiie  uud 
come  and  fish  right  inshore. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  shore  were  they  accustomed  to  fish  1— A. 
They  fished  very  close  to  the  shore. 

Q.  What  distance  ? — A.  It  is  with  boats  we  catch  all  our  fish  there, 
and  we  fish  from  one  mile  to  three  miles,  mostly  about  a  mile  and  a 
half  or  two  miles  from  shore ;  and  of  course  the  fleet  know  where  tbe 
boats  are  catching  mackerel  (they  have  glasses),  and  so  soon  as  they 
perceive  the  boats  are  getting  mackerel,  they  dash  right  in  and  they 
drift  right  down  through  tbe  boats. 

Q.  Explain  how  the  boats  fish  ? — A.  The  boats  fish  at  anchor  on 
what  is  called  a  spring;  they  spring  their  boats  and  bring  them  broad- 
side to  the  current,  so  that  every  man  has  a  chance  along  the  side  uf 
the  bait. 

By  Mr.  Dana: 

Q.  They  swing  by  the  wind  and  not  by  the  tide? — A.  They  are  swing 
ing  with  the  tide  as  much  as  possible  on  account  of  keeping  the  bait 
fairly  alongside  the  boat.  The  lines  otherwise  would  run  in  a  cluster, 
and  foul  each  other  when  hauling  out  mackerel. 

Q.  How  do  the  vessels  fish  ? — A.  They  are  mostly  under  jib  and  main- 
sail. They  haul  down  the  jib  and  drift  along  past  the  boats;  they  heave 
any  amount  of  bait,  but  sometimes  the  mackerel  are  very  deep  down 
and  they  are  not  able  to  raise  them  before  they  drift  past  the  boats. 
But  if  the  mackerel  are  handy,  near  the  top,  as  often  happens,  the  proba- 
bility is  that  they  will  take  them  from  the  boats  by  throwing  over  a  great 
lot  of  bait.  Sometimes  they  scare  the  mackerel  so  tha*-  neither  tliey 
nor  the  boats  get  them. 

Q.  Is  it  considered  by  your  fishermen  an  advantage  or  a  disadvantage 
to  have  the  fleet  fishing  among  them  ? — A.  Of  course  it  is  considered  a 
great  disadvantage. 

Q.  As  there  is  some  difference  of  opinion  in  regard  to  that,  explain 
your  reason  for  that  opinion  ? — A.  It  is  easily  understood.  When  the 
boats  raise  mackerel  the  vessels  dash  in  among  them  and  throw  any 
amount  of  bait  and  drift  oflf,  drawing  the  mackerel  away  into  deej)  water. 
If  they  raise  them,  which  they  generally  do,  they  drift  off  and  draw  the 
mackerel  away  with  them.  You  will  see  the  glitter  of  their  sides  as  far 
as  you  can  observe  them.  If  there  is  a  good  school  and  the  fish  happen 
to  take  the  bait  right,  it  is  very  likely  that  the  vessels  will  so  scatter 
them  that  the  boats  will  lose  them.  Sometimes,  as  it  often  happens,  the 
mackerel  are  deep  down.  If  their  bait  does  not  get  down  to  tbe  mack- 
erel from  its  blowing  a  good  breeze,  the  vessels  may  drift  off  and  may 
not  get  them  the  first  time ;  but  they  will  tack  and  go  through  the  same 
thing  again,  but  the  next  time,  perhaps,  they  will  take  the  school  from 
the  boats. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  now  from  practical  experience  and  not  from 
theory  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  know  what  I  am  saying. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  what  has  actually  happened? — A.  Yes;  I  have 
witnessed  it  myself,  often  and  often. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


345 


Q.  Do  the  vessels  ever  injare  the  boats! — A.  Sometimes  they  do.  I 
bave  been  applied  to  more  than  once,  as  a  magistrate,  to  know  if  any- 
thing could  be  done  to  punish  those  men  who  dashed  into  the  midst  of 
tbe  boats. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  were  not  very  successful  in  carrying  the  process  of 
law  out  to  sea  ? — A.  I  told  them  Her  Majesty  would  have  to  see  to  that ; 
we  were  not  able  to  manage  that  in  our  little  country. 

Q.  When  you  entered  into  the  fisheries  14  years  ago,  did  you  com- 
mence with  more  than  one  boat? — A.  We  have  now  8  boats  and  employ 
40  men  on  an  average. 

Q.  Fourteen  years  ago  when  you  commenced,  had  you  as  many 
boats ! — A.  We  commenced  with  a  couple  of  boiits,  and  year  after  year 
we  have  increased  the  number.  Our  mackerel  fishing  fell  ofl'  last  year 
very  much. 

Q.  During  these  14  years  you  have  been  fishing,  what  has  been  the 
average  catch  made  by  your  boats  ? — A.  W^e  reckon  100  barrels  to  a 
boat  with  five  hands  as  tbe  average  one  year  with  another ;  perhaps  I 
am  a  little  under,  but  that  is  a  safe  average. 

Q.  Has  that  fishing  been  a  precarious  fishing,  or  has  there  been  a  fair 
average  quantity  year  by  year ;  has  it  during  some  years  been  a  total 
failure,  or  is  there  a  fair  average  catch  every  year  ? — A.  I  suppose  last 
year  was  about  as  hard  a  year  as  there  has  been  for  some  time,  but  it 
was  not  a  total  failure. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch  last  year? — A.  The  catch  last  year  was  about 
60  or  65  barrels  to  a  boat ;  65  was  an  average. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  pretty  fair  run  ? — A.  In  1874  with  three  of  the  boats 
we  took  1,000  barrels.  Six  of  our  boats  took  1,800  barrels ;  that  was  an 
extra  good  year. 

Q.  Was  there  ever  so  much  fish  taken  at  the  Island  before  as  was 
taken  in  1874? — A.  I  think  not.  There  were  of  course  more  men  en- 
i;aged  in  the  business  then  than  previously.  They  might  have  been  as 
plentiful  some  other  years :  I  believe  they  were. 

Q.  What  is  the  size  of  your  boats  which  take  about  100  barrels  per 
year  ?— -A.  Our  boats  are  from  24  to  27  feet  keel. 

Q.  And  what  would  be  the  average  cost  ? — A.  They  are  worth  about 
$200  apiece. 

Q.  Docs  that  include  outfit  ? — A.  They  are  worth  more  than  that,  but 
the  people  build  them  themselves,  and  this  sum  is  not  counting  the 
time. 

Q.  But  what  would  be  tbe  price  of  the  boat  if  you  had  bought  it  ? — 
A.  About  $240.  They  are  all  fitted  with  duck  sails  the  same  as 
schooners. 

Q.  There  are  other  fishing  boats  on  the  Island  larger  than  those  ? — 
A.  There  are  some  larger  boats,  but  that  is  the  average  at  Kustico. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  solely  of  Ruatico  Harbor  ? — A.  Yes.  There  are 
larger  boats  to  the  westward.  We  find  it  more  profitable  to  have  boats 
of  that  size. 

Q.  For  the  last  14  years  you  place  what  you  have  stated  as  the  aver- 
age catch  per  boat  ?~ A.  About  that. 

Q.  About  100  barrels  per  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  boats  go  fishing  out  of  Rustico  Harbor  ? — A.  There  are 
two  harbors — the  little  harbor  and  big  harbor;  out  of  the  big  harbor 
there  will  be  80  boats,  and  the  little  harbor  about  60,  altogether  about 

140  boats  from  Rustico  Harbor,  not  including  the  whale-boats,  which  go 
out  from  tbe  coves  and  which  are  hauled  on  shore. 


346 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Has  tbis  boat^fishing  industry  increased  materially  daring  the  past 
10  years  f — A.  It  has  more  than  doubled  in  the  last  10  years. 

Q.  It  has  been  foand  profitable,  then  f — A.  I  suppose  they  fonnd  it  so. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  any  idea  of  how  many  boats  are  seut 
out  from  other  harbors  along  the  coast  T — A.  From  reliable  iuformatioQ 
I  have  got,  there  are  between  900  and  1,000 ;  926  boats  along  the  north 
shore  are  engaged  in  the  fishery.  That  is,  from  East  Point  to  West 
Cape. 

Q.  That  embraces  the  north  side  alone  f — A.  Tes. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  an  idea  of  the  boats  engaged  in  the  fishing  busi- 
ness on  the  south  coast  ? — A.  I  don't  know  so  much  about  the  south 
coast ;  I  rather  think  there  are  not  so  many,  but  there  is  a  considerable 
number. 

Q.  Of  those  900  or  1,000  boats,  you  say  those  to  the  westward  are 
much  larger  than  those  of  Eustico  ? — A.  Tes,  larger  boats  to  the  west- 
ward. 

Q.  How  much  larger  ? — A.  I  suppose  they  will  take  two  extra  hands 
more  than  our  boats. 

Q.  Should  not  their  catches  be  larger  than  those  of  your  small  boats? 
— A.  They  ought  to  be. 

Q.  As  a  fact,  are  they  ? — A.  The  bight  of  the  island  is  the  best  fish- 
ing ground  ;  but,  of  course,  the  larger  vessels  should  catch  more  mack- 
erel.   They  come  down  as  far  as  the  port  of  Kustico. 

Q.  During  the  14  years  you  have  been  in  the  fishing  business,  have 
you  exported  your  fish  to  the  United  States  or  disposed  of  it  at  hornet— 
A.  These  last  10  years  we  have  established  an  agency  in  Boston  and  we 
ship  our  fish;  before  that  we  sold  them  to  American  merchants  doing 
business  there. 

Q.  As  regards  the  prices  obtained  for  mackerel,  can  you  give  the 
Commission  an  idea  of  the  average  price  you  have  obtained  ? — A.  They 
have  varied  a  great  deal  in  price  during  the  last  10  or  12  years. 

Q.  Between  what  figures  have  they  ranged  ? — A.  I  think  they  were  as 
high  in  Boston  in  the  fall  of  1S68  as  $25  and  $26  for  No.  1 ;  No.  2  and 
No.  3  fish  were  in  proportion,  but  they  were  down  very  low  in  the  winter 
of  that  year.    Mackerel  have  never  been  so  high  as  that  season. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  price  you  obtained,  or  can  you  make  an  aver- 
age ? — A.  I  could  hardly  give  an  average.  The  year  of  the  large  catch, 
I  think  we  obtained  $15  for  No.  1,  $12  for  No.  2,  and  about  $9  for  Ko. 
3.    That  was  in  1874. 

Q.  Does  the  catch  regulate  the  price? — A.  I  don't  know  that  it 
does. 

Q.  What  does,  then  ? — A.  I  don't  know  that  I  could  venture  an  opin- 
ion on  that  point. 

Q.  There  were  some  years  during  which  a  duty  was  levied  on  island 
mackerel  entering  the  United  States  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  price  did  you  get  those  years  ! — A.  I  believe  we  made 
as  much  then  as  we  have  done  since ;  I  don't  think  there  has  been 
much  difference.  Mackerel  has  been  lower  in  price  in  the  American 
market. 

Q.  Since  when  T — A.  Since  1868. 

Q.  That  is  since  the  duty  was  taken  off  f — A.  The  duty  was  on  ;  the 
duty  went  on  in  1867. 

Q.  During  the  time  the  duty  was  on  did  the  price  go  up  or  down  ? 
Did  you  realize  as  good  returns  during  these  years  as  when  the  duty 
was  not  on  ? — A.  I  don't  think  it  made  a  great  deal  of  difference. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


347 


Q.  Daring  those  years  Americans  were  accostomed  to  fish  on  oar 
shores  T — A.  Yes ;  they  were  fishing,  of  coarse. 

Q.  Were  they  ever  excluded,  practically,  from  fishing  along  our 
coasts  T— A.  They  were  never  excluded  since  I  remember.  The  cutters 
would  give  them  a  little  annoyance  sometimes. 

Q.  Did  the  cutters  Iceep  them  out  t — A.  Very  few  of  them  ;  the  cut- 
ters would  take  a  vessel  now  atid  then,  but  the  vessels  soon  got  clear 
of  the  cutters. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  did  the  cutters  exclude  American  flshermeii 
from  the  shore  and  prevent  them  fishing  within  the  limits  f — A.  They 
kept  some  of  the  vessels  out. 

Q.  What  was  the  custom  when  cutters  came  along  ? — A.  When  the 
cutters  came  along  they  took  very  good  care.  The  American  vessels 
are  very  swift,  and  except  they  were  in  a  calm  or  in  a  harbor  or  bay,  very 
few  were  taken. 

Q.  Did  they  abandon  the  coast  when  the  cutter  went  by? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  did  they  do  ? — A.  They  still  fished  there.  Of  course  there 
were  some  cautious  men  who  would  keep  out  for  fear  of  losing  their 
vessels. 

Q.  Do  you  think  any  American  fishermen  abandoned  the  inshore  fish- 
ing because  warned  by  a  cutter  1 — A.  I  think  it  very  unlikely,  from  my 
experience. 

Q.  Suppose  American  fishermen  were  excluded  from  the  three-mile 
limit  of  our  shores,  do  you  think  any  of  them  would  engage  in  the  mack- 
erel fishery  of  tlie  sea  outside? — A.  In  our  gulf? 

Q.  Yes. — A.  I  don't  think  it  would  pay  them. 

Q.  All  the  best  fishing  is  inside  ? — A.  All  inshore. 

Q.  Do  you  think,  if  they  were  excluded  from  the  three  mile-limit,  any 
prudent  man  wonld  invest  his  capital  in  the  business  ? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  about  it  ? — A.  I  have  no  doubt  about  it,  if 
they  were  excluded  from  the  feeding  grounds  where  the  mackerel  are 
taken. 

Q.  Three  miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  call  those  the  feeding  grounds  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Explain  to  the  Commission  where  mackerel  get  their  food. — A. 
There  is  an  eddy  tide  in  our  harbor.  The  tide  is  generally  one  way  out- 
side and  another  way  inside.  In  that  eddy  tide  there  is  this  red  stuff 
they  feed  on — shrimp— about  this  part  of  the  ground.  That  is  what 
they  like.  Ours  is  perhaps  the  best  fishing  ground  on  the  coast,  on  ac- 
count of  the  red  stuff  being  at  the  bottom. 

Q.  How  far  is  it  from  the  shore  ? — A.  About  2,  3,  and  1  mile. 

Q.  Is  it  beyond  that  distance  ? — A.  I  think  the  boats  scarcely  ever 
take  any  mackerel  outside  of  three  miles.  I  suppose  vessels  get  some  out- 
side of  that.    Our  boat-fishing  is  all  inside. 

Q.  If  Americans  were  excluded  from  the  three-mile  limit,  wonld  they 
catch  sufficient  fish  to  remunerate  them  for  coming  to  the  gulf? — A.  I 
don't  think  they  could  make  a  full  fare.  They  might  get  some  on  Bank 
Bradley  at  the  first  of  the  season. 

Q.  Would  you,  as  a  practical  man,  fit  out  a  vessel  for  that  purpose? — 
A.  I  would  not. 

Q.  Do  you  think  Americans  could,  if  you  could  not  ? — A.  I  think  it 
is  doubtful. 

Q.  Have  yon  any  doubt  about  it  ? — A.  I  feel  confident  it  would  not 
pay. 

Q.  Supposing  you  had  the  fisheries  to  yourselves,  and  Americana 
were  excluded  and  duties  levied,  what  would  be  the  effect  on  the  markets 


848 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


of  theUDited  States  f — A.  I  tbiok  there  would  not  be  as  many  mack- 
erel taken  into  the  market.  I  think  the  probability  Ib  ih^t  mackerel 
would  be  high,  because  if  they  were  excluded  from  the  inshore  lisUery 
there  would  not  be  anything  like  as  many  mackerel  taken  mto  the 
American  market  from  our  gulf,  so  that  the  market  would  not  be  glutted 
as  much. 

Q.  Would  you  prefer  to  have  Americans  excluded  and  pay  a  small 
duty! — A.  I  don't  know  about  that.  I  suppose  it  would  be  far  better 
for  the  fishermen  if  the  Americans  were  excluded.  I  think  this,  that 
when  mackerel  are  taken  out  of  our  waters  within  the  three  mile  limit 
in  such  large  quantities  it  must  have  some  effect  upon  the  market.  If 
we  had  the  inshore  fisheries  to  oursb>es,  of  course  we  could  pay  a  little 
duty  and  it  would  not  affect  us  a  groat  deal. 

Q.  What  do  you  say  about  a  duty  of  $3  per  barrel ;  would  they  have 
any  difficulty  about  paying  it? — A.  I  think  we  would,  perhaps,  gaiu  ou 
it  in  the  price. 

Q.  A  question  has  been  asked  as  to  why  more  Prince  E'^.ward  Islaud 
fishermen  do  not  use  vessels  instead  of  boats ;  can  you  explain  why  tbey 
invest  their  capital  in  boat  instead  of  vessel  fishing? — A.  They  think 
they  can  do  better  with  boats.  Some  had  vessels  fitted  out  some  years 
ago,  but  they  gave  them  up  and  are  now  fishing  with  boats.  They  find 
they  can  catch  more  fish.  Tbey  come  in  and  dress  their  fish  during  the 
middle  of  the  day ;  they  go  out  and  come  in ;  they  are  handy  to  the  shore 
and  are  right  on  the  fishing  ground  at  once.  Another  reason  is  this,  our 
season  is  very  short.  Our  fishing-vessels  were  used  as  coasters  iu  the 
fall  to  carry  produce  after  the  fishing  season  was  over,  and  if  it  was  a 
bad  fishing  season  the  freight  in  the  fall  made  it  up  a  little.  But  now, 
in  order  to  make  a  successful  voyage,  you  want  a  smart  vessel  which  is 
not  suitable  for  coasting ;  the  vessels  are  required  to  be  built  on  a  differ- 
ent model  from  those  fit  to  carry  our  produce  to  market. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  have  abandoned  to  some  extent  vessel 
for  boat  fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  there  many  island  vessels  engaged  in  fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  the  fleet  has  decreased  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  boat-fishing  has  increased  ? — A.  Very  much,  and  they 
are  better  boats. 

Q.  Have  yon  ever  heard  of  any  distress  among  the  fishermen  of  the 
island,  and  of  a  petition  to  the  legislature  for  bounties,  or  anything  of 
that  kind  ? — A.  I  think  there  was  a  petition.  I  have  almost  forgotten 
about  it. 

Q.  When  was  that  ? — A.  I  don't  know  how  long  ago.  I  think  there 
was  something  of  that  kind,  but  don't  know  whether  it  was  ever  pre- 
sented. 

Q.  Is  there  any  distress  existing  among  those  fishermen  ? — A.  I  don't 
think  so ;  they  are  not  to  be  pitied  very  much. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  fish  you  take  in  your  boats  along  the  shore,  can 
you  tell  the  Commission  what  proportion  would  be  No.  1,  No.  2,  and 
No.  3  mackerel  ? — A.  I  suppose  nearly  one -third  of  each.  At  the  first 
of  the  season  they  are  No.  2  and  No.  3,  and  then  in  August  they  are 
No.  1  and  No.  2  principally,  and  so  on  to  the  end  of  the  season,  No.  1 
quality  always  increasing  toward  the  end  of  the  season. 

Q.  When  do  the  mackerel  first  make  their  appearance  along  your 
shores  ? — A.  About  the  last  week  in  June.  This  year  they  were  some- 
what later,  about  1st  July. 

Q.  You  say  in  your  harbor  there  is  an  eddy  ?    Tell  us  about  it.— A. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


349 


Yes;  the  tide  is  very  often  insliore  rnnning  one  way  and  outshore 
another. 

Q.  Do  the  mackerel  remain  there  during;  the  whole  season  f — A. 
Sometimes  they  do.  In  1874  a  scliool  of  ma(;kerel  remained  there  the 
\rhole  summer,  sometimes  going  east  and  west,  keeping  within  the  eddy 

tide. 

Q.  Until  what  date  in  the  snmmer  or  fall  ? — A.  Until  about  20th  Oc- 
tober, when  they  Renerally  go  away.  It  depends  a  great  «leal  on  the 
winds.  It  the  gales  of  wind  are  late  in  coming  in  the  tall  the  mackerel 
remain  long,  but  if  the  galea  commence  early  in  October,  they  r^o  away 
sooner.  Fur  instance,  at  the  time  of  the  great  American  gale,  there 
were  no  more  mackerel  after  that.    That  was  on  the  5th  October. 

Q.  Have  any  of  your  flHhermen  ever  boarded  any  American  fishing- 
vessels  in  deep  water  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  have  they  found  ? — A.  They  found  that  the  Americans  could 
not  catch  in  proportion  to  their  crews  what  we  could  in  boats.  They 
found  some  of  them  that  had  been  Ashing  with  twelve  men  had  not 
caught  as  manj'  as  some  of  our  boats  with  only  five  men. 

Q.  Do  your  boats  remain  all  the  time  on  the  fishing  ground? — A. 
They  come  into  the  harbor  at  night. 

Q.  Then  you  fish  during  the  day  ? — A.  During  the  day,  when  the 
weather  is  suitable. 

Q.  What  would  be  your  opinion  as  to  the  general  proportion  of  fish 
caught  within  the  limits  and  outside,  altogether  f — A.  Is  that  by  the 
vessels  ? 

Q.  Or  from  the  boats? — A.  I  could  not  say  about  the  vessels;  I  am 
not  acquainted  with  the  vessel-fishing;  but  our  vessels  never  could 
do  anything  like  so  well  as  ihe  boats,  although  they  had  the  inshore 
fishery. 

Q.  Where  do  you  «;et  bait  for  fishing  ? — A.  We  catch  herring  on  our 
own  shore  and  on  the  Magdalen  Islands  in  the  spring.  We  also  use  a 
great  many  clams ;  we  can  take  mackerel  with  clams  when  we  could  not 
do  so  with  any  other  bait. 

Q.  Do  you  get  clams  on  your  shore  ? — A.  Yes ;  any  amount  of  them. 

Q.  They  are  much  used  for  ordinary  bait  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  much  more 
so  now  than  formerly. 

Q.  And  herrings  are  caught  on  your  coast  and  at  the  Magdalen  Isl- 
ands!—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Herrings  are  plentiful  on  the  island  coast  ? — A.  They  were  not  this 
year;  but  last  year  they  were  in  abundance. 

Q.  But  generally  ? — A.  We  generally  get  good  bait  there. 

Q.  Have  you  any  difUculty  in  securing  fishing  bait  ? — A.  Not  often. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  You  generally  get  bait  from  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  No ;  we 
seuerally  catch  it,  but  we  do  obtain  some  from  the  Magdalen  Islands. 
This  spring,  however,  we  got  none  there ;  it  was  not  to  be  had. 

By  Mr.  Davies: 

Q.  Are  the  men  on  the  American  fleet  of  vessels  accustomed  to  throw 
oftal  on  the  fishing  grounds  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  your  experience  regarding  the  result  of  it?— A.  The 
American  fleet  may  come  among  the  boats  when  a  good  school  of  mack- 
eral,  perhaps,  has  been  struck  and  a  great  many  taken,  but  whenever 
they  throw  offal  overboard  no  more  mackerel  will  be  caught  on  that 
spot  for  some  days  afterwards — not  until  a  brush  of  wind  comes  to  stir 
op  the  whole  thing  from  the  bottom.    I  never  yet  saw  a  fleet  of  Amer- 


350 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


i! 


ioan  vessels  fish  and  take  mackerel  one  day  and  found  any  mackerel 
caught  the  next  day  where  they  had  been  or  for  some  days  afterward, 
while  the  boats  will  go  out  day  after  day  and  catch  them.  This  leads 
me  to  think  that  the  throwing  over  of  offal  hurts  the  flshiug. 

Q.  The  boats  dress  their  fish  on  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  throw  their  fish  offal  overboard  on  the  fishing 
grounds? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  in  your  opinion  this  injures  them  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  have  noticed 
often  and  often,  whenever  a  fleet  of  vessels  bad  caught  and  dressed 
mackerel  one  day,  no  fish  are  caught  tlicre  the  next  day  or  for  some 
days  after. 

Q.  What  do  the  vessels  do  when  they  throw  the  offal  over  at  a  certain 
place  ? — A.  They  go  to  some  other  place. 

Q.  And  the  boats  then  lose  their  catch  1 — A.  The  boats  cannot  follow 
their  example,  because  they  are  not  calculated  to  stay  out  at  night. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  fishing  in  any  other  part,  save 
the  immediate  locality  of  which  you  have  spoken  ? — A.  It  is  carried  on 
in  pretty  much  the  same  way  all  along  the  shore. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  get  any  bait  on  the  island  ? — A.  They  sometimes 
buy  it  at  Gharlottetown,  I  believe.  I  suppose  this  bait  has  beea  im- 
ported. 

Q.  They  do  not  catch  any  bait  ? — A.  I  never  saw  them  do  so. 

Q.  Do  you  get  any  codfish  on  the  north  side  of  the  island  ? — A.  Tes, 
some. 

Q.  Is  this  fishery  prosecuted  there  to  any  extent  ? — A.  Not  to  any 
great  extent. 

Q.  I  believe  it  is  chiefly  followed  on  the  south  side  of  the  island  ?— A. 
Yes ;  to  the  eastward,  about  Murray  Harbor,  there  are  a  good  many  cod 
and  hake. 

Q.  And  there  are  not  many  near  Eustico  ? — A.  We  catch  a  few  there; 
we  get  the  boats  under  weigh  for  them  before  the  mackerel  come,  but 
we  do  not  do  much  of  it  there ;  all  do  something,  but  not  a  great  deal. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  do  you  take  them  ? — A.  We  catch  thetn  in 
about  20  fathoms  of  water.  In  the  spring,  we  get  them  w^ithin  the 
three-mile  limit,  but  after  the  first  school  has  arrived,  they  move  oft'  into 
deep  water. 

Q.  You  catch  the  first  school  always  within  the  three-mile  limit  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Are  they  large  or  small  fish  ! — A.  They  are  not  very  large.  Those 
caught  in  the  spring  are  pretty  large. 

Q.  They  do  not  seem  to  follow  this  fishing  largely  in  Bustico  ?— A. 
Not  now ;  it  was  more  followed  some  years  ago. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  What  is  the  depth  of  the  water  three  miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  I 
suppose  it  would  be  about  ten  fathoms.  In  some  places  it  is  deeper,  and 
Id  some  shallower. 

Q.  I  mean  about  your  own  neighborhood  ? — A.  Even  there,  the  bottom 
Is  uneven. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  You  say  that  during  the  last  two  years  the  fishing  was  not  quite 
so  good  as  usual  f — A.  Yes. 

f  <  Q.  How  about  last  year  f — A.  The  mackerel  was  scarcer  last  year  than 
they  had  been  for  a  number  of  years. 

Q.  And  your  catch  was  about  65  barrels  to  a  boat  last  year  T— A.  I 
think  the  average  was  not  more.    It  might  have  been  70. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


351 


Q.  Did  yon  find  any  difference  in  the  position  of  the  mackerel  last 
year  f  Were  they  farther  out  or  closer  in  than  usnal  f — A.  They  were 
in  just  about  the  same  position  as  usual. 

Q.  What  are  the  indications  this  year  f — A.  When  I  left  they  were 
tbat  we  would  have  a  good  catch.  My  son  told  me  that  they  had  got 
nearly  as  many  mackerel  already  as  we  took  last  year  altogether.  The 
fish  came  this  year  very  much  as  they  did  in  1874.  They  arrived  about 
the  same  time  in  the  gulf,  and  they  have  acted  in  very  much  the  same 
way. 

Q.  What  is  the  general  impression  regarding  the  whole  season's 
catch !— A.  There  are  great  hopes  of  a  good  season.  I  suppose  it  will 
be  such.  A  very  heavy  body  of  mackerel  is  on  the  shore — the  heaviest 
body  that  has  been  there  for  some  years. 

Q.  Have  the  vessels  of  the  American  fleet  come  down  at  all  to  your 
waters? — A.  Some  seiners  are  there  now.  I  was  told  before  I  came 
away  tbat  one  seiner  took  200  barrels  between  Bustico  Gape  and  New 
Loudon  Head. 

Q.  Just  off  your  harbor?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  would  that  be  ? — A.  It  was  within  the 
three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  opinion  regarding  the  effect  the  use  of  seines 
will  have  on  the  mackerel  fishing  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  much  about  that. 
I  have  been  on  the  Magdalen  Islands,  where  they  hauled  seines  on 
shore,  but  I  do  not  know  much  about  purse-seining.  My  impression 
flora  what  I  have  been  told  about  it  is,  that  it  is  going  to  be  destructive 
to  the  fisheries. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  opinion  as  to  the  reason  why  the  mackerel 
fishery  was  not  so  good  iluring  the  last  two  years  as  previously  ? — A. 
There  are  so  many  theories  and  reasons  given  for  it,  and  these  are  so 
conflictiug,  that  I  could  hardly  tell  what  my  own  opinion  is  about  it. 

Q.  You  just  accept  the  fact  as  a  fact? — A.  There  is  one  thing  to  be 
said,  there  was  not  a  large  body  of  maekerel  on  the  shore. 

Q.  Did  you  Include  the  last  two  years  in  the  average  catch  you  men- 
tioned for  fourteen  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Including  these,  it  v^ould  be  as  you  have  said? — A.  Yes;  because 
I  stated  that  we  caught  with  these  boats  1,800  barrels  in  1874. 

Q.  I  have  been  told  that  very  large  quantities  of  ice  have  come  down 
during  the  las^  two  years ;  would  this  fact  keep  the  mackerel  back  ? — 
A.  Sometimes ;  but  there  was  any  amount  of  ice  in  the  gulf  this  year, 
and  yet  we  have  a  large  body  of  mackerel  on  our  coasts. 

Q.  Was  northern  ice  in  the  gulf  this  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Besides  gulf  ice  t — A.  Yes.  It  came  in  from  the  north  shore,  so  I 
do  not  think  that  the  theory  you  mention  is  a  good  one. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  You  stated  that  you  never  bad  any  experience  in  vessel  fishing 
personally  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  And  that  for  the  past  fourteen  years  you  have  used  these  boai:s — 
how  many  have  you  had  during  this  period? — A.  We  commenced  with 
two,  and  we  now  have  eight. 

Q.  You  say  "  we  ";  do  you  belong  to  any  firm  ? — A.  My  sons  are  en- 
gaged in  fishing ;  I  do  not  do  much  at  it. 

Q.  You  have  also  bought  fish  ? — A.  Sometimes ;  but  not  extensively. 

Q.  Who  are  your  agents  for  selling  your  fish  in  Boston  ? — A.  Our 
agent  is  Mr.  Bussell.    They  were  Wise  &  Bussell,  but  Wise  has  retired. 


352 


AWARp   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Was  the  year  of  the  great  gale  1851  or  '52 1— A.  It  was  1851,  i 
thiDk. 

Q.  And  that  year  in  yonr  vicinity  were  lost  160  vessels — nearly  all 
American  vessels ;  was  not  this  the  case  1 — A.  The  greater  portioD  was 
American — 1  mean  in  the  gulf  altogether.  I  have  seen  it  so  stated,  but 
I  do  not  know  from  my  own  knowledge. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  give  the  average  catch  of  the  boats  as 
100  barrels  of  mackerel  during  the  past  14  years  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  there  were  926  boats  on  the  north  shore!— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Yon  think  that  they  have  taken  100  barrels  apiece? — A.  I  was 
only  speaking  of  the  boats  which  we  have  ourselves.  I  did  not  mean 
all  the  boats,  because  there  was  a  number  of  small  boats  which  were 
hauled  on  the  shore.  I  do  not  mean  it  to  be  understood  that  the  small 
boats  took  100  barrels  by  any  mean^. 

Q.  How  many  small  boats  were  there  in  the  926  f — A.  I  could  not  tell 
how  many;  but  they  are  outside  in  the  coves;  they  .do  not  come  iuto 
the  harbors. 

Q.  And  they  are  included  in  the  926 1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  there  be  more  than  one-half  of  the  926  small  boats  ?— A, 
No ;  not  of  the  boats  that  are  hauled  on  the  outside  shore.  These  would 
not  form  one-half  of  the  926. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  w^ould  the  small  boats  average  ? — A.  Some  of 
them  would  do  very  well,  because  they  are  handy  and  near  the  place,  of 
course ;  but  they  cannot  stay  out  as  the  larger  boats  can.  I  suppose 
that,  on  the  whole,  they  would  not  catch  many. 

Q.  How  many  do  they  catch  ?  I  want  an  estimate. — ^A.  They  take 
three  men  generally  in  place  of  five,  and  they  would  average  ia  propor- 
tion to  what  the  others  catch — say  the  others  averaged  100. 

Q.  If  five  men  caught  100  barrels,  then  three  men  would  catch  60?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  how  many  of  the  926  are  boats  manned  by  three  men  ? 
— A.  I  could  not. 

Q.  You  do  not,  of  course,  mean  to  have,  as  the  result  of  your  testi- 
mony on  this  point,  the  average  for  the  926  put  down  as  ioo  barrels 
apiece  f — A.  O,  no ;  I  am  speaking  of  our  own  boats  in  that  regard. 

Q.  And  these  are  larger  and  better,  better  manned,  and  luckier  tbau 
the  others? — A.  No;  I  refer  to  the  fishing  of  Rustico. 

Q.  And  these  are  the  best  ? — A.  There  are  140  of  them,  and  that 
would  be  just  about  the  average  for  them. 

Q.  The  140  would  catch  about  100  barrels ;  do  you  know  of  any  other 
boats  averaging  as  much  ? — A.  At  Tignish  and  Cascampeque,  there  are 
good  boats  and  good  men,  and  I  suppose  that  they  would  do  as  well. 

Q.  How  many  of  them  would  do  so  ?  I  want  to  learn  what  would  be 
the  average  number  of  barrels  taken  by  the  whole  fleet  in  the  season? 
— A.  I  could  not  give  that. 

Q.  But  the  average  is  not  100  barrels  or  anything  like  it? — A.  Well, 
it  would  not  be  for  the  small  boats.  I  should  say  that  probably  there 
are  not  more  small  boats  than  one-sixth  or  one  seventh  of  the  02(>. 

Q.  At  what  would  you  estimate  the  whole  mackerel  catch  on  the  north 
coast  of  the  island  during  an  average  year  ? — A.  I  could  not  clearly  say- 
I  think  that  the  catch  would,  perhaps,  be  rather  more  in  proportion  in 
our  port  than  westward;  that  is  in  regard  to  the  size  of  the  boats;  but 
of  coarse  they  have  larger  boats  and  they  consequently  catch  more. 

Q.  Do  you  tbiuk  that  50,000  barrels  are  taken  in  a  season  on  the  north 
coast  of  the  island  by  your  fishermen  1 — A.  No ;  I  do  not  think  so. 


▲WABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


353 


Q.  Are  40,000  barrels  taken  f — A.  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  Are  there  30,000  f— A.  It  ia  doubtful  whether  they  catch  so  many. 
I  do  not  think  that  they  do. 

Q.  Are  20,000  a  year  taken  on  the  north  coast  of  the  island  ? — A.  O; 
yes;  a  great  deal  more  than  that. 

Q.  The  catch  is  between  20,000  and  30,000  f — A.  Fifteen  thousand  bar- 
rels were  taken  in  Bastico  in  1874. 

Q.  That  was  what  yon  call  the  great  year  Y — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  want  your  estimate  of  the  average,  because  you  have  given  the 
nniuber  of  boats  engaged  on  the  whole  in  the  boat-fishery  during  the 
last  fourteen  years.  You  say  you  think  that  there  are  not  30,000  taken, 
bat  more  than  20,000.  Would  you  put  it  at  25,000  on  the  whole  north 
coast  of  the  island  f — A.  I  would  say  there  was. 

Q.  How  mauy  ? — A.  More  than  30,000  barrels  caught  on  the  whole 
coast. 

Q.  I  want  your  estimate. — A.  I  will  tell  you  what  I  believe  a  boat 
catches.  You  know  the  number  of  boats,  and  you  can  draw  your  own 
conclusions. 

Q.  I  prefer  to  have  your  own  judgment  in  the  matter. — A.  I  could  not 
say.  I  do  not  know  whether  the  fishermen  on  the  other  parts  of  the 
shore  follow  the  fishing  up  as  closely  as  we  do. 

Q.  How  do  you  gee  at  the  number  926  ! — A.  I  have  received  reliable 
information  from  other  ports  concerning  it. 

Q.  And  how  did  you  get  at  the  100  barrels  a  boat  you  told  Mr.  Davies 
of  ?— A.  Well,  I  have  had  experience  in  that  respect. 

Q.  If  you  have  experience  enough  to  answer  his  questions,  I  think 
you  have  enough  to  give  me  the  benefit  of  your  judgment  regarding  the 
whole  number  caught  on  the  north  side  of  the  island.  Can  you  not  do 
so?— A.  I  suppose  that  our  own  fishing  is  perhaps  a  little  better  than  it 
is  to  the  westward,  although  they  have  caught  a  great  many  fish  there 
this  season.  I  would  not,  however,  say  on  my  oath  what  the  year's  catch 
would  be.    I  could  not  do  so. 

Q.  Dou't  you  know  something  about  it  ? — A.  I  know  about  the  fishing 
at  our  own  place. 

Q.  But  about  the  fishing  on  the  whole  north  shore  of  the  island  ? — A. 
Yes;  I  have  an  idea  respecting  it. 

Q.  What  is  your  idea  and  best  judgment  regarding  it? — A.  I  suppose 
that  they  catch  nearly  as  much  in  proportion  as  we  do. 

Q.  Aud  you  will  not  be  persuaded  to  give  your  judgment  as  to  the 
number  of  barrels  caught  on  the  average  during  the  last  fourteen  years 
on  the  whole  north  side  of  the  island  f  You  do  not  know  enough  about 
it  to  hazard  an  expression  of  opinion  respecting  it  ? — A.  Nor  is  anybody 
able  to  tell  it.  You  cannot  tell  in  your  own  country.  A  great  deal  of 
tlsh  is  exported  which  is  never  passed  through  the  custom-house  at  all. 
Mr.  Hall  and  others  have  vessels  along  the  shore,  and  they  put  their 
catch  in  boats  and  send  it  away. 

Q.  I  want  you  either  to  say  that  you  cannot  tell  anything  about  it  or, 
if  you  can,  to  tell  me  as  well  as  you  are  able  what  it  is. — A.  I  have  given 
ray  estimate  of  what  the  catch  may  be.  The  boats  on  the  other  parts  of 
the  shore  are  just  as  well  fitted  out  as  ours,  aud  I  suppose  they  catch 

about  the  same  amount  of  fish. 
Q.  Is  it  your  opinion  that  the  average  catch  on  the  north  shore  of  the 

island  during  the  past  fourteen  years  has  beeu  30,000  barrels  of  mack- 

erelf—A.  I  think  that  it  would  oe  a  little  more. 
Q.  Is  it  35,000!— A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  How  far  out  are  the  shrimps,  the  little  red  stufi:'  on  which  the 
23  p 


354 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


I 


i 


m. 


«|H| 


i!  It 


mackerel  feed,  fooDd  f — A.  I  do  not  know  the  limit  exactly;  bat  we  flnd 
tbem  iu  the  mackerel  we  catch,  and  we  do  not  go  far  out  with  oar 
boats. 

Q.  In  what  depth  of  water  are  these  shrimps  foand  t — A.  We  catch 
the  mackerel,  I  suppose,  in  from  three  to  ten  fathoms  of  water. 

Q.  Are  these  shrimps  not  found  in  water  considerably  deeper  than  ten 
fathoms  ? — A.  They  may  be ;  but  I  have  never  been  in  vessels  to  see 
whether  or  not  this  is  the  case. 

Q.  You  have  never  gone  out  more  than  three  miles  in  your  fishing- 
boat? — A.  O,  yes;  and  have  caught  some  mackerel  out  beyond  that, 
but  never  many. 

Q.  Still  they  were  apparently  on  feeding-grounds  at  more  than  three 
miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  We  caught  very  few  outside  the  three-mile 
limit. 

Q.  Your  boats  are  not  adapted  to  going  more  than  three  miles  out!- 
A.  O,  they  could  do  so. 

Q.  They  do  very  well  on  smooth  water,  and  that  is  one  of  the  reasons 
why  you  keep  so  close  to  the  shore,  is  it  not  ? — A.  It  is  not  that. 

Q.  Has  that  nothing  to'  do  with  it  ? — A.  Our  bo..ts  could  go  to  the 
Magdalen  Islands  for  that  matter. 

Q.  Do  you  go  there  ? — A.  They  have  gone  there  and  got  a  load  of 
herring. 

Q.  Do  you  do  it  usually  ?  We  have  had  a  boat,  with  a  man  and  bis 
wife  in  it,  start  acroFS  the  Atlantic,  and  they  have  arrived  at  their  des- 
tination, but  this  is  not  usual  f — A.  We  do  not  make  a  business  of  it, 
but  we  have  done  it. 

Q.  Do  they  make  a  business  of  going  farther  than  three  miles  from 
the  shore?  Don't  they  hug  the  shore  partly  on  account  of  their  size!— 
A.  Well,  no. 

Q.  That  has  nothing  to  do  with  it  ? — ^A.  If  the  wind  is  off  land,  of 
course,  the  handier  they  get  mackerel  the  better,  but  the  boats  can  go 
any  distance  out  for  that  matter.    They  are  very  good  boats. 

Q.  How  far  from  home  do  yoii  have  to  go?  You  want  to  get  home  at 
night  as  near  sunset  as  you  can,  don't  you  ? — A.  Sometimes  we  reach 
home  about  twelve  o'clock  at  night,  but  we  do  not  mind  being  out  if  we 
get  mackerel. 

Q.  How  long  do  they  fish  ? — A.  As  long  as  the  school  bites. 

Q.  Are  shrimps  always  to  be  found  off  the  coast,  or  do  they  come  there 
from  time  to  time  ? — A.  Sometimes  the  mackerel  have  shrimps  in  them, 
and  sometimes  they  have  none. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  they  stay  habitually  about  your  shores,  or 
whether  they  migrate  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  that. 

Q.  Did  1  understand  you  to  say  that  a  vessel  could  not  do  as  well 
fishing  for  mackerel  as  a  boat,  even  if  the  former  went  close  to  the  shored 
You  thought  that  the  boat  fishing  was  the  more  profitable  ? — A.  Yes; 
we  find  it  so. 

Q.  So  you  think  American  vessels  could  not  do  proportionately  as  well 
as  the  boats,  if  the  former  had  a  right  to  fish  inside  the  tbroemile 
limit? — A.  Perhaps,  every  thing  being  equal,  they  would  catch  as  many 
fish  as  the  boats. 

Q.  What  was  your  statement  about  the  fish  being  drawn  away  from 
your  boats  by  American  bait  ? — A.  I  said  that  when  the  boats  were 
fishing  at  anchor,  as  they  do  in  the  spring,  and  when  the  American  ves- 
sels would  run  and  drift  close  past  them,  the  latter  would  draw  away 
the  school  from  the  boats. 

Q.  That  very  frequently  happens,  does  it  not  ?— A.  Yes. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


355 


Q.  That  is  on  account  of  the  superiority  and  greater  quantity  of  the 
bait  used  by  the  Americans,  is  it  not? — A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  is. 
They  throw  a  greater  quantity  in ;  the  bait  generally  belongs  to  some 
rich  man,  I  suppose;  but  I  believe  that  if  there  is  a  strong  current  our 
bait,  the  clam,  is  preferable. 

Q.  You  have  never  seen  Americans  fishing  for  cod  bait  on  your 
„uore8? — A.  No. 

Q.  Yon  know,  I  suppose,  that  bait  is  sold  by  your  people  to  the  Ameri- 
cans, and  that  your  dealers  advertise  the  fact  they  have  such  supplies 
for  sale  in  United  States  papers  ? — A.  Oh,  yes,  I  suppose  they  do.  I 
kDOW  that  they  bring  down  bait  for  sale. 

Q.  It  is  brought  from  the  States  f — A.  Fogies  are. 

Q.  And  do  not  your  people  buy  it  sometimes  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  buy  a  good  deal  of  it;  don't  they  T— A.  Not  a  very  great  deal; 
the  get  it  for  a  change. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  buy  it  ? — A.  We  do  sometimes,  just  for  a  change  of 
bait. 

Q.  This  is  the  bait  you  speak  of  as  used  .in  quantities  by  the  Ameri- 
cans ;  the  fact  is,  that  it  depends  on  how  the  people  or  fishermen  supply 
themselves  with  bait.  The  fishermen  who  are  well  off  buy  more  of 
it, !— A.  The  mackerel  are  a  very  strange  fish  in  this  respect ;  though 
yoa  pour  in  any  amount  of  bait,  they  sometimes  won't  bite.  Of  course, 
if  a  lot  of  bait  is  thrown  in,  and  there  are  plenty  of  mackerel  in  the 
neighborhood,  they  aru  very  apt  to  follow  it. 

Q.  You  have  been  over  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  know  something  about  the  mackerel  fishing  there  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Don't  they  catch  a  great  many  there  ? — A.  It  is  not  reckoned  a 
good  coast  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Many  are  not  found  there  ? — A.  They  are  caught  there,  but  it  is 
r.ot  reckoned  a  good  coast  for  them. 

Q.  Where  is  Mouton  Island  ?— A.  Between  here  and  Cape  Sable. 

Q.  Where  is  Barrington  Pass  ? — A.  It  is  near  Gape  Sable,  between 
that  island  and  the  mainland. 

Q.  Don't  these  places  advertise  as  you  know ;  and  do  they  not  keep 
a  reading-room  somewhere  here  for  mackerel  fishermen,  in  connection 
with  a  place  where  bait  is  sold  1 — A.  I  am  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.  It  is  kept  to  attract  American  fishermen  there  to  buy  bait ! — A.  I 
am  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.  Have  you  not  seen  the  announcement  ?  It  is  advertised  in  poetry 
in  the  Gloucester  papers  in  the  following  manner : 

"  Compeiition  is  the  life  of  trade."  Ice  and  bait  cheap  at  th»  fishery  ice  and  bait  depot,  Enurald 
Isle,  Shag  Harbor,  Barrington,  N.  S.     By  Michael  Wrayton. 

American  fishermen  will  find  this  the  cheapest,  mcst  convenient  and  easiest  harbor  of 

access  ou  our  coast  for  icing  and  baiting.  ■^T', 

Numerous  traps  and  nets  within  sight  of  ice-house.     One  trap  will  be  kept  set  all  througk 

the  season  (especially  for  providing  herring  bait)  inside  of  Bon  Portage  Light.    Ou  passinf 

tuis  light— 

„  Look  sharp  in  the  northeast, 

A  fixed  red  light  you'll  see 
On  the  starbosra  point  of  Shag  Harbor ; 

Rounding  east,  anchor  in  safety. 
Where  you  will  find  fresh  bait  and  ice 

At  the  lowest  price,  you  see, 
And  gain  in  weight,  waste  and  price, 
By  your  patronizing  me. 


356 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


So  far  as  your  observation  or  inqairy  of  American  vessels  goes,  do  you 
know  for  a  fact  that  when  they  fish  in  deep  water  they  do  not  catch 
many  mackerel  ? — A.  That  is  what  our  people,  who  have  been  with 
them  have  always  informed  me. 

Q.  This  is  not  the  result  of  your  observation,  but  it  has  been  told  you 
by  others  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  can  not  use  purse  seines  except  in  deep  water,  can  tbey  ?— 
A.  They  do  not  go  very  far  from  the  shore  with  them. 

Q.  How  deep  is  the  water  where  they  are  used  ? — A.  I  do  not  know. 
I  am  not  acquainted  with  purse  seining. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  that  it  is  not  in  less  than  15  fathoms  of  water  ?— 
A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  throw  offal  overboard  right  into  a  school  offish 
and  thus  spoil  their  own  fishing  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  But  when  they  are  through  fishing,  they  are  sometimes  careless  about 
it  T — A.  The  mackerel  stop  biting  in  the  evening,  and  then  the  uien  turn 
to  and  dress  the  fish. 

Q.  But  tbey  do  not  do  it  until  the  schools  disappear,  or  stop  biting  ?— 
A.  No. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  Is  not  Bank  Bradley,  of  which  you  have  spoken,  off  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island,  and  do  the  fish  not  pass  over  it  in  spring  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  they  do  not  stay  there  any  time  at  all  ? — A.  Not  long.  I  can> 
not  speak  from  personal  observation  on  the  point,  but  our  men  iu  the 
vessels  tell  me  that  they  stay  there  only  about  a  week,  I  think.  I  have 
never  been  fishing  there,  but  our  men  that  have  been  there  in  the  ves- 
sels say  that  they  only  stay  there  a  short  time. 

Q.  But  you  practically  never  fished  there  at  all  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  say  that  on  the  north  side  of  the  island, 
between  East  and  North  Gapes,  there  were  926  boats  ? — A.  Yes ;  that  is 
the  information  that  I  have  received  on  this  point. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  average  catch  for  a  boat  for 
each  year  is  about  100  barrels  ? — A.  I  speak  with  reference  to  our  own 
harbor  in  this  matter,  and  that  is  about  what  our  boats  generally  get. 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  asked  you  whether  you  would  undertake  to  say  that 
the  whole  catch  for  the  north  side  of  the  island  would  amount  to  more 
than  .35,000  barrels,  and  you  appeared  to  hesitate  ? — A.  Yes ;  with  re- 
spect to  the  western  catch.  The  926  boats  include  those  around  West 
Cape  and  the  North  Gape ;  there  are  198  boats  between  North  Cape  and 
the  West  Cape. 

Q.  You  see  that  if  you  are  right  about  the  average  for  each  boat  be- 
ing 100  barrels,  it  would  be  making  the  catch  for  the  year  amouut  to 
92,600  barrels  T — A.  I  spoke  with  reference  to  our  own  harbor. 

Q.  And  the  number,  100  barrels,  is  rather  below  the  average  there  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  say,  you  had  understood  from  other 
owners  of  boats  that  this  was  about  the  average  all  over  the  island  f- 
A.  No;  it  is  the  average  at  Bustico. 

Q.  Then  you  did  not  mean  to  say  that  35,000  barrels  was  the  amount 
of  the  whole  catch  along  the  island  ? — A.  Not  from  East  Point  to  West 
Cape — no. 

Q.  You  only  referred  to  the  neighborhood  of  Bustico  t— A.  Yes;  and 
to  New  London,  following  the  bight  of  the  island. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  35,000  being  the  catch,  you  mean  that  it  is  for 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


357 


tbe  coast  between  Cascampeqae  and  Tracadie  T— A.  I  mean  from  Tra- 
cadie  to  the  North  Gape,  but  not  around  the  other  side  at  all. 

Q.  How  many  boats  do  you  say  are  betweeen  Tracadie  and  the  North 
Cape  ?— A.  I  think  there  are  a  little  over  700. 

Q.  The  boats  are  larger  on  the  coast  as  you  go  up  towards  Cascum- 
peque?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  700  boats  took  100  barrels  each,  that  would  make  70,000  bar- 
rels!—A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  if  these  700  took  more  than  your  boats,  they  would  catch 
more  than  70,000  barrels  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  the  Commission  to  understand  that  this,  in  your 
jadgment,  is  the  average  number  of  barrels  taken  between  these  two 
points— Cascumpeque  and  North  Gape  on  the  northern  side  of  the  is* 
land  ?— A.  It  would  not  be  so  much  as  that,  because  there  are  a  num- 
ber of  small  whaling  boats  which  are  hauled  up  in  the  different  coves 
along  the  island,  and  which  are  only  manned  by  three  men ;  of  course 
I  do  not  include  them  in  the  estimate. 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  that  the  average  catch  for  all  the  boats,  large  and 
small,  is  100  barrels  each  for  each  year  I — A.  I  am  not  giving  any  esti- 
mate save  with  regard  to  our  own  harbor,  and  I  believe  that  number  is 
ratber  under  than  over  what  has  been  the  average  catch  at  this  point. 

Q.  That  is  the  take  of  boats  manned  by  from  three  to  five  men  ? — A. 
No;  it  is  the  catch  in  Bustico  harbor  with  boats  manned  by  five  men. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  refer  to  boats  manned  by  only  three  men  ? — A- 
I  cannot  speak  for  them. 

Q.  You  say  that  15,000  barrels  have  been  taken  in  Bustico  Harbor 
alone  in  one  season  ? — A.  That  was  in  1874. 

Q.  What  you  say  in  reference  to  the  catch  beyond  Bustico  Harbor  is 
utter  guess-work  on  your  part  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  may  be  a  great  deal  more  than  the  quantity  you  mentioned  to 
Mr.  Foster,  and  it  may  be  less? — A.  Just  so,  because  I  do  not  know  it, 
and  oar  statistics  do  not  give  it,  for  mackerel  are  shipped  outside  without 
being  cleared  at  the  customhouse. 

Q.  Are  the  shrimps  found  three  miles  out  from  the  shore  ? — A.  I  do 
not  think  so.    I  have  been  told  that  they  are  not  found  out  there. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  have  at  times  caught  fish  outside  the  limit  f — A. 
Yes,  a  few.    The  shrimps  are  found  in  eddies  not  far  from  the  shore. 

Q.  And,  practically,  fishing  beyond  the  three-mile  limit,  either  for 
boats  or  vessels,  is  useless  ! — A.  Well,  we  would  not  engage  in  it  our- 
selves because  after  we  go  out  a  certain  distance  we  do  not  catch  many 
flsb. 

Q.  Gould  a  vessel  outside  the  three-mile  limit  get  a  full  fare? — A.  I 
do  not  think  so. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  Would  you  be  good  enough  to  turn  to  the  map  of  the  Island  and 
tell  us  where  you  find  the  700  boats  coucerning  which  you  read  from  a 
memorandum  ? — A.  There  are  seven  hundred  vessels  between  Tracadie 
and  this  point  and  around  back  again.    This  number  is  included  in  the 

92C. 

Q.  How  did  you  get  the  memorandum  you  have  on  a  piece  of  paper  t 
—A.  I  obtained  it  from  men  living  in  diit'erent  harbors  along  the  coast 
and  owners  of  boats. 

Q.  Have  you  been  round  making  inquiries  about  them  ? — A.  I  have 
seen  different  parties,  who  carry  on  fishing  there,  because  I  did  not  know 


358 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


i^ 


i 


i 
ill 


!ii 


I 


J* 


so  much  about  these  as  about  other  parts.  There  is  good  flsbing  along 
by  East  Poiut. 

Q.  But  there  are  no  fishermen  there  to  keep  the  boats  you  have  been 
talking  off — A.  There  are  some  there  who  fish  in  a  small  way. 

Q.  Whereabouts  are  most  of  the  large  boats  found,  so  far  as  you 
know  f — A.  At  our  harbor. 

Q.  Bustico  ? — A.  Yes,  and  at  Gascnmpeque  and  at  Tignish.  The  latter 
j»3M)t  a  harbor,  but  there  is  a  cove  there. 

Q.  And  Tignish,  Casoumpeque,  and  Kustico  are  three  places  where 
jon  find  the  most  of  the  large  boats  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  this  count  was  being  made,  could  not  th3  large  boats  have 
been  counted  ? — ^A.  They  might  have  been. 

Q.  Were  they  not  counted  f — A.  They  were  not. 

Q.  The  large  and  small  boats  were  lumped  together  ? — A.  Yes ;  the 
small  boats,  however,  form  only  a  small  proportion  of  the  number. 

Q.  I  had  considerable  difficulty  in  getting  you  to  make  an  estimate  of 
the  quantity  caught  by  these  926  boats,  and  I  want  to  know  whether 
jou  desire  to  vary  the  statement  you  finally  made  to  me  under  this 
head  ? — A.  No,  I  do  not. 

Q.  There  were  over  30,000  and  not  over  35,000  barrels  taken  If— A.  I 
could  not  estimate  it  save  with  respect  to  our  own  harbor. 

Q.  And  that  is  the  estimate  you  made  ? — A.  I  estimated  that,  one 
year  with  another,  the  average  catch  was  about  100  barrels. 

Q.  And  how  can  you  tell  that  the  average  was  100  barrels,  for  the 
whole  926  boats  f — A.  I  did  not  say  that. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  how  many  are  large  and  how  many  small  boats  ?— 
A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  want  to  leave  this  thing  by  stating  that  you  do  not  kno\r 
anything  about  the  total  catch  of  the  portion  of  the  island  you  have 
pointed  out  and  described,  or  not  ? — A.  I  cannot  give  an  estimate  for 
the  year. 

Q.  You  cannot  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  your  first  estimate  was  good  for  nothing,  and  the  estimate 
you  made  to  me  was  good  for  nothing,  and  the  last  estimate  which  yoa 
gave  Mr.  Thomson  is  good  for  nothing  from  want  of  knowledge  to  found 
them  all  upon  ?— A.  I  estimated  the  catch  at  my  own  harbor. 

Q.  Beyond  that  you  don't  know  anything  about  it  ? — A.  Beyond  that 
I  do  not. 

Q.  And  all  yon  know  about  the  catch  in  what  you  call  the  great  year, 
1874,  is  that  15,000  barrels  were  caught? — A.  This  was  in  Bustico. 

Q.  That  is  all  you  know  about  it? — A.  I  know  we  had  a  large  catch 
that  year  all  over  the  island. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  anything  more  about  the  total  catch  in  1874, 
and  in  the  part  of  the  island  you  have  described,  save  that  iu  Bustico, 
in  that  great  year,  15,000  barrels  were  caught? — A.  I  do  not  know  what 
the  sum  total  of  the  whole  catch  was. 

Q.  You  know  nothing  else  about  it? — A.  I  could  not  give  anything 
save  an  idea  respecting  it. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  What  are  the  small  boats  you  mention  as  being  hauled  on  shore?— 
A.  These  boats  are  used  in  fishing  outside  the  harbor,  in  small  coves 
along  the  coast. 

Q.  And  they  stay  out  there  over  night? — A.  Yes.  They  haul  the 
boats  up  on  shore  to  keep  them  safe  in  case  of  storms. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


359 


Q.  Does  that  statement  apply  to  the  larger  boats  f — A.  No ;  bat  to 
siuail  whaling-boats. 

Q.  How  many  mackerel  do  they  bring  iu  at  a  time ;  do  they  get  the 
boats  fall  f — A.  No ;  they  hardly  ever  obtain  so  many  fish  at  once. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  do  they  bring  in  f — A.  I  suppose  that  they 
would  carry  abont  2,000  mackerel.  They  are  all  whaling-boats.  The 
large  boats  fish  out  of  the  harbor  and  come  in  daring  the  middle  of  the 
day,  when  the  fish  are  dressed.  They  then  go  oat  again.  The  small 
boats  also  come  in  daring  the  middle  of  the  day,  and  at  night  they  are 
hanled  on  shore  for  the  reason  I  have  mentioned. 

Q.  In  fishing  there  you  used  a  great  many  boats ;  how  did  yoa  trans* 
8bip  the  fish  to  market  ?  By  what  vessel  do  yoa  send  them  there  ? — A. 
Yes;  we  send  them  to  market. 

Q.  To  what  market  f — A.  To  Boston. 

Q.  How  f  In  American,  or  in  yonr  own  boats  f — A.  Sometimes  in  ves- 
sels of  oar  own,  and  sometimes  by  the  American  steamers. 

Q.  Have  you  transshipping  vessels  running? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  are  enough  generally  to  carry  your  catch  ? — A.  No.  We 
send  a  good  many  by  boats. 

No.  6. 

Stanislas  Feancois  Poirier,  M.  P.,  farmer,  mill-owner,  and  fisher- 
man, of  Tignish,  Prince  Edward  Island,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the 
Goverumeut  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Qaestion.  You  are  a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons  of  Canada, 
for  Prince  County,  Prince  Edward  Island? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  lived  there  all  your  life? — A.  Yes ;  I  was  born  there. 

Q.  Do  you  live  close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  My  farm  fronts  on  the  shore. 
I  live  about  two  miles  north  of  Tignish  Harbor. 

Q.  This  is  very  near  Cape  North  ? — A.  It  is  four  miles  from  that  point. 

Q.  You  have  been  there  all  your  life? — A.  I  was  born  on  the  land 
where  I  now  live. 

Q.  Is  that  part  of  the  island  frequented  by  fishermen  to  any  extent  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  back  would  you  say  that  in  that  quarter  peo- 
pie  have  made  it  a  business  to  prosecute  fishing  to  any  extent  ? — A.  This 
has  been  the  case  since  1853  and  '4.  Since  then  they  have  turned  their 
attention  to  mackerel  fishing.  They  fished  for  cod  previously.  Mack- 
erel, cod,  and  hake  are  caught  there.  Our  place  is  a  very  good  hake- 
fishing  ground.    We  catch  and  cure  a  great  quantity  of  them. 

Q.  1  believe  that  there  are  some  large  fishing  establishments  at  your 
end  of  the  island  ? — A.  Yes ;  there  are  many ;  Hall  has  a  very  large 
establishment  there,  {..i^d  also  Pope  and  Howlaud,  and  Madison,  and 
several  others  who  own  smaller  establishments.  I  refer  to  Cascumpeque 
and  the  part  around  the  North  Cape. 

Q.  I  believe  there  is  hardly  any  part  of  the  island  where  so  much  at- 
tention is  given  to  the  fishing  interest  as  is  the  case  up  there? — A.  I 
think  not,  except  perhaps  at  Bustico. 

Q.  Daring  these  years  when  yon  say  the  people  have  devoted  their 
attention  more  particularly  to  the  fishing  business,  that  is,  since  1854, 
has  there  been  any  marked  increase  in  the  number  of  boats  and  people 
engaged  in  it  ? — A.  Oh,  yes ;  it  has  largely  increased  since  1854 ;  the  in* 
crease  has  amounted  to  300  or  400  per  cent.,  with  regard  to  the  size  of 


360 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Im 


the  boats,  the  nnmber  of  flsbermeD,  and  the  qaantity  of  fish  taken.  We 
do  not  fish  in  schooners  in  that  locality,  but  in  small  boats.  Our  big- 
gest boats  have  only  about  30  feet  beau.  They  are  used  for  bake  and 
for  mackerel,  because  the  mackerel  are  found  near  us. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  the  part  of  the  coast  extending  from  Miinin- 
egash  to  Gascumpeque'? — A.  Yes;  around  by  the  North  Gape. 

Q.  The  chief  fisheries  are  cod,  hake,  and  mackerel  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  any  herring f — A.  Yes;  in  the  spring.  They  are 
the  earliest. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  enough  of  them  for  baitf — A.  Sometimes.  If  the 
ice  remains  on  shore  late  in  the  spring,  the  herring  £,enerally  go  away 
before  the  people  can  set  their  nets:  in  that  case  very  few  are  caught. 
Last  year,  however,  there  was  hardly  any  ice  in  the  spring,  and  any 
amount  of  them  were  secured. 

Q.  What  is  the  general  result? — A.  That  we  generally  get  bait  enough. 

Q.  How  many  boats  of  the  class  you  mentioned  are  engaged  fishing 
exclusively  between  Miminegash  and  Gascumpeque f — A.  I  couldnotou 
oath  state  the  number  positively,  but  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  there 
are  about  280  of  all  sizes,  from  those  having  30  feet  keel  to  those  having 
one  of  about  15  feet;  that  is  the  average  size. 

Q.  What  is  the  cost  of  a  30  feet  boat?— A.  Between  $300  and  $400^ 
when  rigged  out  properly,  vtry  well  built  and  well  fitted  out. 

Q.  What  fish  come  next  after  herring? — A.  God. 

Q.  Is  the  cod  fishery  prosecuted  to  any  material  extent? — A.  Yes; 
to  a  considerable  extent. 

Q.  Whereabouts  do  you  catch  them? — A.  At  first  very  close  in  to  the 
shore.  They  generally  follow  the  herring  school.  They  are  very  often 
found  in  three  fathoms  of  water  all  around  the  shore. 

Q.  How  near  would  that  be  to  the  shore  itself? — A.  About  a  mile 
from  the  shore.  This  fishing  continues  for  about  a  fortnight,  when  they 
are  down  feeding  on  the  herring  spawn,  and  then  these  fish  move  away 
to  meet  some  other  bait,  a  little  farther  away;  I  am  alluding  to  codfish. 

Q.  Are  the  cod  caught  in  any  great  quantities  during  this  fortnight?— 
A.  O,  yes,  during  some  years.  When  the  capling  strike  in  on  the 
coast,  the  fishermen  use  them  for  bait,  and  they  secure  large  quantities 
of  cod. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  capling  there  too? — A.  Yes.  They  come  right  into 
the  surf  and  are  caught  in  small  scoop-nets. 

Q.  Gapling  are  considered  good  bait  ? — A.  Yes ;  very  good,  while 
the  codfish  are  after  them.  You  have  to  get  as  bait  what  the  cod  are 
following ;  if  not,  you  cannot  catch  any  fish  worth  speaking  of. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch  of  cod  this  season? — A.  I  should  suppose 
that  it  was  probably  something  like  5,000  quintals.  This  has  been  the 
average  catch  for  a  number  of  years  past  between  Gascumpeque  and 
Miminegash.  You  might  get  the  catch  by  referring  to  the  statistics  in 
the  fisheries  department,  but  there  they  are  apt  to  confound  hake  and 
cod,  and  there  might  bo  a  discrepancy  in  the  figures. 

Q.  And  the  hake  comes  after  the  cod  fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Simnltaneously  with  the  mackerel  fishing  ?-^A.  No.  The  latter 
generally  begins  about  the  20th  of  June  around  this  shore,  and  the 
hake  fishing  commences  about  the  25th  of  July,  or  perhaps  the  1st  of 
August. 

Q.  The  mackerel  begins  first  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  As  a  general  rule,  are  these  fishing  gronndn  good  for  mackeielf— 
A.  They  are  very  good. 

Q.  At  whnt  distance  from  the  shore  arc  tin*  macker<^l  taken  ?— A. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


361 


From  the  20th  of  Jane  np  throngh  Jaly  and  August  and  until  the  20th 
of  September,  the  mackerel  are  all  caught  within  two  miles  of  the  shore 
around  the  portion  of  the  island  to  which  we  refer.  I  have  been  fishing 
for  these  forty  years  in  my  own  locality,  and  I  may  safely  say  that  I 
have  never  caught  mackerel  outside  of  two  miles  from  the  shore  around 
there. 

Q.  They  were  all  taken  within  two  miles  of  the  coast  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  your  recollection  extends  over  a  period  of  40  years  ? — A. 
Yes ;  I  was  born  in  1823,  and  I  began  fishing  when  I  was  12  or  14  years 
of  age.  I  think,  I  can  safely  say  I  can  speak  from  recollection  for  forty 
years  back.  I  do  not  carry  on  a  fishery,  but  I  have  my  own  boat,  and 
1  take  out  a  crew. 

Q.  The  mackerel  remain  on  the  coast  until  the  20th  of  September  ? — 
A.  Generally  about  that  time  we  have  a  heavy  storm,  and  the  mackerel 
will  then  move  a  little  farther  out. 

Q.  Have  the  American  fleet  pursued  mackerel  fishing  in  this  locality 
between  Miminegash  and  Gascumpeque  f — A.  Tes;  and  very  extensively. 

Q.  And  for  how  many  years,  in  your  experience  ? — A.  Ever  since  1 
can  remember.  I  remember  seeing  American  vessels  there  since  1854, 
more  particularly.    They  have  had  a  large  fleet  of  vessels  there. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average  number  of  the  vessels  in  the  Ameri- 
can fleet  which  comes  into  the  bay  ? — A.  It  is  hard  to  say,  positively, 
speaking  under  oath. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  this  fleet  frequents  the  part  of  the  island  you 
have  particularly  mentioned? — A.  I  staid  at  North  Gape  for  some 
years  minding  a  light-house,  and  I  suppose  1  saw  300  sail  come  into  the 
waters  between  Gascumpeque  and  Miminegash.  That  number  would  be 
about  the  average. 

Q.  Vessels  would  come  and  go  from  other  parts  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  saw 
them  pass.  There  might  have  been  a  large  number  which  I  never  saw. 
I  only  speak  for  the  locality  to  which  I  have  referred.  I  saw  a  number 
of  American  vessels  enter  Gascumpeque  Harbor  for  refuge.  I  think 
there  were  about  300. 

Q.  What  kind  of  a  harbor  is  it? — A.  In  fact  it  is  the  only  harbor  of 
refage  on  that  side,  with  the  exception  of  Malpeque.  It  would  be  a 
very  good  harbor  if  it  was  a  little  improved.  It  is  not  as  good  as  it 
was.  I  know  people  who  remember  when  they  had  22  feet  of  water  on 
the  sand-bar  outside,  but  since  then  two  new  harbors  have  been  formed, 
and  perhaps  about  one-half  of  the  water  of  the  bay  runs  through  new 
channels;  and,  consequently,  the  current  being  less  in  the  main  harbor, 
the  sand  has  encroached  on  it.  There  are,  perhaps,  10  or  12  feet  of 
water  in  it  at  high  tide. 

Q.  The  Americans  have  frequented  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  many  of  their  vessels  there? — A.  I  have  seen,  I 
suppose,  200  sail  there  at  one  time. 

Q.  Did  these  American  vessels  fish  in  as  close  to  the  shore  as  did  the 
boats  ? — A.  They  generally  came  close  to  the  shore.  The  mode  of  fish- 
ing there  needs  explanation.  Our  boats  fish  at  anchor,  remaining  sta- 
tionary, because  our  craft  are  small,  and  if  they  laid  to,  the  motion  and 
di'iftiug  would  be  so  great  that  they  would  never  keep  close  enough  to 
the  cod  and  mackerel.  The  latter  will  follow  bait  if  heaved  out.  The 
Americans  fish  laying  to,  and  we  very  close  to  the  shore — perhaps  at 
this  time  of  year  at  about  half  a  mile  from  it.  The  Americans  run  as 
close  to  the  shore  as  they  can  safely  do,  and  I  have  very  often  seen  them 
ran  so  close  that  they  grounded.  Their  idea  is  to  decoy  away  the  school 
of  mackerel,  by  heaving  out  a  good  deal  of  bait.    It  makes  quite  a 


862 


AWARD  OF  THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


quiver  in  front  of  the  vessel,  and  keeps  running  along  with  the  vessel. 
The  mackerel  follow  the  bait,  and  thus  the  Americans  have  a  better 
chance  to  fish  successfully  than  our  small  boats,  wherever  they  may  go, 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  produced  on  the  small-boat  fishing  when  the 
fleet  comes  inf — A.  When  a  large  American  fleet  strikes  the  shore 
among  the  boats  it  decoys  the  mackerel  away  in  a  short  time,  becanse 
these  flsh  will  follow  the  bait.  Then  our  boats  have  very  often  to  weigh 
anchor,  or  cut  their  cables  and  run  away  from  the  fleet.  The  result  is, 
that  the  mackerel  work  off  whenever  the  Americans  come  so  near  as  to 
strike  an  inshore  school.  Perhaps  the  Americans  have  better  bait  than 
we  have.  I  do  not  know  exactly  what  bait  they  use — perhaps  it  is  a 
little  better,  but  this  is  the  manner  in  which  they  act.  Whenever  they 
lose  a  school  they  come  to  the  windward  again,  heave  to,  and  commeDce 
throwing  over  more  bait. 

Q.  Is  coming  to  the  windward  going  up  the  shore  f — A.  If  the  wind 
blows  off  shore,  of  course  they  come  right  close  inshore,  as  close  as  they 
suppose  the  mackerel  are ;  and  around  these  shores  they  come  in  as 
close  as  it  is  possible  for  vessels  to  do.  In  fact,  they  come  sometimes 
within  two  fathoms  of  water. 

Q.  Are  the  cod  taken  here  by  the  American  vessels  caugho  within  two 
miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  As  far  as  I  know,  very  few  muHt  be  taken  out- 
side of  three  miles  from  the  shore.  In  fact,  I  am  not  aware  of  atiy  mack- 
erel being  caught  outside  the  three-mile  limit,  all  around  these  shores; 
some  may  be  caught  outside  of  it,  but  I  am  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.  Do  the  American  vessels  draw  the  fish  out  beyond  this  limit !— A. 
I  think  that  they  have  done  so. 

Q.  And  then,  of  course,  they  might  catch  fish  beyond  it? — A.  Tes; 
in  that  case  they  could.  I  only  speak  of  it  as  far  as  our  boats  are  con- 
cerned. 

Q.  Do  the  mackerel  return  to  the  shores  afterward  ? — A.  Kot  that  I 
am  aware  of. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  our  fishermen,  under  such  circumstances, 
lose  them  altogether  ? — A.  Yes,  for  that  year.  When  decoyed  away,  the 
flsh  do  not  come  back  the  same  year. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  fleet  came  today  ahd  fished  on  the  coast, do  yon 
mean  to  say  that  the  shore  would  be  utterly  depleted  of  fish  during  the 
rest  of  the  reason  ? — A.  My  experience  is  this :  that  a  school  of  mackerel 
when  once  decoyed  out  from  the  shore,  won't  come  back  that  season.  It 
may,  however,  so  happen  that  another  school  may  strike  in  there ;  but 
the  same  school  will  not  return. 

Q.  Suppose  that  one  school  was  thus  taken  away,  would  not  others 
supply  its  place  afterwards  ? — A.  Sometimes  this  is  the  case ;  the  rea- 
son why  we  know  that  the  same  school  does  not  return,  under  such  cir- 
cumstances, is  because  we  see  it  is  not  replaced  by  the  same  quality  of 
mackerel. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  idea  of  the  number  and  average  catch  of 
those  vessels  from  conversation  with  the  captains  or  otherwise  ? — A.  It 
is  very  hard  for  me  to  arrive  at  that.  If  you  expect  me  to  be  very  cor- 
rect, I  could  hardly  answer.  I  think  something  like  400  or  500  barrels 
a  year — some  more  or  less.  In  some  years  they  may  be  doable ;  that 
is,  the  whole  season.  I  would  think  about  500  or  600  barrels  for  the 
season. 

Q.  That  is  the  average  from  year  to  year! — A.  In  fact  I  have  very 
little  opportunity  of  knowing  what  they  would  catch. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  land  much  for  supplies  f — A.  Yes.  Well,  the 
only  place  they  get  supplies  that  I  know  of  is  Casumpec. 


AWABU   OP   THE   FISHERY   C0MMI8HI0N. 


363 


Q.  Ton  have  a  railroad  there  f— A.  Yes,  the  terminus  of  a  railroad. 

Q.  Do  they  trausship  flab  from  there f — A.  Yen;  I  thinlc  they  do. 

Q.  Is  that  vale  d  mach — that  right  f — A.  It  is  a  great  benefit,  be- 
cause if  they  had  to  go  home  and  land  their  fish  and  get  supplies  they 
would  lose  a  trip.  For  instance,  if  a  vessel  could  get  three  trips  by  going 
in  there,  she  could  only  make  two  by  having  to  go  to  Boston  or  New- 
buryport,  or  wherever  she  would  have  to  go  to  get  supplies.  That  might 
be,  perhaps,  at  a  very  particular  time  of  the  year,  when  the  mackerel  is 
very  close  and  thick,  and  biting  well.  They  might  lose  very  severely 
by  uot  linviug  the  privilege  of  landing  and  getting  supplies.  It  must 
be  a  great  privilege  to  have  the  liberty  of  going  in  and  landing  their 
fisb. 

Q.  You  value  that  at  one  trip! — A.  Yes;  it  is  worth  one  trip. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  conversed  with  American  captains,  that  k,  about 
that!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  value  it? — A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever  heard  them  talk 
of  the  value,  but  that  is  what  ^they  often  said,  that  they  would  lose  one 
catch  by  not  having  the  privilege  of  landing.  That  is  the  value  I  heard 
them  put  down. 

Q.  Well,  the  hake  fishery  follows  the  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes ;  the  hake 
cat  tbe  mackerel,  and  follow  them. 

Q.  Just  explain. — A.  It  is  something  like  a  codfish,  but  generally 
a  larger  fish.  It  will  take  a  less  number  of  hake  to  make  a  quintal  than 
of  codfish— 100  per  cent.  less. 

Q.  Do  they  follow  that  to  any  extent!— A.  Yes;  they  follow  that  a 
good  deal.  But  those  hake  are  Cf.ught  in  the  night-time ;  they  do  not 
bite  in  the  day. 

Q.  Has  the  presence  of  the  fleet  anything  to  do  with  the  hake! — A. 
Well,  tbe  hake  follow  the  mackerel,  and  the  mackerel  being  decoyed 
outside  by  the  American  vessels,  the  hake  will  be  further  out.  When 
the  mackerel  are  close  inshore,  the  bake  will  be  close  ineihore.  For 
instauce,  this  year  we  are  getting  mackerel  in  five  or  six  fathoms  of 
water  all  along  those  shores,  and  we  can  catch  hake  in  six  fathoms. 
These  hake  are  caught  at  night.  This  enables  our  small  boats  to  ven- 
ture that  far  out  at  night,  because,  if  it  gets  stormy,  nothing  can 
happeu  tbeni  before  they  can  get  in.  But  when  the  mackerel  are  de- 
coyed out,  our  small  boats  cannot  venture  that  far  at  night ;  it  is  too 
far  out. 

Q.  How  far  would  it  be  ! — A.  It  is  four  miles  out.  That  is  the  bene- 
fit of  having  the  mackerel  close  in,  as  far  as  the  hake  fishery  is  con- 
cerued.  If  they  are  left  alone  they  come  naturally  in  close.  That  is 
what  my  experience  teaches. 

Q.  Do  the  people  follow  the  hake  fishery  extensively  ? — A.  Yes;  a 
good  many  are  caught.  I  believe  more  hake  are  caught  around  those 
shores  than  codfish,  by  fifty  per  cent.  They  are  very  valuable.  The 
sounds  are  worth  something  over  a  dollar  a  hundred  ;  I  am  not  very 
positive.  They  yield  more  oil  than  the  codfish,  averaging  a  gallon  of 
oil  to  the  quintal.    These  are  the  market  values,  I  think.    There  is 

more  value  in  the  hake  than  in  the  codfish,  I  think. 

Q.  And  there  are  fifty  per  cent,  more  of  them  caught! — A.  Yes;  I 

thiuk  so. 

Q.  This  year  has  the  mackerel  fishery  been  a  success,  so  far  ? — A.  It 

has  been  very  good,  so  far ;  better  than  it  has  been  for  a  number  of 

years,  so  far. 

Q.  Have  there  been  many  caught! — A.  Yes;  the  catches  have  been 

very  good. 


364 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ii'itii; 


Q.  Which  is  the  better  time  for  mackerel  fishing,  this  time  of  the 
year  or  in  the  autumn  ? — A.  Well,  the  catches  are  in  the  mouth  of  An- 
gust,  from  the  12th  of  July  until  the  15th  of  September.  The  best 
catches  are  generally  with  high  tide,  such  as  the  spring  tide,  with  a 
full  moon  or  a  new  moon. 

Q.  The  fish  themselves,  are  they  better  ? — A.  Oh,  the  fish  are  poor 
at  this  time  of  the  year;  they  are  commencing  to  be  fat.  I  presume 
there  are  now  a  few  ISo.  2s,  a  great  many  No.  3s,  but  no  No.  Is. 

Q.  You  say  there  are  250  or  260  boats  ?— A.  About  250, 1  think. 

Q.  What  number  of  men  do  you  have  to  one  boat? — A.  The  average 
IS  three ;  some  have  four  and  some  two.  I  guess  they  will  average 
three  men.    There  are  a  great  many  small  boats. 

Q.  You  are  only  speaking  with  reference  to  the  same  locality  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  anything  about  Eustico? — A.  I  know  a  little, 
but  my  knowledge  is  too  limited.  I  am  limiting  my  statements  to  the 
fisheries  around  the  shores  I  have  mentioned. 

Q.  Take  a  boat  with  three  men  on  that  shore,  what  would  be  the 
average  catoh  for  the  season,  do  you  suppose,  running  over  any  period 
of  years  yen  like  ! — A.  I  think  about  70  or  80  barrels.  They  lose  a  good 
deal  of  time  on  this  account:  that  by  going  for  hake  in  the  night  they 
are  too  late  for  the  morning's  catch  when  they  return ;  and  they  lose  a 
good  deal  of  mackerel  in  this  way. 

Q.  You  say  the  men  engaged  in  the  hake  fishery  lose  a  good  many 
mackerel? — A.  Yes;  when  they  are  out  in  the  night  for  hake  they  will 
not  get  a  morning's  catch  of  mackerel.  They  may  go  out  in  the  even- 
ing and  get  a  few  mackerel.  They  cannot  mix  the  mackerel  with  the 
hake,  as  the  mackerel  spoil  in  a  very  short  time,  and  they  have  to  come 
ashore  with  their  fish.  This  makes  them  too  late  for  the  morning's 
catch. 

Q.  They  catch  hake  and  cod  there  in  their  dories  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  think 
more  around  those  shores  than  in  any  other  part. 

Q.  Has  the  number  in  the  boat  something  to  do  with  the  quantity?— 
A.  Oh,  yes.  A  crew  of  four  would  get  more  than  a  crew  of  three. 

Q.  The  average  you  have  stated  is  for  three  men  ? — A.  Yes ;  if  there 
were  four  men  the  average  would  be  higher.  The  boats  are  p'enerally 
manned  according  to  size ;  if  big  enough,  there  are  four  hands.  A  boat 
with  four  hands  will  get  twice  as  many  as  a  boat  with  two.  The  aver- 
age is  about  three. 

Q.  That  will  give  about  800  men  ? — A.  Something  like  that. 

Q.  From  750  to  800?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  the  hake,  except  when  decoyed,  are  all  taken  within  two 
miles? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Two  or  three  ? — A.  This  very  year  they  have  been  taken  about  a 
mile  from  the  shore.  The  reason  of  that  is  because,  as  I  take  it,  the 
mackerel  are  handy  in. 

Q.  Supposing  we  were  enabled  to  exclude  the  Americans  from  fishing 
within  three  miles  of  the  coast,  do  you  think  they  would  or  could  prose- 
cute the  fishery  with  any  success  ? — A.  1  don't  think  so,  around  those 
shores  I  am  speaking  of. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  about  it  at  all? — A.  I  have  no  doubt  at  all, 
because  there  is  no  mackerel  unless  they  can  decoy  them,  or  induce 
them  to  go  out. 

Q.  But  supposing  they  were  excluded? — A.  No;  I  don't  think.  I 
know  I  could  not  do  it.  From  my  knowledge,  I  fancy  it  would  be  a 
waste  of  bait. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


465 


Q.  Well,  if  we  were  able  to  exclude  them,  our  market  is  the  United 
States,  is  it  not?— A.  Yes,  for  mackerel. 
Q.  You  remember  when  the  duty  was  in  existence  ? — A.  Yes. 
q!  Now,  supposing  we  excluded  them  from  our  shores  within  the 
tbree-mile  limit,  would  you  have  much  objection  to  paying  the  duty 
there?  What  are  your  ideas? — A.  I  think  not.  I  think  we  would  be 
gaiDers.  For  instance,  in  a  year  like  this,  when  there  are  no  mackerel 
ia  the  American  waters,  or  a  very  limited  quantity,  and  we  are  catching 
a  great  quantity  in  our  own  waters,  I  presume,  if  they  were  excluded, 
tbose  catches  would  continue  from  day  to  day  until  the  season  was  out. 
We  could  have  a  large  quantity  of  our  mackerel  in  the  United  States 
market.  Their  number  would  be  limited  and  the  markets  would  be 
good.  The  big  price  we  would  get  would  by  far  overbalance  the  $2  tax 
or  $1  duty  which  they  had  on  before.    That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  this  new  system  of  seine-fishing  ? — 
A.  Yes ;  I  have  seen  them  fish. 

Q.  What  is  the  eflfect  of  that  system  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  very  bad ; 
very  injurious  to  the  fishery.  It  is  not  the  large  quantity  they  catch 
that  are  fit  for  use,  but  the  large  quantity  that  is  not  fit  for  use,  and 
which  is  destroyed  and  killed  or  thrown  away.  I  have  known  some  of 
these  seines  to  catch  a**  .nuch  as  GOO  or  700  barrels  of  these  small  mack- 
erel, which  are  all  dePi-iGyed  and  thrown  away. 

Q.  What,  five  or  six  hundred  barrels  of  these  small  mackerel  not  fit 
for  use  ?— A.  Yes ;  in  one  catch. 

Q.  These  would  be  destroyed  ?— ^A.  Yes ;  most  of  them  died,  I  pre- 
sume.   The  mackerel  are  very  easily  killed. 

Q.  That  is  destruction  of  the  fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  that  is  destroyed.    Of 
course  they  won't  grow  any  when  they  are  dead. 
Q.  Now  the  American  fishermen  clean  their  fish  on  board  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  What  becomes  of  the  offal  ? — A.  It  is  thrown  overboard. 
Q.  What  effect  has  that  ? — A.  It  is  very  injurious  to  the  mackerel  to 
eat  those  gibs,  or  offal,  or  whatever  you  call  it. 

Q,  What  is  the  effect  of  cleaning  on  board  ? — A.  It  has  the  effect  of 
soiliug  the  waters.  It  thickens  it,  and  until  we  have  a  storm  to  clear 
the  water  the  fish  will  not  resort  there. 

Q.  It  drives  the  fish  away,  in  other  words  ? — A.  Yes.  If  they  eat 
this  fish  or  the  water  impregnated  with  it  it  would  kill  them,  for  I  know 
thatiu  cases  of  much  stronger  anjmals;  for  instance,  hogs  if  they  eat 
it,  it  will  kill  them  dead  in  a  short  time.  I  cannot  prove  positively  that 
it  will  kill  mackerel,  but  it  must  have  a  very  bad  effect.  I  have  known 
myself;  for  instance,  I  have  been  in  a  large  boat  and  caught  a  large 
quantity — when  I  have  cleaned  the  fish  on  board  and  thrown  the  offal 
over— uext  morning  there  would  be  no  mackerel  around ;  I  could  not 
catch  any.  You  must  understand  that  perhaps  if  one  boat  were  to  do 
that  the  efi'ect  would  not  be  very  bad,  but  when  there  are  150  sail  or 
150  boats,  all  averaging  between  boats  and  schooners  a  large  quantity 
of  mackerel,  and  all  those  gibs  are  thrown  over  at  a  distance  of  2  or  3 
lailes,  it  makes  a  very  large  quantity.  It  must  be  injurious.  Our 
fishermen  all  clean  their  fish  on  the  shore. 

Q.  You  do  not  destroy  the  fish  ? — A.  No ;  the  offal  is  generally  used 
for  compost. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  Cascumpec  Harbor  and  intimated  that  of  late  years 
it  had  been  filling  up  a  little.  Has  the  government  of  Canada  been 
expending  any  money  on  the  improvement  of  those  harbors? — A.  None 
whateverr 


111 


366 


AWARD    OF  TUE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


SI'!  il 


Q.  Od  Souris  Harbor  and  other  places  1 — A.  Yes,  there  has  been  a 
breakwater  bnilt  at  Souris. 

Q.  Have  they  been  making  any  harbors  of  refuge  ?— A.  O,  yes.  I 
did  not  see  Souris,  but  I  believe  it  is  a  very  good  harbor  whicli  the 
Dominion  Government  have  built.  They  have  built  a  harbor  at  Tignish, 
but  it  is  not  of  sufficient  importance  to  allow  American  fishing  vessels 
to  come  in.  The  Souris  Harbor,  I  believe,  is  a  good  one.  I  bave  been 
informed  that  there  is  as  much  as  28  feet  of  water  there. 

Q.  Do  the  American  fishermen  take  advantage  of  it  ?— A.  Yes ;  be- 
cause when  they  fish  in  the  bay,  quite  close  in  the  bay  it  makes  a  great 
cove.  When  a  vessel  does  not  make  this  harbor  of  refuge  it  must  go 
ashore  somewhere.  They  cannot  get  out  of  the  bight.  If  they  are  iu 
fishing  along  these  shores  and  a  heavy  northeaster  strikes  in,  not  only 
the  Americans  but  any  other  vessels  from  North  Cape  to  East  Point 
cannot  get  clear.  If  they  cannot  make  a  harbor  of  refuge  they  must  go 
ashore.    That  is  my  experience. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  American  waters  ? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  an  island  vessel  to  go  there  fishing  ?— A. 
Not  to  my  knowledge,  I  have  never  heard  of  it.  There  may  have  been, 
but  I  do  not  know  of  it. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  say  that  your  boats  when  they  get  out  a  short  distance  from 
the  shore  and  get  hold  of  the  mackerel,  that  is,  when  the  mackerel  are 
raised  or  found  there,  the  American  vessels  come  in  to  windward  of 
them  and  heave  to  and  drift  down  and  drift  out  sometimes  far  enough  to 
carry  the  mackerel  with  them.  But  this  business  of  the  Americans  iu 
drifting  must  be  when  the  wind  is  off  shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  your  boats  confined  to  mackerel  fishing  with  the  wind  off 
shore? — A.  No,  not  altogether. 

Q.  Can  you  not  fish  in  a  calm  or  with  the  wind  blowing  up  or  down 
the  shore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Or  on  the  shore  if  it  is  not  too  strong?— A.  Yes.  if  it  is  not  blow- 
ing too  hard. 

Q.  So  it  is  only  with  one  direction  of  the  wind  that  you  can  be  troubled 
with  this  drifting  of  the  American  schooners? — A.  Well,  mostly.  The 
tide  has  a  good  deal  to  do  with  it.  The  tide  runs  from  the  shore  out 
whatever  way  the  wind  blows. 

Q.  The  tide  runs  from  the  shore  out  ?  Does  it  not  set  up  and  down 
the  shore? — A.  Well,  not  very  mucb,  not  so  much  as  it  does  in  rivers. 

Q.  Well,  I  do  not  know  about  this.  Are  you  sure  of  that,  that  if  you 
have  a  shore  slightly  concave  as  this  is — what  is  the  extent  of  the  tide? 
— A.  Three  feet. 

Q.  That  is  very  slight?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  ocean  rises  and  falls  about  three  feet.  But  do  not  the  tide 
and  eddies  set  altogether  irrespective  of  that  and  depend  upon  the  Lead- 
lands? — A.  Well,  it  has  that  effect  to  a  certain  extent.  Wben  the  tide 
falls  it  runs  oft'  from  the  shore  to  a  certain  extent,  and  when  it  rises  it 
comes  direct  into  the  shore.  That  is  my  experience  of  what  I  saw.  I 
mean  around  those  shores  I  have  spoken  of,  not  all  around. 

Q.  Suppose  there  is  a  light  wind  off  shore,  and  the  tide  is  setting  iu, 
then  he  cannot  float  down,  as  you  say  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  taking  the  chances  of  the  winds  and  tides,  the  opportunities 
for  doing  as  you  have  described  are  few  and  far  between  ?— A.  He  has 
about  half  the  day. 

Q.  Do  yon  have  any  off-shore  wind  that  depends  upon  the  time  of  the 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISUERY   COMMISSION. 


367 


day?— A.  I  will  explain  :  In  the  afternoon  we  generally  bave  the  wind 
aroand  to  the  eastward.  Of  course  it  is  then  blowing  oft'  the  laud  on 
one  side,  and  on  the  land  on  the  other. 

Q.  Then  the  vessels  on  the  one  side  have  no  chance  of  doing  as  you 
say,  because  the  wind  is  blowing  on  the  shore  ?  On  the  other  side  they 
Ijave  ? — A.  These  vessels  sail  very  quickly.  It  does  not  take  them  very 
long  to  run  round.  If  they  are  fishing  on  one  side  in  the  afternoon  they 
generally  come  round  and  fish  off  the  other  in  the  evening. 

Q.  Your  boats  can  do  the  same  ? — A.  No.  Our  boats  cannot  do  the 
same,  because  our  people  are  not  prepared  to  carry  the  fish  in  their 
boats.    Each  boat  must  land  its  catch  at  the  stage  that  it  belongs  to. 

Q.  They  taKe  s'lils  and  have  keels  ? — A.  Some  have,  and  some  have 
oars.    A  few  hours  will  spoil  a  catch  of  mackerel. 

Q.  It  is  not  so  bad  as  that  ? — A.  Three  hours  will  spoil  a  catch  of 
mackerel.    They  must  be  gibbed  and  soaked  in  three  or  four  hours. 

Q.  If  your  vessels  do  not  want  to  bave  the  American  fleet  coming  down 
upoD  tbem,  why  do  not  they  govern  their  own  fishing  somewhat  by  the 
known  state  of  the  winds  f  Why  do  not  they,  if  they  know  the  times 
and  hours,  suit  themselves  to  that,  and  go  out  where  there  is  a  wind 
blowing  on  the  shore? — A.  The  great  number  of  our  boats,  they  are  small, 
and  for  the  most  part  they  take  no  barrels  with  them.  They  must  fish 
handy  to  the  stage  they  belong  to.  They  make  two  trips  a  day.  They 
are  on  the  ground  by  daybreak.  They  come  ashore  and  land  their  fish, 
which  are  taken  away  and  cleaned  immediately.  They  leave  again 
about  one  o'clock  and  must  return  in  the  evening. 

Q.  They  go  as  you  go  to  church,  to  morning  service  and  to  afternoon 
service  ? — A.  I  don't  know  anything  about  that. 

Q.  If  this  was  worth  while,  you  could  adapt  yourselves  and  your  boats 
to  that  state  of  things,  so  that  your  boats  could  go  out  when  there  was 
a  wind  blowing  inshore ;  that  is,  if  your  breezes  are  certain.  Are  they 
so?— A.  We  haven't  got  command  of  the  wind. 

Q.  There  are  some  places  where  they  always  have  a  particular  breeze 
at  a  particular  hour. — A.  It  is  not  so  with  us. 

Q.  Now,  don't  you  think  that,  considering  the  amount  of  time  when 
there  is  a  wind  blowing  up  or  down  the  coast,  or  when  there  is  a  calm, 
or  when  it  is  blowing  on  shore,  or  when  there  is  only  a  light  wind  off 
shore,  aud  the  tide  is  setting  in,  all  of  which  present  cases  when  the 
American  schooners  cannot  float  down  upon  you,  don't  you  think  you 
have  said  a  little  too  much  about  that? — A.  I  don't  think  I  have,  be- 
cause I  will  show  you  how.  A  school  of  mackerel  strikes  along  about 
the  24th  of  June,  and  remains  about  six  weeks,  or  perhaps  two  months, 
about  the  same  place.  It  does  not  go  out  very  much  further,  or  come 
in  any  closer.  We  catch  them  in  three  to  six  fathoms,  as  the  tide  rises 
or  falls,  which  has  a  good  deal  to  do  with  mackerel.  Well,  when  the 
American  fleet  get  i)lenty  of  mackerel  in  their  own  waters,  of  course 
they  will  not  trouble  us,  but  otherwise  they  will  come  round  our  grounds 
and  stop  there  a  whole  summer,  and  they  will  watch  those  mackerel  just 
as  well  as  the  boats  themselves.  If  they  are  not  there  to-day,  they  will 
be  there  tomorrow.  It  may  so  happen,  if  a  breeze  strikes  up  to  drive 
them  away  for  some  miles,  that  we  may  catch  the  mackerel  without  their 
presence.  But  if  they  haven't  much  mackerel  to  catch  elsewhere,  they 
will  be  on  the  ground. 

fi-  You  have  spoken  of  this  as  if  it  was  something  fixed  and  constant. 
I>i(l  it  not  occur  to  you  to  mention  that  this  was  only  an  occasional 
tiling,  when  there  was  an  off-shore  breeze  and  no  tide  to  offset  it  ?— A. 


368 


▲WABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


m 


I  was  not  asked  that  question,  bat  I  answer  you  now,  as  you  have 
asked  it. 

Q.  Now,  another  grievance  is  that  somehow  or  other,  probably  from 
having  better  bait,  which  is  probably  menhaden,  is  it  not  ? — A.  Well 
they  may  have  better  bait.    I  do  not  know.  ' 

Q.  Well,  that  somehow  their  bait  is  more  attractive  to  the  mackerel! 
— A.  What  I  mean  is  this,  that  when  you  have  these  small  craft  and 
the  bait  is  heaved  out  alongside  the  craft,  the  tide,  running  one  way  or 
another,  takes  away  that  bait  clear  of  the  craft.  The  American  vessel 
is  lying  to,  and  it  creates  an  eddy,  which  keeps  the  bait  around  it  for  a 
certain  distance. 

Q.  Does  the  American  control  the  tide  ? — A.  No ;  but  the  vessels  are 
ranged  along  and  they  are  drifting  out,  which  makes  an  eddy  that 
keeps  the  bait  running  out  with  them.  Ours  are  stationary,  and  ac- 
cording as  the  bait  is  heaved  out  it  does  not  remain  alongside  the  craft 

Q.  The  tide  takes  it  out,  but  the  American  goes  with  the  tide  and 
consequently  with  the  bait.  Suppose  the  tide  is  setting  in  ? — A.  The 
bait  goes  with  the  tide  and  the  vessel  with  it. 

Q.  Then  she  must  go  ashore  ? — A.  Well,  I  have  seen  them  go  ashore, 
they  were  that  greedy. 

Q.  By  the  force  of  the  tide  ?  Did  you  ever  know  an  American  who 
allowed  himselfto  be  carried  ashore  by  the  tide? — A.  Yes;  after  a  school 
of  mackerel. 

Q.  Then  your  boats  get  the  best  of  it,  don't  they  ! — A.  Well,  I  do  not 
know,  I  have  not  seen  a  great  many.  They  forgot  that  they  drew  12 
feet  of  water  and  allowed  themselves  to  go  into  shallow  water. 

Q.  What,  12  feet  ? — A.  According  to  the  size  of  the  vessel. 

Q.  Now,  when  there  is  no  gale  of  wind,  no  ordinary  breeze,  if  the 
tide  is  strong  enough  to  carry  a  large  vessel  ashore,  is  it  not  enough  to 
dispose  of  the  bait  ? — A.  The  vessel  forms  an  eddy  which  keeps  the  bait 
alongside  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  Here  is  an  American  vessel  that  comes  in,  the  tide  is  setting  in, 
but  there  is  an  off  shore  breeze  strong  enough  to  overcome  the  tide.  She 
will  drift  slowly  out,  the  more  slowly  because  she  is  going  against  the 
tide.  Now  a  lot  of  bait  is  thrown  overboard.  Will  not  that  be  taken 
away  from  her? — A.  No. 

Q.  Well,  if  the  wind  blows  hard  enough  to  drift  her  against  the 
tide  ? — A.  Perhaps  you  may  be  a  navigator  ? 

Q.  I  understand  that  if  she  lays  to  she  has  some  sail  set,  enough  to 
catch  the  wind  ? — A.  Yes.  She  may  go  half  with  the  wind  and  half 
with  the  tide. 

Q.  That  would  leave  her  just  where  she  was!— A.  Perhaps  you  do 
not  want  to  hear  what  I  have  to  say.    I  shall  not  say  any  more. 

Q.  Y^ou  say  she  is  going  half  with  the  wind  and  half  with  the  tide  ?— 
A.  I  say  if  the  wind  is  blowing  something  stronger  than  the  tide  she 
may  make  her  way  not  altogether  with  the  tide  but  with  the  wind. 

Q.  She  would  in  that  case  be  forging  ahead  a  little  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  would  take  her  out  of  the  way  of  the  bait  f — A.  No.  the  bait 
keeps  in  the  wake.  There  is  a  certain  quiver  it  makes  in  tne  water. 
The  water  that  escapes  at  both  ends  of  the  vessel  meets  somewhere,  and 
there  is  an  eddy.  Until  the  bait  sinks  deep  enough  to  be  clear  of  the 
eddy  it  runs  with  the  eddy,  and  the  mackerel  keep  into  that.  Now,  oar 
boats  are  at  anchor,  and  the  moment  the  bait  is  thrown  out  it  runs 
away. 

Q.  She  must  be  heaving  out  bait  all  the  time,  because  it  is  going  away 
all  the  time  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWABD  OF   TU£   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


369 


Q.  If  it  is  an  ebbing  tide  it  is  going  out  ? — A.  Yes* 
Q.  Are  the  boats  fishing  all  pretty  much  on  the  same  ground  t — A. 
The  boats  all  anchor  upon  a  range  and  fish  there ;  if  the  tide  runs  this 
^ay  [pointing  to  map]  the  bait  runs  away  from  them. 

Q.  Then  your  idea  of  the  American  schooner  lo  that  she  need  not  be 
throwing  over  bait,  because  this  eddy  that  is  jonveniently  formed  will 
carry  the  bait  along  with  her  ? — A.  No.  I  do  not  want  my  views  to  be 
misrepresented. 

Q.  Stop  a  bit ;  say  that  in  another  form.  What  do  you  mean  T — A.  I 
do  not  mean  to  be  misrepresented,  as  if  I  said  that  the  Americans  did 
not  heave  any  bait. 

Q.  If  the  American  throws  over  bait,  and  an  eddy  forms  so  that  the 
bait  follows  the  vessel — you  understand  f — A.  To  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  To  a  very  considerable  extent ;  this  gives  her  a  great  advantage  in 

the  amount  she  has  to  throw  away  ? — A.  Yes ;  the  bait  of  the  schooner 

will  keep  in  the  eddy  until  it  sinks  low  enough  to  keep  clear  of  the  eddy. 

Q.  A  large  part  of  it,  of  course,  is  lost,  and  they  have  to  throw  more 

overboard? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  one  of  the  grievances,  is  it  ? — A.  Yes ;  well,  I  should  not 
say  that  is  a  grievance,  because  we  have  to  use  bait  whether  or  no, 
bat  the  grievance  is  that  with  their  bait  they  decoy  the  mackerel  out- 
side. 

Q.  The  great  grievance  is  that  the  mackerel  go  outside,  beyond  the 
reach  of  the  boats  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  the  same  thing  occurs  again,  if  the  mackerel  are  carried  out- 
side the  limit  the  hake  follow  them? — A.  Yes;  at  a  certain  time  the 
hake  will  feed  on  those  mackerel  until  the  fall  herring  set  in. 
Q.  Then  \7hat  follows  the  hake  ?— A.  What  kind  of  fish,  you  mean  ? 
Q.  What  comes  next  in  the  order  of  time  ? — A.  It  is  the  last  fish  we 
catch— the  hake  and  mackerel.    The  herring  is  first,  then  the  cod,  then 
the  mackerel  and  the  hake. 
Q.  Are  the  hake  sent  to  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  the  United  States?— A.  Not  to  the  United  States  j  to  the  West 
Indies  or  England,  I  think.  I  am  not  a  merchant.  I  presume  they  do 
not  ship  any  bake  to  the  United  States.  I  think  the  sounds  are  sold  in 
the  United  States. 

Q.  I  wish  to  understand  your  views  of  political  economy.  You  said 
that  if  the  mackerel  failed  in  Massachusetts  Bay,  on  the  American  coast, 
and  you  had  sole  control  of  it  here,  and  could  have  boats  and  men  and 
vessels  enough  to  catch  enough,  you  could  then  afford  to  send  to  the 
American  market  and  pay  $2  duty? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  that  you  do  not  care  whether  there  is  a  duty  or  not  ? — A.  No ; 
because  my  views  are  that  the  consumer  pays  the  duty.  That  is  my 
opinion. 

Q.  If  you  could  furnish  mackerel  enough,  and  did  not  have  the  duty 
to  pay,  you  would  make  just  $2  more  on  the  barrel? — A.  Well,  that  is 
not  altogether  my  view,  although  I  am  not  supposed  to  be  on  oath  in 
that. 

Q.  But  it  is  not  true  that  if  you  sold  the  same  quantity  of  mackerel,  and 
had  no  duty  to  pay,  you  would  make  $2  a  barrel  more  than  if  you  had 
to  pay  the  duty? — A.  That  may  be  the  views  of  some  honorable  gentle- 
men ;  but  I  presume  the  consumer  has  to  pay  this  duty,  and  that  I  will 
get  as  much  if  I  have  to  pay  this  as  if  not.  I  know  last  year  we  got  a 
big  price  for  our  potatoes,  although  you  had  a  protective  duty  of  15 
<!ent8  a  bushel  upon  those  potatoes.  Still  we  got  a  large  price  for  them 
24  F 


370 


AWARD   OF  THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


in  Prince  Edward  Island,  because  we  monopolized  the  market  to  a  cer- 
tain extent. 

Q.  You  mean  to  say  that  although  you  pay  $2,  that  is  added  to  the 
price,  and  anybody  who  purchases  has  to  pay  it  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  tbiuk  that  the  people  in  that  case  buy  as  much  as  if  the 
price  were  lower  by  the  amount  of  duty  T — A.  I  think  if  the  Americans 
have  the  right  to  take  away  the  fish  and  glut  the  American  market  vath 
tbem,  it  will  reduce  the  price,  and  we  cannot  get  a  sale  for  ours  at  all, 

Q.  Would  there  be  any  competition  among  the  British  fishermen  that 
would  tend  to  bring  tbe  price  down  f — A.  Well,  there  might  be. 

Q.  It  is  possible  that  people  would  not  buy  as  much  if  they  bad  to 
pay  $2  duty  in  addition  to  your  bigh  price  f  Your  views  upon  this  poiut 
are  pure  theory  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  spoke  just  now  of  a  railroad  being  built.  I  did  not  know  that 
you  had  one.  Where  does  it  run  f — A.  I  am  sorry  we  have  not  a 
description  of  it  on  the  map.  It  runs  from  Tignish,  calling  at  Gascum- 
pec,  from  that  to  Summerside,  then  to  Charlottetown,  from  that  to 
Georgetown  and  Souris. 

Q.  When  was  it  built  ? — A.  It  was  opened  in  1874, 1  think. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  carrying  of  fish  had  anything  to  do  with 
the  su  ;cess  of  that  road  f — A.  I  am  not  aware.  I  could  not  say.  It  is 
uot  liRely  that  was  the  only  inducement.  I  am  aware  that  a  great  many 
barrels  of  mackerel  are  shipped  and  carried  away  and  sent  by  rail  to 
Summerside  generally,  sometimes  to  Charlottetown  ;  from  Summerside 
to  8V  ?diac,  and  tbence  to  Boston  or  Portland,  or  wherever  they  are  to 

go- 
Q.    ioc.  think  it  is  a  very  great  benefit  to  the  Americans  to  get 

supplies  here  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  understand  your  argument.  And  do  you  think  it  is  not  a  benefit 
to  your  people  to  have  that  market  ? — A.  No ;  I  won't  say  that.  It 
must  be  some  benefit.  The  merchants  that  supply  these  vessels  will 
have  a  profit,  whatever  they  can  make. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  bold  that  these  supplies  are  sold  purely  on  the 
principles  of  humanity  1  Your  people  sell  provisions  on  principles  of 
trade,  do  they  not  f — A.  Yes ;  but  you  are  well  aware  that  the  profit 
on  a  schooner  or  on  10,  50,  or  100  vessels  may  not  be  very  large. 

Q.  It  is  worth  having  ? — A.  It  is  some  advantage,  I  am  satisfied,  but 
it  is  not  an  equivalent. 

Joseph  Campbell  recalled. 
Examined  by  Mr.  Dana  : 

Question.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  had  never  heard  any- 
thing about  reports — official  reports,  or  petitions,  or  proposals  for  boun- 
ties or  gifts — to  relieve  the  distresised  condition  of  the  fishermen.— An- 
swer. Not  any  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Well,  you  have  been  in  Nova  Scotia,  have  you  not  f — A.  I  have 
been  away  in  the  States  a  good  deal. 

Q.  But  you  have  been  in  Nova  Scotia  within  six,  eight,  or  ten  years  !- 
A.  I  have  been,  off  and  on. 

Q.  And  in  Gape  Breton  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  now,  I  have  herea  document  signed  by  H.  W.  Johnston,  who, 
I  believe,  was  the  assistant^r  deputy,  in  Halifax,  of  tbe  minister  of 
marine  and  fisheries  for  the  Dominion,  to  the  Hon.  Peter  Mitchell,  who 
was  the  head  of  the  department.    It  is  dated  in  1863.    Now,  I  want  to 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


371 


see  if  this  will  recall  something  to  your  memory.    Tou  recollect  tho 
date,  18C8.    Among  other  things  he  says : 

For  many  years  the  inshore  fishery  has  been  pursued  with  varying  success.  During  some 
years  the  catch  of  hearing,  mackerel,  cod,  &c,,  has  been  such  as  to  place  the  fishermen  in 
comparatively  easy  circumstances  after  a  few  months'  work,  while  in  others  a  scanty  supply 

has  reduced  them  almost  to  poverty. 

#  #  #  »  «  •  • 

Not  many  years  since  tlae  shore  fishery  was  abundant  and  lucrative,  seldom  decreasing  so 
ereatly  as  to  cause  much  actual  want,  but  with  late  years  this  branch  of  industry  has  fallen 
off  to  an  alarming  extent,  and  a  failing  fishery  around  the  shores  seems  to  excite  no  surprise. 
The  cause  of  this  failure  (which  during  the  last  season  has  been  almost  total)  can  only  be 
theoretically  stated,  but  the  observation  of  experienced  persons  indicates  several  reasons  of 
considerable  importance  in  producing  this  unfortunate  result. 

Then  the  results  it  is  not  worth  while  to  go  into.  Among  other  tilings, 
it  is  said  that  '^  the  mackerel  make  their  appearance  much  later  in  the 
season,  and  are  then  hurrying  southward  to  their  winter  haunts,  re- 
maining but  a  short  time  along  the  shores,  and,  if  the  weather  shuiild  be 
stormy,  the  nets  are  frequently  lost,  and  the  great  proportion  ot  the  fish 
pass  by  uncaught.  So  that  the  fish  are  hroagbt  upon  the  shores  in  No- 
vember, a  month  noted  for  violent  gales  and  stormy  weather,  wlieu  their 
capture  becomes  much  more  hazardous  and  difficult."  The  report  goe» 
on  to  say,  "  the  prevalence  of  high  winds  from  the  northward  has  with- 
oat  a  doubt  a  tendency  to  drive  the  fish  far  out  into  the  deep  water^ 
beyond  the  limits  of  the  net  fishermen,"  and  then  goes  on  to  say  : 

The  failure  of  the  inshore  fisheries  last  autumn  appears  to  have  been  nearly  a  total  one, 
while  the  deep-sea  fishery  did  not  yield  nearly  so  laige  a  return  as  usual.  As  I  before  men- 
tioned, in  the  western  parts  of  the  province,  including  Queens,  Sbelburne,  Yarmouth,  and 
Digby  Counties,  the  inhabitants  of  the  shore  do  not  rely  entirely  upon  this  shore  net  fishing 
for  a  livelihood  ;  they  are  generally  in  possession  of  small  vessels  in  which  they  pursue  the 
bank  fishing  ;  but  even  here  I  learn  there  is  very  considerable  suffering,  which  is  not  re- 
stricted to  the  fishing  popalation,  but  extends  to  small  farmers  and  laboring  men,  and  is  the 
resultof  a  failing  crop  last  year  and  the  want  of  sufficient  employment. 

Along  the  shores  of  Halifax  and  Lunenburg  Counties  few,  if  any,  mackerel  were  taken 
Itst  fall. 

The  following  extract  from  a  letter  addressed  to  me  by  a  gentleman  residing  at  Cape 
Canso,  who  is  largely  engaged  in  fishing  operations,  will  give  some  idea  of  the  extent  of  the 
failure  iu  Guysborough  County : 

"The  deficiency  of  catch  of  fall  mackerel  in  Chedabucto  Bay,  during  the  fall  of  1867,  can- 
not be  less  than  15,0U0  barrels,  which,  at  a  low  average  price  of  ten  dollars  per  barrel, 
amounts  to  $150,000 ;  of  herring  the  short  catch  will  be  nut  less  in  quantity,  and  if  I  were 
to  say  one  half  more  it  would  be  perhaps  nearer  the  mark ;  but  taking  the  first  figure  as  a 
deficiency  of  catch  from  Cape  Canso,  including  Chedabucto  Bay  west  to  Beaver  Light,  a 
distance  of  sixty  miles  (west  of  that  I  have  no  reliable  information),  and  placing  them  at 
the  low  price  ot  three  dollars  per  barrel,  we  have  from  these  two  kinds  of  fish  alone  the  sum 
ofil9u,U0O  that  our  eastern  fishermen  (leaving  entirely  out  the  east  and  west  coasts  of 
Cape  Breton)  are  short  producing  for  1867.  Now  add  to  this  the  almost  entire  failure  of 
some  other  kinds  of  fish  not  so  generally  known  abroad  but  of  much  value  at  home,  dog-fish 
in  particular,  of  which  in  1867  there  was  a  total  failure,  no  one  boat  producing  $4  worth 
against  $40  as  an  average  for  many  years  past,  which,  with  a  large  falling  off  in  cod,  had- 
dock, spring  and  summer  mackerel,  and  otber  of  less  note,  we  have  at  the  smallest  possible 
(ompntatiou  a  further  deficiency  of  |50,000,  making  in  all  an  aggregate  of  $245,000  to  be 
borne  by  this  class  of  men  and  the  parties  who  supply  them  in  the  shape  of  debts  unpaid 
on  the  one  side  and  privation  and  denial  of  the  common  necessaries  of  life,  such  as  bread, 
molasses,  tea,  coffee,  meat,  and  the  common  kinds  of  clothing,  on  the  other  side."  •  •  • 
The  class  of  men  who  are  maintained  by  the  shore  fisheries  are  as  a  general  rule  very  poorr 
ud  many  of  them  largely  indebted  to  the  merchants  who  supply  them.  The  land  on  which 
they  live  is  in  the  majority  of  instances  rocky  and  sterile  and  incapable  of  cultivation  beyond 
the  raising  of  a  few  vegetables  and  a  suppl  v  of  hay  for  their  scanty  stock ;  then,  as  I  nave 
before  remarked,  the  principal  means  of  their  support  is  the  result  of  a  few  mouths'  labor, 
and  during  the  winter  mouths  they  are  mostly  unemployed,  and  thus  a  great  portion  of  the 
J(ar  is  rendered  entirely  unproductive ;  this  would  not  be  the  cause  of  such  evil  results  if 
the  produce  of  these  few  months  of  labor  was  as  certain  and  as  great  as  it  formerly  was,  bat 
with  the  present  frequent  short  catches  and  the  want  of  other  remunerative  employment, 
distress  and  want  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  seem  almost  inevitable.  The  coucluslon  firom 
uese  facts  seems  forced  upon  us  that  the  inshore  net  fishery  j>er  M  is  quite  insufficient  to 


372 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


provide  for  the  necessities  of  those  engaf^ecl  in  it,  and  the  question  then  arisef,  "  la  this  u>ht 
entirely  abandoned  as  an  industrial  pursuit,  and  if  not,  under  what  circumstances  can  it  be 
profitably  pursued." 

Mr.  Davies.  Do  you  wish  the  witness  to  understand  that  yoa  are 
reading  from  a  report  on  the  fisheries  of  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence ! 

Mr.  Dana.  I  asked  him  if  he  was  acquainted  with  Nova  Scotia  and 
Cape  Breton.    I  laid  the  ground  for  my  questions. 

Mr.  Davies.  Does  it  purport  to  be  a  report  as  to  the  fisheries  of  Nova 
Scotia  and  Gape  Breton  ?  I  am  given  to  understand  that  it  is  a  report 
as  to  a  special  locality. 

Mr.  Dana.  It  is  entitled  "  Special  Report  on  the  Distress  among  the 
Nova  Scotia  Fishermen." 

Mr.  Davies.  It  refers  to  St.  Margaret's  Bay,  does  it  not ! 

Mr.  Dana.  No  ;  not  all. 

Q.  Now,  one  plan  for  the  relief  of  this  distress  is  that  the  government 
should  furnish  vessels  to  the  fishermen  on  such  terms  that  they  could 
:fl8h  at  less  cost  to  themselves,  the  difference  to  be  borne  by  the  general 
public.  Another  plan  suggested  is  the  introduction  of  the  system  of 
bounties.  Did  not  you  ever  hear  that  spoken  of? — A.  I  have  beard 
bounties  encouraged  ;  that  is  all. 

Q.  Did  not  you  understand  that  the  reason  they  were  talked  of  was 
because  there  had  been  so  great  a  failure  and  so  much  poverty  among 
the  fishing  classes  ?— A.  I  did  not  understand  it.  I  did  not  see  it  in  my 
time  at  all. 

Q.  Another  reason  given  is,  that  "  the  pogies,  the  only  real  mackerel 
bait,  is  not  caught  east  of  Portland,  and  must  all  be  imported  for  oar 
fleet,  the  increased  cost  of  which,  added  to  the  American  duty,  the  fish- 
erman has  to  pay  on  his  share  of  fish,  besides  charges  of  transportation, 
place  him  in  the  position  that  if  he  catches  during  the  season,  to  his 
own  share,  40  barrels  of  mackerel  in  one  vessel,  he  has  not  made  as  good 
a  season  by  about  $100  gold  as  if  he  had  been  in  an  American  bot- 
tom." Now,  then,  these  two  methods  of  relief  are  suggested,  and  this 
report  sets  forth  very  strongly,  indeed,  the  deplorable  condition  of  the 
men  engaged  in  the  fisheries  in  18G8,  and  for  one  or  two  years  before, 
in  Nova  Scotia  and  Cape  Breton.  You  have  be€n  in  those  countries 
and  belong  to  the  same  Dominion? — A.  Yes;  but  we  did  not  fisb  but 
very  little  there. 

Q,  Haven't  you  heard  of  this  ?  Has  it  not  come  to  your  ears  ?— A. 
ISo ;  the  report  was  not  made  any  way  strong  to  come  to  our  ears. 

Q.  Is  not  that  strong  enough  ?  Then  there  is  a  committee  of  relief, 
the  report  of  which  is  as  follows : 

The  committee  appointed  by  the  house  of  assembly  of  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  subject  of  the 
distressed  fishermen  of  the  province,  beg  leave  to  report  as  follows : 

1.  That  they  have  had  a  conference  with  the  committee  of  Halifax  citizens  appointed  for 
a  like  purpose,  and  it  has  been  mutually  agreed  that  out  of  the  present  available  funds  of 
$17,000,  or  thereabouts,  they  shall  receive  as  the  fair  proportion  for  the  county  of  Halifax 
the  sum  of  |4,000 ;  and  that  of  future  contributions  one-fifth  shall  be  paid  over  to  said  com- 
mittee. 

2.  The  committee  recommend  that  the  sum  of  $5,000  should  be  appropriated  out  of  th« 
general  funds  of  the  province  for  general  distribution. 

3.  The  committee,  after  careful  examination  and  inquiry,  are  satisfied  that  there  exists  at 
the  present  time  among  the  fishing  population  of  the  counties  of  Digby,  Yarmouth,  Shel- 
burne.  Queens,  Lunenburg,  Halimx,  Guysborough,  Antigonish,  Richmond,  Inverness,  Vic- 
toria, and  Cape  Breton  great  and  wide-spread  distress  and  destitution. 

4.  Your  committee  are  also  satisfied  that  this  distress  will  rather  increase  than  diminish 
from  the  present  date  until  the  first  of  June  next,  and  that  unless  extensive  and  permanent 
arrangements  be  made,  many  will  perish  from  starvation. 

5.  The  committee  are  therefore  of  opinion  that  there  is  urgent  necessity,  not  only  for  relief 
from  the  provincial  authorities,  but  for  a  loud  call  upon  the  charily  and  generosity  of  the 
citizens  of  this  and  the  neighboring  provinces. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


373 


ointed  for 

funds  of 

Df  Halifax 

said  corn- 


diminish 
jermanent 

y  for  relief 
gity  of  tlw 


6,  The  comnnittee  recommend  that  a  snitable  board  be  appointed  by  the  (government  in 
etch  of  the  above  counties,  to  take  charm  of  and  distribute  the  relief  so  provided. 

7,  Your  committee  have  thus  partially  reported,  and  bet;  leave  to  recommend  that  five 
hundred  copies  of  this  report  be  publisheid  for  eeueral  distribution,  and  that  the  substance 
of  this  report  be  forwarded  by  tele^aph  for  piiblication  in  this  and  the  neighboring  prov- 
inces.   All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 

JOHN  K.  RYERSON 
H.  BLANC  HARD, 
M.  B.  DE8BRISAY, 
J.  A.  KIRK, 
URBAIN  DOUCETT, 
SAMUEL   FREEMAN, 
JOSIAH  HOOPER, 
ALONZO  WHITE, 
JOHN  ROSS. 

That  committee  was  not  a  voluntary  one,  but  was  appointed  by  the 
house  of  assembly  of  Nova  Scotia,  on  the  subject  of  the  distress  of  the 
fishermen  of  Nova  8cotia.  A  loud  call  was  made,  not  only  upon  the 
people  of  this  province,  but  upon  tliose  of  the  neighboring  provinces, 
tor  relief  for  your  brother  fishermen.  Then  the  su^ect  was  referred  to 
in  the  speech  of  his  honor  the  lieutenant-governor  in  the  following 
terms :  "  While  rejoicing  that  the  husbandman  in  the  past  season  has 
iiad  no  reason  to  complain  of  a  deficient  harvest,  I  regret  that  an  almost 
total  failure  in  the  fishery  has  produced  much  and  general  distress 
among  those  engaged  in  this  branch  of  industry,  and  I  have  found  it 
necessary  to  make  considerable  advances  from  the  public  treasury  for 
their  relief,  an  account  of  which  will  be  submitted  for  the  sanction  and 
approval  of  your  legislature."  A  similar  reference  was  made  in  the 
address  in  reply  to  the  speech  of  Governor  Doyle.  Subsequently  to 
that  his  honor  announced  that  "  the  legislatures  of  Ontario  and  Qaebec 
have  contributed  the  munificent  sum  of  $5,000  and  $4,000  respectively 
towards  the  relief  of  the  distressed  fishermen  of  this  province."  So 
that  they  had  contributions  in  all  the  provinces,  and  yet  you  say  you 
never  heard  of  it  ? — A.  No ;  I  did  not  hear  of  it,  and  did  not  feel  the 
effect  of  it. 

Mr.  Dana.  Tou  were  sailing  un  der  the  American  flag  and  paying  no 
duties.    Yon  got  out  of  the  way  of  it. 

Q.  Do  you  read  the  newspapers  ? — A.  I  do,  sir;  sometimes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  the  Quebec  papers  ?  Here  is  a  Quebec  paper 
called  the  Morning  Chronicle.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  it  ?  I  have  a  copy 
of  that  paper  here  dated  15th  October,  1875,  in  which  reference  is  made 
to  the  distress  in  Labrador.  Did  you  hear  of  that  ? — A.  I  beard  of  the 
failure  of  the  fisheries,  not  of  distress. 

Q.  But  you  supposed  that  if  the  fisheries  failed  there  would  be  dis- 
tress ?    The  following  is  what  appears  in  the  paper  I  have  referred  to : 

"  We  regret  to  hear  from  a  most  reliable  source  that,  owing  to  the 
failure  of  the  gulf  fisheries  this  season,  there  is  the  gravest  reason  to 
apprehend  the  prevalence  of  great  distress,  if  not  of  positive  starvation, 
during  the  coming  winter  among  the  scattered  fishing  population  along 
the  dreary  rock-bound  coast  of  Labrador." 

The  article  goes  on  to  give  the  particulars,  which  I  need  not  read  at 
length.  I  think  you  must  have  heard  of  that  state  of  things.  There 
were  debates  in  the  legislature  on  this  eubject.  There  is  the  governor's 
speech,  in  which  he  says  that,  "  while  rejoicing  that  the  husbandman 
baa  bad  no  reason  to  complain  of  a  deficient  harvest,  he  has  to  report 
an  alnaost  total  failure  of  the  fisheries,  that  has  produced  much  and  gen> 
eral  distress  among  those  engaged  in  this  branch  of  industry,"  and  in 
which  he  states  that  he  has  found  it  necessarv  to  make  considerable 


374 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


.  tr 


advances  from  the  public  treasury  for  their  relief.  Then  there  was  the 
reply  of  the  house  of  assembly :  "  We  highly  approve  of  the  eftbrta 
made  by  your  excelleucy  to  relieve  the  distress  of  the  flshermeu,  and  ia 
common  with  your  excelleacy  we  regret  that  the  failure  in  that  branch 
of  industry  has  occasioned  much  and  general  distress  among  a  useful 
class  of  the  people."  Then  there  was  a  speech  by  Mr.  Blanchard,  a 
vote  of  $5,000  by  the  house  for  the  relief  of  the  fish<)rmen.  Then  Mr. 
Cochran  spoke,  and  Mr.  White,  and  several  other  gentlemen,  and  then 
the  house  passed  a  resolution  in  aid  of  the  fishing  population  of  Nova 
Scotia  and  Gape  Breton.  And  then  yon  had  distress  in  Labrador.  Toa 
knew  that  the  fishery  had  failed,  and  you  might  assume  from  that  that 
there  would  be  some  distress,  might  you  not  f 

A.  Certainly  it  failed;  but  regarding  the  distress  you  have  been 
speaking  of,  we  have  not  felt  that. 

Q.  And  this  did  not  come  to  your  notice  t — A.  No. 

Mr.  Dayies.  Tour  reference  is  to  one  year — 1868  f 

Mr.  Dana.  That  was  the  time  action  was  taken ;  but  the  report  of 
Mr.  Johnston  shows  that  it  had  been  going  on  for  some  years.  He  says, 
**  Not  many  years  since,"  &c.,  and  **■  of  late  years,"  &c.,  showing  that  it 
had  been  going  on  for  a  number  of  years. 


No.  7. 


The  conference  met. 


Monday,  August  6. 


Hon.  Geobqe  William  Howlan,  Cascumpecque,  Prince  Edward 
Island,  called  on  behalf  of  the  government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  You  are  a  senator  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  ^—Answer- 
Yes. 

Q.  Formerly,  I  believe,  you  were  a  member  of  the  executive  council 
of  Prince  Edward  Island  !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  t — A.  Nearly  12  years,  I  believe. 

Q.  You  have  had  a  large  acquaintance  with  the  fisheries  of  the 
island  ? — A.  Yes,  somewhat. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  ? — A.  I  think  from  about  1852  down  to  the 
present  time. 

Q.  You  have  been  engaged  in  the  business  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  carried  on  a  large  business  at  Cascumpecque? — A.  Some 
at  Cascumpecque,  some  at  Tignish,  and  around  the  shores  of  North 
Cape. 

Q.  You  are  at  present  engaged  in  that  business  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  distance  from  the  land  are  mackerel  caught  at  the  island  !— 
A.  You  have  reference  to  our  shore  fisheries  ? 

Q.  Yes. — A.  From  about  one  mile  to  two  miles. 

Q.  With  regard  to  all  the  fishing— the  schooner  fishing  and  boat  fish- 
ing— within  what  distance  from  the  land  are  mackerel  caught  round 
Prince  Edward  Islar  I  f— A.  By  schooners  round  Prince  Edward  Islandt 

Q.  By  the  foreign  fleet— by  the  American  fleet  f— A.  The  American 
fleet  tish  outside  the  line,  and  inside  the  line,  when  they  have  the  privi- 
lege to  do  so. 

Q.  In  the  whole  fisheries,  what  proportion  of  the  finh  are  caught  witbio 
3  miles  of  the  land  f — A.  By  the  people  of  Prince  Edward  Island? 

Q.  I  mean  altogether  f— A.  By  all  peoples — by  all  fishermen  t  We 
catch  our  fish — our  shore  fisheries  are  altogether  within  3  miles. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


375 


Q.  The  island  flsbermen  catch  their  fish  altogether  within  3  miles  of 
th«  shore !— A.  That  is  oar  staple  fish — mackerel,  cod,  hake,  and  had- 
dock. 

Q.  Yon  are  speaking  of  the  boat  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Of  what  size  are  the  boats  f — A.  They  are  all  the  way  from  15  to 
30  tieet  keel. 

Q.  What  distance  can  they  go  from  the  land  f — A.  Well,  most  of 
our  fishing  is  done  within  three  miles  of  shore. 

Q.  Are  your  boats  adapted  for  going  out  a  greater  distance  than  3 
miles  f— A.  Some  are  and  some  are  not. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  them  are  so  adapted  f — A.  Of  all  the  boats  of 
Prince  Edward  Island,  I  should  think  about  25  per  cent. 

Q.  About  25  per  cent,  are  adapted  to  ontside  fishing  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  those  boats  engage  in  the  outside  fishing  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Why  notf — A.  The  only  way  in  which  they  engage  in  outside 
fishing  is  when  they  are  driven  by  stre  ss  of  weather  from  one  side  of 
the  island  to  another. 

Q.  They  don't  fish  outside  three  miles,  although  adapted  to  it  Y — A. 
They  could  go  outside. 

Q.  They  could  carry  it  on  if  it  was  profitable? — A.  They  are  not  fit- 
ted for  it.  Their  lines  are  not  long  enough  for  it  to  begin  with.  There 
is  no  fishing  outside  of  the  limits  except  they  go  to  Banks,  Miscon,  and 
Bradley. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  American  fishermen  who  have  been 
in  the  habit  of  coming  to  the  island  f — A.  I  am  somewhat  acquainted 
with  them. 

Q.  From  all  the  information  you  possess  and  from  your  own  knowl- 
edge, where  are  the  greater  proportion  of  fish  caught  by  the  American 
fleet— what  distance  from  the  land  ? — A.  Do  you  mean  around  Prince 
Edward  Island  ? 

Q.  Yes. — A.  The  greater  portion  of  fish  at  this  season  are  caught  at 
what  is  termed  the  bend  of  the  island,  off  Bustico ;  also,  from  North 
Cape  to  East  Point,  and  from  North  Cape  to  West  Point. 

Q.  That  is,  by  the  American  fleet  ? — A.  These  are  the  usual  fishing- 
grounds,  and  also  from  St.  Peter's  Island  to  East  Point. 

Q.  These  are  the  fishing-grounds  used  by  American  fishermen  f — A. 
They  use  them  when  they  have  the  liberty  to  use  them.  These  are  the 
best  fishing-grounds. 

Q.  Within  what  distance  of  the  shore  are  the  greater  proportion  of 
Dsh  caught  by  the  American  fleet  ? — A.  Do  you  speak  with  regard  to  the 
island ! 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  the  very  places  you  have  last  mentioned. — A.  The 
majority  of  the  catch  is  caught  within  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Do  you  know  when  the  American  vessels  leave  home,  the  diraction 
in  which  they  come,  and  where  they  fish  ? — A.  On  the  Prince  Edward 
Island  coast  1 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  time  they  leave  their  own  ports,  and  the  route 
tbey  take  ? — A.  When  they  set  away  for  the  bay  fishing  the  first  place 
tbey  strike  is  Bank  Bradley,  off  North  Cape.  They  come  there  direct. 
They  perhaps  stop  at  Canso  to  refit. 

Q.  About  what  time  do  they  arrive  at  Bank  Bradley  I — A.  From  the 
middle  to  the  end  of  June. 

Q.  flow  long  do  they  fish  there  1 — A.  They  get  the  early  fish  there. 

Q.  How  many  days  do  they  fish  there? — A.  That  will  depend  upon 
the  state  of  the  season.  Perhaps  during  one  week  or  ten  days  the  fish 
are  there. 


376 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Mfe 


'I  k 


Q  That  bank  is  how  many  miles  from  the  shore  T— A.  Perliaps  15  or 
20  miles. 

Q.  Until  what  period  do  the  vessels  remain  in  the  bay  ! — A.  Until  about 
the  first  weelc  in  October. 

Q.  Where  do  they  fish  during  that  period  T — A.  The  general  flahing- 
ground  is  around  North  Cape. 

Q.  During  the  whole  summer  ? — A.  The  summer  fishing  is  from  there 
around. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  there  from  the  time  they  arrive  on  the  shores  of  the 
island  to  the  time  they  leave  f — A.  Yes ;  from  Georgetown  to  Souris, 
and  from  there  to  North  Cape. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  places  where  they  1  ter  that  ?— A.  When 
they  leave  the  island  they  go  to  Port  Hood,  Ca{>e  Breton. 

Q.  During  all  that  period  the  vessels  are  fishing  near  shore?— A. 
Unless  we  have  a  very  heavy  gale  of  wind  off  shore,  and  then  they  go 
off. 

Q.  For  how  long  a  period  t — A.  Perhaps  during  the  duration  of  the 
gale — three  days. 

Q.  Then  they  return  to  the  shore  again? — A.  Yes;  they  may  not, 
however,  return  to  exactly  the  same  places. 

Q.  Have  you  visited  the  fishing  ports  of  the  United  States — Glouces- 
ter and  other  ports? — A.  Once  or  twice  I  have  been  to  Gloucester. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  persons  there  whose  capital  is  en- 
gaged in  the  fishing  business? — A.  With  some  of  them. 

Q.  Do  you  do  business  for  them  ? — A.  Sometimes  I  do  business  for 
them. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  communication  or  conversation  with  them  on 
the  subject  of  fishing  ? — A.  Yes ;  several  time 

Q.  And  with  the  masters  of  those  vessels  T  Yes. 

Q.  Will  you  state  upon  what  terms  they  Describe  the  mode 

of  fitting  out  and  the  terms  on  which  the  fishermen  go  in  the  vessels.— 
A.  The  terms  are  different  at  different  places.  At  Gloucester  the  sys- 
tem is  called  the  Cape  Ann  lay.  At  Cape  Cod  it  is  the  South  Shore 
lay.  The  usual  custom  that  prevails  is  what  is  called  half-line.  Tbe 
owner  finds  the  vessel  and  fits  her  out,  and  the  crew  generally  get  one- 
half  of  the  fish,  and  pay  the  captain  from  2^  to  5  per  cent,  on  the  gross 
catch.  When  the  system  of  licenses  prevailed,  the  crew  usually  paid 
the  license,  and  in  some  instances,  under  a  good  master,  they  paid  berth 
money.  The  cook  is  generally  paid  by  the  crew,  as  they  like  to  live 
well.  The  general  pay  of  a  good  cook  is  almost  as  much  as  a  master 
has. 

Q.  Can  you  see  the  vessels  fishing  from  the  place  where  you  reside!— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  do  they  fish  ? — A.  It  depends  whether 
they  fish  inshore  or  not.  This  time  of  the  season  they  are  generally 
fishing  inshore. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  inshore?— A.  Say  within  two  miles  of  the 
shore. 

Q.  Are  the  vessels  lying  within  two  miles  of  the  shore  ?— A.  Yes,  at 
this  season  of  the  year. 

Q.  From  your  knowledge  of  the  business,  would  it  be  reasonably 
practicable  for  the  American  fleet  to  carry  on  fishing,  if  they  were  ex- 
cluded from  fishing  within  three  miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  I  would  not 
oare  to  engage  in  it  myself. 

Q.  Would  you  do  so  ? — A.  I  would  not. 

Q.  Not  if  you  were  rigidly  excluded  from  fishing  within  three  miles 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISHION. 


377 


of  the  shore? — A.  Tbe  iiiformntion  I  have  on  that  point  is  this:  The 
irritatiou  caused  by  the  continaous  watchfulness  and  care  of  tbe  cut- 
ters  

Q.  Before  you  go  into  that  I  want  to  ask  yon  wliether  you  would  do 
80,  assuming  yon  were  rigidly  excluded  beyond  a  line  three  miles  from 
land  f— A.  I  would  not. 

Q.  You  say  you  would  not  engage  in  the  business ;  would  it  be  a 
profitable  business? — A.  I  think  not — not  from  my  experience.  My  ex- 
planation is  this :  It  is  generally  difficult  to  procure  a  good  crew  of  men 
to  flsb  in  any  waters  where  they  are  peculiarly  embarrassed  and  irritated 
irom  tinae  to  time  from  the  watchfulness  and  care  generally  exercised 
in  these  cases.  Men  dislike  to  do  it  unless  they  have  tbe  right  to  fish 
iushore — the  right  to  fish  wherever  they  find  flsb. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  a  case  where  by  law  they  are  excluded  and 
where  they  violate  the  law  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  a  case  where  they  are  by  the  law  excluded  and 
where  they  obey  tbe  law.  Suppose  they  were  to  be  excluded,  and  sup- 
pose they  were  to  be  so  excluded  that  they  did  not  attempt  to  come 
over  that  line,  what  would  be  the  eflfect  ? — A.  The  chances  would  be  very 
much  against  any  vessel  making  a  fare. 

Q.  From  your  communication  with  masters  and  owners  and  persons 
engaged  in  the  business,  do  you  think  they  would  engage  in  it?  Have 
you  had  conversation  with  them  on  tbe  point! — A.  I  have  conversed 
with  several  masters  and  owners. 

Q.  Would  they  fit  out  vessels  ? — A.  They  would  hesitate  to  do  so. 
I  don't  think  any  man  wouM  commence  tbe  business  and  put  bis 
capital  into  it  if  he  knew  be  would  be  excluded  from  the  inshore  fisheries. 
That  is  generally  the  information  I  have  received  from  them. 

Q.  AVIiy  would  you  not  engage  in  tbe  business  if  excluded  from  fish- 
ing Tvithin  three  miles? — A.  My  experience  in  tbe  majority  of  cases  is 
that  unless  they  had  tbe  right  to  tbe  inshore  fishing  tbe  business  would 
be  a  failure. 

Q.  Can  you  mention  any  season  when  tbe  majority  of  tbe  fish  were 
canght  outside? — A.  By  American  fishermen  ? 

Q.  Yes.— A.  I  certainly  could  not  tell  you.  I  have  never  been  on  board 
tbe  American  fishing  vessels.  The  general  feeling  among  Americans  is 
that  they  very  much  wish  to  have  the  use  of  the  inshore  fishery  as  on 
that  depends  pretty  much  the  success  of  their  voyages.  That  is  the  im- 
pression I  have  always  received  from  both  owners  and  masters. 

Q.  During  how  long  a  period  7 — A.  Ever  since  1  have  been  connected 
with  the  business.    That  is  the  universal  feeling. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  any  other  opinion  expressed  during  that 
period?— A.  By  the  fishermen  themselves  ? 

Q.  Yes,  by  them. — A.  2fo ;  it  is  the  almost  universal  opinion. 

Q.  You  have  never  neard  any  other  opinion  expressed  ?  A.  I  have 
heard  other  opinions.  But  I  am  speaking  of  tbe  experience  of  masters 
and  owners  of  vessels?  I  don't  think  1  have  ever  beard  any  other 
opinion  from  them. 

Q.  During  the  periods  when  they  were  restricted  by  law,  I  want  to 
bow  whether  they  fished  within  tbe  three-mile  limit  during  the  time 
when  the  cutters  were  on  the  coast  watching  them  ? — A.  Do  you  speak 
of  vessels  which  bad  no  licenses? 

Q.  Unlicensed  vessels? — A.  I  think,  as  a  general  rule,  they  kept  pretty 
well  clear  of  the  three  miles,  but  at  times  they  got  inside. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  about  irritation ;  I  want  you  now  to  explain  that.  I 
think  you  said  they  did  not  wish  to  be  subjected  to  cutters  coming  after 


378 


AWABD   OF   THE   FI&FERT   COMMISSION. 


I  I- 


lit 


them  f — A.  You  can  readily  understand  that  a  fishing  vesssel  is  dif- 
ferent from  almost  any  other  vessel,  as  each  of  the  crew  is  as  mach  in- 
terested in  the  voyage  as  the  master,  they  working  on  joint  account. 
It  is  not  very  easy  to  know  whether  they  have  been  fishing  inside  the 
three-mile  limit  or  not.  A  vessel  fishing  aioug  the  shore  from  North 
Gape  to  Kildare,  keeping  inshore  within  the  three-mile  limit,  might  drift 
out  at  night  and  find  itself  off  Rustico  at  daylight;  or  it  might  run  down 
so  as  to  make  the  land  at  daybreak. 

Q.  I  ask  you  whether  you  did  not  mean  that  the  owners  of  vessels 
did  not  wish  to  be  subjected  to  irritation  and  annoyance  ? — A.  From 
Uie  experience  and  conversation  I  have  had  with  owners  of  vessels,  the 
conclusion  in  their  minds  seemed  to  be  that  it  was  almost  a  necessity  of 
the  voyage  that  they  should  have  the  right  to  the  inshore  fisheries 
for  they  ran  the  risk  of  losing  not  only  their  vessel  but  their  outfit. 

Q.  Did  they  run  the  risk  of  being  captured  ? — A.  In  some  instances 
they  were  captured. 

Q.  Those  persons  of  whom  you  have  spoken,  were  they  in  the  habit 
of  running  the  risk  of  being  captured  by  entering  the  three-mile  limit 
when  the  cutters  were  not  in  sight  ? — A.  When  the  cutters  were  not  in 
sight  they  were  in  the  habit  of  going  within  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Yon  are  speaking  of  your  communications  with  the  captains  T— A. 
Yes,  that  is  my  experience. 

Q.  That  is  knowledge  gathered  from  them  f—  A.  Yes,  and  by  actual 
observation  as  well. 

Q.  Was  there  any  possibility  of  guarding  the  coast  with  the  number 
of  cutters  used  ? — A.  I  think  not ;  it  was  almost  impossible  to  guard 
the  coast. 

Q.  Yon  might  describe  how  that  was? — A.  The  steamers  (the  cutters) 
generally  were  in  Cascumpecqne  Harbor,  and  the  vessels  watch  them 
come  and  go  in.  The  steamers  cannot  enter  Eustico  Harbor  and  New 
London ;  one  steamer  was  lost  there. 

Q.  It  was  difiBcult  for  the  steamers  to  enter  other  harbors  ? — A.  Yes, 
on  account  of  the  shoal  water. 

Q.  Where  would  the  steamers  be  f — A.  They  would  be  outside. 

Q.  How  far  outf — A.  In  four,  five  or  ten  fathoms. 

Q.  In  that  case  they  would  always  be  seen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  would  prove  a  great  difficulty  in  protecting  the  fisheries  T— 
A.  There  would  be  in  that  way,  because  while  the  cutters  were  here  the 
American  vessels  might  be  fishing  within  the  limits,  from  West  Gape  to 
North  Gape. 

Q.  How  many  miles  of  coast  would  that  be — and  the  whole  coast 
line  f— A.  About  160  miles  from  East  Point  to  North  Point,  about  45 
miles  from  North  Point  to  West  Point ;  the  total  length  from  300  to  400 
miles.  From  Gharlottetown  to  Summerside  the  coast  is  not  frequented 
by  mackerel  on  account  of  the  formation  of  the  bottom  of  the  Gulf. 

Q.  About  the  state  of  the  Island  fisheries,  you  have  a  large  number 
of  fishing  boats  on  the  Island! — A.  Yes,  there  is  a  good  number. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  the  boat-fishing  is  a  valuable  fishing  ?— A. 
We  look  on  it  as  such. 

Q.  About  ho);^  many  boats  have  you  there  ?— A.  Between  1,300  and 
1,600. 

Q.  Of  late  years  the  boat-fishing  has  increased  f— A.  A  good  deal 
since  1870. 

Q.  How  much  has  it  increased  since  that  date T— A.  The  number  was 
doubled  I  think  between  1860  and  1870,  and  it  has  increased  since  1870 
by  about  300  boats. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


379 


Q.  la  there  any  scbooner-flshing  carried  on  from  the  island  ? — A.  Not 
as  mach  as  formerly. 

Q.  What  do  you  consider  the  reason  of  the  decline? — A.  The  reason 
why  we  have  gone  from  schooner  into  boat  fishing  is  this:  After  the 
repeal  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  the  vessels  which  carried  on  our  busi- 
ness carried  on  not  only  the  fishing  business,  but  that  of  carrying  agri- 
cnltnral  produce.  In  spring  they  would  be  employed  in  carrying  oats 
and  potatoes  to  the  nearest  ports  Of  the  United  States,  and  they  would 
go  out  fishing  in  the  fall.  When  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  repealed 
only  25  per  cent,  of  our  population  were  engaged  in  fishing  and  75  per 
cent,  in  agriculture.  We  necessarily  had  to  find  new  markets  for  our 
produce.  We  sold  our  schooners  and  built  brigs  and  barques,  and  sent 
our  oats  in  that  way  to  England  and  to  France.  Having  the  inshore 
fisheries  preserved  to  us,  we  put  our  money  either  into  small  fishing 
boats  or  iuto  larger  vessels,  brigs  and  barques,  and  in  that  way  our 
macl^erel  fleet  has  decreased.    We  have  not  more  than  35  or  40  vessels 

DOW. 

Q.  There  is  ample  opportunity  to  carry  on  the  boat-fishing  there  f — 
A.  The  opportunity  is  unlimited. 

Q.  You  consider  boat  fishing  more  profitable  than  schooner-fishing  ? — 
A.  We  do. 

Q.  Can  you  carry  it  on  with  less  capital  t — A.  Yes ;  a  well-fitted 
fishing  vessel  of  60  or  70  tons  would  cost  $5,000.  That  sum  would  pur- 
chase perhaps  25  boats.  So  that  while  the  vessel  would  have  the  catch 
of  12  or  14  men,  you  would  have  from  the  same  capital  invested  in 
boats  the  catch  of  75  men. 

Q.  The  question  arises  whether  you  have  the  capital  to  carry  on  the 
bnsiness,  suppose  you  had  the  fishing  all  to  yourselves  f — A.  We  could 
very  well  attract  capital ;  but  while  the  fisheries  question  is  in  a  state  of 
irritation  no  men  care  to  put  much  capital  into  it. 

Q.  You  would  have  no  difficulty  in  getting  capital  if  you  had  the 
fisheries  exclusively  to  yourselves  ? — A.  I  don't  think  there  would  be 
any  difficulty. 

Q.  To  what  extent  do  you  think  it  would  be  increased  ? — A.  It  would 
be  increased,  at  all  events,  to  within  the  possible  number  of  men  we  could 
devote  to  it.  At  the  present  time  most  of  the  fishermen  are  farmers  as 
veil.  The  fisheries  are  only  in  their  infancy  around  Prince  Edward 
Island. 

Q.  How  many  men  are  engaged  in  the  fishing  business  of  the  island f — 
A.  About  25  per  cent. 

Q.  About  what  would  be  the  number  ?— A.  Galling  the  population 
100,000,  and  taking  the  number  at  20  per  cent.,  there  will  be  about 
5,000  men  engaged  in  the  fishing  business  directly  and  indirectly. 

Q.  You  say  they  are  partially  engaged  in  farming f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Has  the  fishing  interest  been  promoted  to  any  e^  tent  by  the  ex- 
clusion of  the  American  fishermen  during  those  periods  they  were  ex- 
cluded or  partially  excluded  ? — A.  Do  you  refer  to  the  promotion  of  our 
inhhore  fisheries  I 

Q.  Yes ;  during  the  time  the  American  fishermen  were  excluded  or 
partially  excluded,  after  the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  did 
your  people  obtain  any  benefit  from  the  protection  of  the  inshore  fisher- 
ies t— A.  I  think  experience  will  show  thuy  have.  That  is  our  impres- 
sion. That  is  the  general  impression  of  those  on  the  island  engaged  in 
the  fisheries. 

Q.  That  was  the  effect  of  the  abrogation  of  the  treaty  T — A.  Yes. 


380 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  SopposiDg  American  fishermen  were  excluded  entirely,  what  in 
your  opinion  would  be  the  effect  ?— A.  To  the  shore  fisheries  ? 

Q.  To  the  Canadian  fisheries. — A.  My  opinion  is,  that  while  I  should 
be  very  glad  to  see  the  American  fishermen  comiug  to  us,  still,  speaking 
from  an  abstract  point  as  to  whether  the  fisheries  would  be  more  valua- 
ble to  us  if  left  to  the  island  people,  I  say  yes. 

Q.  It  would  be  in  the  interest  of  Oanadian  fishermen  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Explain  how  it  would  be  so. — A.  One  reason  would  be  this :  that 
having  the  inshore  fisheries  protected  and  altogether  for  the  use  of  the 
Dominion  fishermen,  a  larger  amount  of  capital  would  be  invested  and 
a  larger  quantity  of  fish  would  be  taken. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  consider  this  in  view  of  any  duty  that  might  be  im- 
posed by  the  United  States. — A.  So  far  as  the  duties  are  concerued,  they 
regulate  themselves,  like  the  laws  of  all  other  commerce. 

Q.  Gonsidering  that  the  United  States  would  have  the  right  to  im- 
pose any  duty,  do  you,  in  view  of  that,  hold  the  opinion  that  it  would  be 
to  the  advantage  of  the  Canadian  fishermen  to  exclude  Americans  ?— A. 
I  do,  from  the  inshore  fisheries. 

Q.  You  are  decidedly  of  that  opinion  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  that  such  is  the  general  opinion  of  the  people  of 
Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  Yes;  it  is  pretty  much  the  g«ueral opinion 
of  those  engaged  in  the  fisheries  at  the  island. 

Q.  Who,  in  your  opinion,  would  pay  and  have  paid  the  duty,  under 
the  circumstances,  where  it  has  been  imposed  by  the  United  States?— 
A.  We  generally  look  upon  the  consumers  as  having  to  pay  it.  It  de- 
pends altogether  upon  the  law  of  supply  and  demand. 

Q.  Is  that  a  theory  of  yours,  or  is  it  your  experience  f — A.  The  aver- 
age taken  during  the  time  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  and  the  average 
since  will  lead  to  that  conclusion.  There  is  no  question  that  when  the 
right  to  a  market  during  several  years  for  a  great  interest,  and  the  bus- 
iness necessarily  growing  out  of  such  an  investment,  is  checked,  it  gives 
rise  to  a  different  state  of  affairs ;  but  if  the  fisheries  were  placed  excla- 
sively  for  the  use  of  Canadian  fishermen,  I  am  deliberately  of  opinion 
that  it  would  be  better  for  them,  because  it  does  not  follow  that  in  the 
exercise  of  the  wisdom  a  man  brings  to  bear  on  his  business  it  is  neces- 
sary to  follow  mackerel  at  all.  There  are  some  portions  of  the  fisheries 
in  which  they  prohibit  or  discountenance  the  catching  of  mackerel.  In 
Bay  Chaleur  they  discountenance  the  catching  of  mackerel  and  catch 
cod.  It  has  been  an  open  question  whether  fishing  for  cod,  hake,  and 
haddock  would  not  be  more  profitable. 

Q.  If  the  American  fieet  were  excluded  from  the  fisheries  of  Prince 
Edward  Island,  what  other  source  of  supply  would  be  open  to  them  ?— 
A.  They  have  the  right  to  fish  outside  three  miles  and  in  their  own 
waters. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  it  an  unprofitable  business  fishing  there  T— A.  I 
think  so.    I  should  not  care  to  embark  in  it. 

Q.  I  am  now  asking  yon,  in  view  of  the  entire  exclusion  of  all  foreign 
fishing- vessels  from  our  inshore  fisheries,  what  would  be  the  effect!— A. 
I  wish  to  be  distinctly  understood  that  I  am  speaking  altogether  with 
reference  to  Prince  Edward  Island  fisheries;  not  being  acquainted  with 
the  American  coast,  I  cannot  give  an  opinion  in  regard  to  it. 

Q.  Why  do  yon  say  that  we  should  not  have  to  pay  the  duty  imposed 
by  the  United  States  f— A.  It  depends  on  the  law  of  supply  and  demand. 
If  the  quantity  of  fish  required  by  the  United  States  is  100,000  barrels, 
and  the  catch  by  the  American  fishermen  is  only  60,000,  it  follows  that 
they  are  40  per  cent,  short.    So  up  goes  the  price  of  mackerel,  and  they 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


381 


mast  go  ontside  for  tbem.  That  was  clearly  established  last  year  in  po- 
tatoes.  While  they  were  20c.  a  bushel  at  the  island,  they  were  exported 
and  sold  at  $1.10  in  the  United  States.    The  consumer  must  have  paid 

the  duty. 

Q.  What  was  the  duty  levied  on  those  sent  to  the  United  States  ! — A. 
Fifteen  cents  a  bushel,  I  think. 

Q.  What  were  the  prices  of  mackerel  from  1860  to  1865,  and  from  1865 
sabsequently ;  were  mackerel  higher  or  lower  ? — A.  The  average  from 
1860  to  1865  was  $11.60,  American  currency,  gross.  From  1866  to  1872 
the  price  was  $14. 

Q.  The  price  was  higher  after  the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty 
thau  it  was  before? — A.  The  average  price  was  higher. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  What  description  of  fish  are  you  now  speaking  off — A.  Mackerel. 

Q.  What  numbers? — A.  Taking  the  average  of  Nos.  1,  2,  and  3  dur- 
ing that  period.  A  better  illustration  of  the  way  in  which  prices  go  up 
and  down  would  be  to  take  the  prices  of  the  past  two  years.  Here  is 
the  return  of  the  Boston  Fish  Bureau  for  1875  and  1876.  In  1875  home- 
caught  fish  were  23,000  barrels ;  foreign-caujjht  fish,  61,000  barrels. 
The  prices  ranged  from  $19.25  for  No.  1  to  $10.50  for  No.  2,  and  $7.40 
for  No.  3.  The  next  year  the  position  is  reversed.  In  1876  the  home- 
caught  fish  were  82,935  barrels;  foreign  caught,  43,000.  That  year  the 
prices  were  $14,  $8,  and  $6.  So  the  price  goes  up  and  down  with  the 
catch. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Your  opinion  is  that  you  would  have  control  of  the  markets  f — A. 
The  fisheries  of  the  United  States  are  not  sufficient  to  supply  the  Ameri- 
can markets.  The  item  of  mackerel,  of  which  I  am  particularly  speak- 
ing, is  an  item  of  export  to  the  United  States,  where  it  is  looked  upon 
as  a  luxury.  We  in  the  fishing  trade  general  think  that  pork  and  mack* 
ere!  carry  their  values  together — that  the  American  puts  one  of  the  two 
into  bis  bouse  in  the  winter,  either  a  barrel  of  the  best  pork  or  a  barrel 
of  mackerel.  It  would  appear  on  looking  over  the  statistics  that  while 
the  modes  of  catching  mackerel,  the  number  of  vessels  and  men  em- 
ployed, have  been  increasing  every  year,  from  which  it  might  be  ex- 
pected to  follow  that  the  fish  would  get  lower  in  price,  such  is  not  the 
case.  Thirty  years  ago  they  were  cheaper  thau  today.  The  prices 
thirty  years  ago  were— No.  1,  $5.30 ;  No.  2,  $4.60 ;  No.  3,  $3.50. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  tonnage  employed  in  the  Ameri- 
can fleet  during  the  existence  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty ;  what  was  the 
maximum  tonnage? — A.  I  think  in  1854,  at  the  commencement  of  the 
treaty,  the  tonnage  was  about  154,000  tons.  From  1854  to  1862  it  ran 
up  to  203,000  tons  odd. 

Q.  What  was  the  highest  tonnage  ?— A.  203,000  tons. 

Q.  Did  it  rise  or  fall  after  the  abrogation  of  the  treaty  ? — A.  From 
1802  to  1868  (in  1866  the  treaty  was  abrogated)  it  fell  from  203,000  to 
84,000. 

Q.  To  what  do  you  attribute  that? — A.  To  a  variety  of  reasons.  A 
Dumber  of  vessels  went  into  other  businesses,  for  one  thing — into  the 
coasting  trade  and  into  other  lines  of  business. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  the  American  fleet  ? — A.  Tes.  Another 
reason  was  the  irritation  caused  by  the  surveillance  exercised  inshore 
of  the  gulf. 

Q>  Is  it  your  opinion  that  had  an  effect  on  it  or  not  ? — A.  I  think  it 
had  a  very  serious  effect  upon  it  from  what  I  can  learn. 


882 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Is  tbat  the  opinion  of  well-informed  Americans  on  the  subject  Y-. 
A.  A  good  many  of  the  owners  of  vessels  in  Gloucester  are  of  that 
opinion. 

Q.  Have  the  people  of  the  fishing  villages  on  the  coast  of  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island  been  benefited,  and,  if  so,  to  what  extent,  by  trade  with 
American  fishing  parties  ? — A.  We  are  always  very  glad  to  have  Amer- 
ican people  come  and  trade  with  us. 

Q.  You  trade  with  them  yourself  ? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  Is  it  a  very  great  advantage  to  the  people  of  the  island  ?— A.  I 
never  knew  a  man  shut  his  shop  to  a  customer. 

Q.  Is  it  any  advantage  to  them  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  mutually  advan- 
tageous. 

Q.  Are  you  sustained  in  any  great  measure  by  it? — A.  No;  not  at 
all.  There  is  no  one  man  on  the  island  who  could  make  a  business  of 
it,  if  he  had  the  whole  of  it. 

Q.  Has  that  trade  increased  or  decreased  since  the  date  of  the  Wash- 
ington Treaty  f — A.  That  trade  has  materially  decreased  since  the  re- 
peal of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  me  why  ? — A.  I  think  one  great  reason  was,  that  the 
great  expenditure  in  the  United  States  caused  a  very  heavy  revenue  to 
be  raised  for  the  war  and  brought  taxes  upon  the  manufactures  of  the 
country.  I  know  that  in  several  instances  where  I  sold  a  great  many 
barrels  to  American  fishermen,  they  say  they  would  be  very  glad  still 
to  buy  them,  but  they  are  compelled  to  buy  their  barrels  at  home,  and 
they  are  branded  all  complete,  except  the  number,  when  taken  on  board. 
Sometimes  when  they  ran  short  and  bought  a  few  additional,  they  had 
to  pay  duties  on  them  when  they  got  home.  Supplies  are  now  sent  for 
those  vessels  by  steamer  to  Oharlottetown,  and  with  our  railroad 
through  the  island  they  can  be  sent  through  in  bond.  Men  having 
twenty  vessels  often  do  that  and  thus  send  sails  and  supplies. 

Q.  Had  you  been  in  the  habit  of  supplying  barrels  t — A.  Tes;  I 
have  sold  them  a  good  many  barrels. 

Q.  Becently  they  have  brought  barrels  from  home  f — A.  Yes,  and 
are  obliged  to  do  so ;  that  is  what  they  tell  us. 

Q.  Speaking  of  sails,  why  do  they  require  sails  to  be  sent  f— A.  A 
vessel  comes  down  in  the  spring  and  she  has  generally  poor  sails.  If 
she  remains  in  the  bay  when  the  weather  gets  rough,  they  send  for  a 
good  set  of  sails. 

Q.  Are  those  sails  sent  by  the  regular  line  of  steamboats  T — A.  Tea, 
to  Charlottetown ;  but  they  can  have  them  distributed  by  railway  at 
Gascumpecque,  Souris,  Georgetown,  or  Summerside. 

Q.  These  ports  are  all  within  the  fishing  district  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  understand  there  is  a  railway  station  at  Gascumpecque,  where 
you  reside  ? — A.  Yes ;  right  at  the  wharf. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  it  is  the  practice  to  send  other  things  be- 
sides sails  ? — A.  Sometimes  it  is  done.  They  send  beef,  very  often  it 
comes  to  my  care ;  sometimes  pork. 

Q.  I  believe  you  are  consular  agent  at  Gascumpecque  for  the  United 
States?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  say  you  act  for  some  of  these  fishing  men  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  regard  to  transshipment,  have  you  any  knowledge  in  regard 
to  that  matter? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  it  an  advantage  to  the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes ;  ft 
considerable  advantage  to  both  merchants  and  fishermen. 

Q.  Describe  how  it  is  so,  and  to  what  extent  it  is  practiced.— A. 
The  privilege  of  transshipment  is  always  looked  upon  by  the  fishermen 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


383 


88  equivalent  to  one  trip,  while  the  merchants  look  apon  it  as  of  very 
great  use  to  them,  especially  a  merchant  having,  say,  ten  or  twenty 
vessels.  If  those  vessels  have  100  or  200  barrels  the  merchant  can 
land  them  in  any  port  and  have  them  transshipped  to  the  United 
States.  He  thus  receives  a  return  for  the  capital  invested  much  quicker 
than  if  the  vessel  herself  were  to  carry  them  home.  Not  only  so,  but 
as  all  the  vessels  are  insured  in  a  mutual  insurance  company,  it  relieves 
the  risk  of  the  amount  for  crossing  the  bay.  The  privilege  of  trans- 
shipment is  looked  upon  as  very  important. 

Q,  How  much  do  you  consider  that  it  would  amount  to  with  regard 
to  trips  ?— A.  To  about  one  extra  trip. 

Q.  Are  or  were  your  vessels  ever  in  the  habit  of  going  to  American 
waters  to  fish  ? — A.  Never  knew  but  one  do  so. 

Q.  When  was  that  ? — A.  Within  the  past  seven  years ;  I  think  she 
was  a  schooner  called  the  Lettie ;  she  went  there  alter  pugies. 
Q.  She  was  an  island  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  did  she  fish  there? — A.  She  went  there  one  trip;  it  was 
a  sort  of  experiment.    She  did  not  do  anything,  and  she  brought  back 
sach  reports  that  no  other  vessel  has  ever  made  the  venture. 
Q.  It  was  an  experiment,  and  it  did  not  succeed  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Had  you  any  interest  in  this  vessel  ? — A.  No ;  none. 
Q.  How  many  of  the  American  fleet  have  you  ever  seen  in  your  har- 
bor at  one  time  f — A.  About  340. 

Q.  On  what  occasion  would  they  assemble  in  such  large  numbers  f— 
A.  When  there  was  a  gale  of  wind. 
Q.  How  often  have  you  seen  them  there  ? — A.  Annually. 
Q.  Do  you  often  see  hundreds  of  vessels  there  ? — A.  Not  now.    We 
do  not  now  see  so  many  as  we  used  to  see  some  three  years  ago.    Very 
few  have  visited  the  harbor  during  the  last  two  or  three  years. 
Q.  How  are  your  fisheries  this  yearf — A.  Very  good  so  far. 
Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  vessels  are  likely  to  go  there  this  yearf — 
A.  I  have  no  way  of  getting  information  on  this  point  otherwise  than 
from  the  public  prints,  and  by  correspondence  with  my  agents. 

Q.  But  you  have  knowledge  concerning  it  as  a  business  man,  have 
you  not  t— A.  They  say  that  at  the  present  time  400  vessels  are  on  their 
way,  and  that  400  are  following  these.  I  learn  that  from  the  public 
prints,  and  from  information  received  from  my  correspondents. 

Q.  Do  yon  believe  that  to  be  a  fact  t — A.  I  think  that  it  may  be  a 
little  exaggerated ;  but  I  dare  say  that  there  will  be  from  500  to  600 
American  vessels  in  the  bay  this  year. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  fisheries  have  ever  been  very  much  bet- 
ter at  any  time  f — A.  We  had  one  year  quite  as  good ;  but  I  never  knew 
them  to  be  better  so  far. 

Q.  You  never  knew  them  to  be  better,  save  during  one  year— that  is 
up  to  the  present  time  1 — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Are  yon  acquainted  with  seine  fishing  ? — A.  I  am  not 
Q.  What  is  your  opinion  with  regard  to  the  practice  of  the  throwing 
3ver  of  offal  1    What  is  its  effect  on  the  fisheries  1— A.  We  look  upon  it 
as  being  very  injurious  to  them. 

Q.  To  what  extent  is  it  practiced  f — A.  Most  of  our  fishermen,  except 
when  they  are  hard  pressed,  will  go  off  shore  and  dress  their  fish. 

Q.  Do  they  do  this  as  a  general  rule  T— A.  They  generally  throw  it 
overboard  when  they  are  off  the  grounds. 

Q.  What  effect  does  the  practice  of  t  rowing  it  over  on  the  fishing 
grounds  produce? — ^A.  It  is  very  destructive  to  the  fisheries. 


384 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


m 


Q.  Do  your  boats  follow  this  practice? — A.  We  never  permit  them  to 
do  so  when  we  can  possibly  avoid  it. 

Q.  Yott  speak  of  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs ;  yon  are  not  practically  ac- 
quainted with  the  fishing  there  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Are  yon  acquainted  with  the  discouragement  shown  there  to  the 
mackerel-fishing? — A.  Yes ;  I  am  acquainted  with  it. 

Q.  You  were  referring  to  the  discouragement  shown  by  the  Jersey- 
men  ? — A.  I  was  speaking  of  their  discouraging  the  mackerel-fishiDg. 

Q.  Do  you  know  why  they  discourage  it  ? — A.  Because  they  find  cod- 
fishing  is  more  profitable.  They  are  entirely  engaged  in  the  foreign 
codfish  trade  with  the  Mediterranean. 

Q.  They  are  not  engaged  in  mackerel-fishing  at  all  ? — A.  Just  for  bait. 

By  Mr.  Trescott: 

Q.  You  have  mentioned  about  the  investment  of  capital  in  the  mack- 
erel-fishing  in  Gloucestf.r.  Can  you  tell  the  variation  in  the  price  of 
mackerel  during  the  \&it  10  or  15  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  minimum  and  maximum  as  you  recollect  it? — A.  From  1860 
to  1865  the  price  averaged  $11.60 ;  from  1866  to  1872  the  average  was 
$14. 

Q.  How  much  has  it  varied  in  price  ? — A.  The  difference  between 
$11.60  and  $14. 

Q.  During  the  last  10  or  15  years  what  has  been  the  minimum  and 
what  the  maximum  price  ?  I  understand  it  has  varied  from  $14  to  $25. 
—A.  In  1860  it  was  $12;  1862,  $12  j  1863,  $11;  1864,  $9;  1805,  $14; 
1866,  $13;  1867,  $13;  1868,  $11 ;  1869,  $17;  1870,  $22;  1871,  $23;  1872, 
$11;  1874,  $14;  1875,  $10  ;  1876,  $17. 

Q.  It  has  varied  from  $11  to  about  $24? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  an  indication  that  mackerel  is  a  fish  of  variable  value  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  has  been  proved  also  by  the  condition  of  the  fisheries  and 
prosperity  of  the  fishermen,  which  have  varied  during  different  years f— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that,  as  far  as  Gloucester  is  concerned,  a  vast 
amount  of  the  capital  employed  would  be  withdrawn  if  it  were  not 
where  it  is? — A.  I  think  the  same  rule  will  apply  to  almost  any  business. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  the  most  the  men  do  is  to  make  a  living,  and 
that  they  keep  the  capital  invested  in  the  business  because  they  cannot 
change  it? — A.  If  a  man  goes  into  a  particular  business  he  must  do  that 
to  succeed. 

Q.  The  mackerel  fishing  is  a  variable  fishing,  is  it  not? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  prices  are  also  variable  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  And  with  regard  to  Gloucester;  the  capital  having  been  employed 
in  that  business  so  long,  giving  employment  to  so  many  people,  it  can- 
not be  chtk.nged  to  another  channel  at  once,  but  the  investment  of  that 
capital  is  uo  indication  of  any  pecuniary  value  of  the  fisheries!— A.  1 
think  it  is,  for  this  reason:  it  has  been  steadily  raised  year  after  year. 

Q.  Largely  so? — A.  I  think  largely  so  in  20  years;  I  have  known  it 
for  about  20  years. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  increase  in  the  last  six  years? — A.  I  think  it 
has  been  a  good  deal.  They  have  invested  a  great  deal  of  capital  during 
the  last  six  years  in  expensive  seines.  More  money  has  been  invested 
in  that  way  during  the  last  six  years  than  was  .during  the  previous  six 
years  in  vessels. 

Q.  ts  there  a  larger  number  of  vessels  also?— A.  I  think  so. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


385 


mployed 
it  can- 
of  that 
?— A.  I 
;er  year, 
uown  it 

think  it 
I  during 
nvested 
riouB  sis 


Q.  Do  you  mean  coming  up  here? — A.  I  mean  engaged  in  the  Ameri- 
can fisheries.    Less  vessels  cotne  here. 

Q.  Has  not  the  capital  invested  in  the  fishing  business  in  Gloucester 
diminished? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  think  that  has  increased  also  ? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  That  it  has  increased  in  i  he  American  fisheries,  and  in  the  fisheries 
of  the  Gulf  also? — A.  They  have  increased  the  amount  of  capital  invested 
in  seines  and  improved  modes  of  taking  fish,  which  have  cost  iu  some 
instances  nearly  as  much  as  the  vessels  themselves.  I  think  also  the 
names  of  vessels  has  increased. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  calculations  made  as  to  the  number  of  vessels 
coming  into  the  fisheries,  and  the  catches  made;  that  is  not  an  estimate 
that  can  be  relied  on — it  is  a  guess  after  all?  In  regard  to  the  350 
American  vessels  going  there,  that  is  an  inference  from  the  general  run 
of  the  business? — A.  They  know  pretty  well.  Canso,  Souris,  and  George- 
town are  generally  the  headquarters  of  the  fleet  in  the  gulf.  The  skip- 
pers come  ashore,  and  are  communicative.  In  fact,  in  many  instances 
they  are  interested  in  each  other's  vessels,  and  they  look  after  the  catch. 
They  can  tell  pretty  well  what  it  is. 

Q.  It  would  be  no  more  certain  than  the  estimate  of  a  storekeeper  of 
the  number  of  people  who  entered  his  store  in  a  day  ? — A.  A  great  deal 
more  so. 

Q,  Why  ? — A.  The  fishermen  and  those  in  the  fisheries  know  as  well 
as  a  matter  of  that  kind  can  be  known  bow  many  barrels  vessels  have 
got.   It  is  pretty  reliable — as  reliable  as  anything  you  can  get. 

Q.  If  there  were  a  $2  license  on  each  vessel,  would  you  take  that  gen- 
eral estimate  in  arriving  at  the  number  of  vessels  ? — A.  I  have  never 
done  that  in  regard  to  vessels,  but  I  have  done  so  with  the  takes  of 
boats.    I  have  bought  out  a  day's  fishing  in  that  way. 

Q.  But  no  fisherman  would  take  a  guess  like  that  ? — A.  If  a  master 
of  a  fishing  vessel,  with  whom  I  was  well  acquainted  as  an  honest, 
straightforward  man,  said  he  had  340  or  350  barrels,  I  should  see  no 
reason  to  doubt  him. 

Q.  What  sort  of  accuracy  is  to  be  attached  to  that  estimate  of  the 
number  of  vessels  on  the  coast  ?  Is  it  not  guess- work  ? — A.  It  is  guess- 
vovk  to  a  certain  extent.  It  is  as  near  as  you  can  tell  from  what  is 
heard  from  one  and  another. 

Q.  It  is  hearsay  ? — A.  It  is  as  nearly  accurate  as  you  can  get  anything 
of  that  kind. 

Q.  It  is  an  impression  ? — A.  It  does  not  arise  from  an  impression.  A 
vesiiel  may  come  into  Georgetown  with  a  broken  spar,  and  the  captain 
state  that  there  are  75  vessels  at  the  Magdalen  Islands.  Another  ves- 
sel would  report  100  vessels  in  Bay  Chaleurs.  That  is  the  only  way  in 
which  you  can  get  at  the  number  of  vessels  in  the  bay. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  catch;  is  there  any  more  certainty  about  that? 
—A.  About  tlie  same. 

Q.  If  300  vessels  were  fishing  together  inshore,  lee-bowing  each  other, 
ai.(l  they  drifted  outside  the  limits,  no  estimate  could  be  made  of  the 
quantity  of  fish  caught  inside  and  outside  the  limits,  even  if  the  num- 
ber of  barrels  caught  were  known  ?  All  in  regard  to  the  number  of 
vessels  and  the  catch  made  is  a  pretty  general  estimate? — A.  It  is  jnst 
such  an  estimate  as  you  would  procure  yourself  if  you  were  apiiointed 
to  procure  an  estimate.  There  is  no  other  way  of  procuring  it.  I  don't 
see  any  other  way. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  transshipment,  do  you  refer  specially  to  the 
transshipment  at  a  point  and  down  the  railroad  to  Gharlottetowu  f — A. 
25f 


38« 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


:| 


It  is  sometimes  seut  to  Cbarlottetown.  I  can  send  a  barrel  of  fish  from 
Oascumpecqae  to  Boston  for  80  cents,  from  Charlottetown  for  GO  cents, 
from  Georgetown  or  Souris  for  80  cents.  The  throngh  rate  from  either 
of  these  ports,  to  which  the  railway  runs,  to  Charlottetown,  is  only  20 
cents  a  barrel. 

Q.  Tou  think  the  privilege  of  transshipment  is  equivalent  to  an  extra 
trip  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  One  extra  in  three  trips  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  a  saving  in  time,  not  in  outfit?— A.  If  a  vessel  fits  oat  with  13 
men  for  500  barrels,  and  catches  200,  they  can  be  at  once  sent  home. 
If  five  vessels  belonging  to  a  Gloucester  firm  are  in  the  bay,  each  hav 
ing  200  barrels  of  No.  3  on  board,  and  a  large  fleet  is  coming  down  with 
seines,  they  can  land  the  barrels  at  Charlottetown,  and  on  Friday  the 
owner  can  have  the  proceeds  in  his  counting-room. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  trade  with  the  American  fishermen,  you  do  uot 
consider  it  directly  of  very  great  advantage,  but  simply  as  an  incidental 
advantage  ? — A.  We  are  very  glad  to  have  it. 

Q.  Not  as  a  matter  of  pecuniary  calculation  ? — A.  No.  It  is  looked 
on,  as  all  matters  of  business  are,  as  mutually  advantageous. 

Q.  It  is  not  a  privilege  granted  to  either  party  ? — A.  No  man  goes  to 
a  man  to  buy  unless  he  wants  the  goods. 

Q.  No  man  would  pay  for  the  privilege  of  being  permitted  to  buy  ?— 
A.  I  and  my  neighbors  are  very  glad  to  have  the  trade.  I  suppose  it  is 
because  we  have  the  stuff  which  suits  them  that  they  buy  it. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  mackerel  fishing  carried  on  from 
Gloucester  in  your  British  waters,  has  increased  within  the  last  tive  or 
six  years  ? — A.  I  did  not  say  so.  I  was  asked  whether  I  believed  that 
the  capital  so  invested  in  Gloucester  within  the  last  six  years,  had  iu 
creased,  and  I  say  yes. 

Q.  Then  this  mackerel  fishing  in  British  waters,  during  the  last  five  or 
six  years  has  not  increased,  but  diminished  f — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  And  steadily  diminished? — A.  I  think  so;  and  more  particularly 
during  the  last  two  and  three  years;  but  I  also  think,  judging  from 
present  prospects,  and  the  information  I  at  present  have  from  the  fish- 
ing grounds,  and  my  correspotidents,  that  the  catch  of  this  year  will  a 
little  more  than  compensate  for  it  as  respects  the  average. 

Q.  Have  you  late  information  ? — A.  I  have  it,  dating  within  the  last 
few  days. 

Q.  Within  a  week?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  latest  I  got  was  the  other  day. — A.  I  had  a  letter  from  my 
agents  dated  Thursday  last. 

Q.  From  where  ? — A.  Boston ;  and  they  say  a  very  large  fleet  has 
left  for  the  bay ;  that  a  large  fleet  will  follow ;  that  there  is  no  fishiug 
on  the  American  coast ;  and  that  most  of  the  vessels  there  report  from 
four  to  ten  barrels  caught.    I  believe  that  400  seiners  will  come  up. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  of  the  catch  this  year  off  Block  Island  ? — A.  No,  I 
did  not.  We  generally  can  tell  at  this  time  of  the  year  what  the  pros 
pects  are.  If  the  fish  do  not  strike  the  American  coast  before  July, 
they  do  not  so  afterwards. 

Q.  If  a  email-sized  vessel  off  Block  Island  caught  150  barrels  iu  a  few 
days,  do  you  think  it  would  indicate  that  the  fish  were  moving  in  that 
direction  ? — A.  It  would  indicate  that  they  were  coming  or  going.  They 
might  be  going  back. 

Q.  As  late  as  August  ? — A.  They  very  often  do. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


387 


By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Yon  told  Mr.  Foster  that  the  fisheries  bad  decreased  daring  the 
last  five  or  six  years?— A.  The  n amber  of  vessels  coming  to  the  gulf, 
during  the  last  five  or  six  years,  has  decreased. 

Q.  What  about  the  fish  themselves  ? — A.  The  fish  are  there. 

Q.  The  fish  have  been  there  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  the  namber  of  vessels  fishing  has  been  smaller  f — A.  The  best 
proof  of  that  is  the  exports  of  Prince  Edward  Island  for  that  period. 

Q.  What  have  they  been  ? — A.  In  1865,  the  last  year  of  the  treaty, 
they  amounted  to  $181,675  in  value.  This  is  taken  from  a  book  en- 
titled "  Fishermen's  Memorial  and  Record  Book,"  by  George  W.  Proc- 
tor, of  Gloucester,  Mass. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  For  what  years  ?— A.  From  1830  to  October,  1873.  In  1865,  the 
last  year  of  the  treaty,  the  exports  of  Prince  Edward  Island  for  the 
current  year  ending  first  of  January  amounted  to  $181,675.  For  the 
corresponding  time  in  Gloucester  there  were  141,000  barrels  caught. 
In  18G6,  the  first  year  of  the  abrogation  of  the  treaty,  the  exports  of 
Priuce  EdwanI  Island  were  $79,990  in  value,  while  in  Gloucester  there 
was  a  falling  oft"  from  141,575  barrels  in  1805  to  112,856  barrels  in  1866. 
In  1867  the  exports  for  the  island  amounted  to  $119,195,  while  in  Glou- 
cester tbere  was  a  falling  oflf  from  112,000  to  103,000  barrels.  Our  ex- 
ports rose  again  in  1868  from  $119,195  to  $161,836 ;  and  for  Gloucester, 
in  186S,  there  was  a  falling  off  from  103,000  to  75,000  barrels.  The 
exports  in  1869  amounted  in  all  to  $109,625 ;  in  1870  they  amounted  to 
$176,280;  and  in  1871  to  $146,925;  while  the  number  of  barrels  for 
Gloucester  decreased  from  146,000  in  1871  to  111,000  in  1872. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  Did  the  fish  exports  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  from  1854  to  1866, 
increase  or  decrease  ? — A.  They  increased. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  wishes  to  know  where  you  obtain  this  information  ? — 
A.  From  the  journals  of  Prince  Edward  Island ;  from  tables  I  prepared 
myself  when  I  was  a  member  of  the  government. 

Q.  And  you  can  say  whether  they  are  correct  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  prepared  them  yourself? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Are  they  in  print  ? — A.  Yes.    For  the  three  years  from  1867  to 
1860  the  exports  increased,  and  from  1861  to  1865  they  decreased.    This 
is  what  the  exports  show. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Are  the  fish  transshipped  as  American  or  British  fish  ? — A.  As 
American. 

Q.  Suppose  Americans  buy  fish  from  the  island  fishermen,  do  they 
then  generally  come  under  the  head  of  American  fish  ? — A.  That  is  very 
seldom  done.  During  the  period  after  the  abrofration  of  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty  the  Americans  were  permitted  by  their  government  to  hire 
British  boats  and  fish,  and  send  the  catch  in  afterwards  as  American 
mackerel, 

Q.  And  they  did  that? — A.  Yes;  in  some  few  instances. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 
Q.  Can  you  give  us  the  exports  for  later  years  ?    What  is  the  last  year 
for  which  you  give  them  ?— A.  For  1872. 


388 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


Q.  Give  US  the  mackerel  exports  since  1872. — A.  I  have  not  got  re- 
turns for  the  succeeding  years;  you  can  readily  understand  that  since  I 
have  left  local  politics  and  gone  into  Dominion  politics,  I  have  not  paid 
the  same  attention  to  this  question  that  I  did  previously. 

Q.  You  have  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  statements  contained  in  the 
report  of  the  Department  of  Fisheries  for  1876  are  correct ! — A.  I  have 
very  grave  doubts  about  it. 

Q.  What  is  the  matter  with  it? — A.  I  do  not  think  that  it  properly 
represents  the  exports,  and  particularly  as  relates  to  P  .ce  Edward 
Island,  and  I  will  show  you  why :  we  very  often  have  to  load  a  vessel 
at  Tignish,  and  while  loading  off  shore,  there  may  come  up  a  breeze, 
and  she  will  go  to  Shediac  or  Charlottetown ;  sometimes  she  will  sail  to 
Shediac,  the  fish  being  sent  on  the  Intercolonial  Railway  to  St.  John, 
and  from  thence  by  steamer.  This  fish  is  generally  put  down  either  to 
the  United  States  or  to  New  Brunswick  as  the  case  may  be,  by  tbe  pa- 
pers of  St.  John ;  I  know  that  one  year  I  myself  shipped  more  fish 
than  appeared  in  the  returns  altogether. 

Q.  What  year  was  that! — A.  I  forget.  It  was  within  the  last  seven 
years.  In  comparing  the  statistics  of  the  United  States  with  our  own, 
it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  fish  which  our  people  eat  are  never  in- 
cluded in  these  figures  at  all. 

Q.  Who  now  makes  up  the  returns  f — A.  They  are  taken  from  the 
custom-bouse  returns  for  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Who  is  the  collector  I — A.  Mr.  Currier,  of  Charlottetown. 

Q.  Who  collects  the  returns  at  tbe  different  ports  ? — A.  We  have 
only  one  port,  speaking  from  a  custom-house  standpoint,  and  that  is 
Charlottetown ;  all  the  others  are  subordinate  to  it. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  when  you  made  the  returns  it  was  true  that  most 
of  your  mackerel  went  to  the  United  States? — A.  This  was  pretty  much 
the  case.    Some  few  went  to  the  West  Indies. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  The  Dominion  statistics  are  in  your  opinion  erroneous  ? — A.  I  speak 
most  confidently  in  this  respect  for  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  But  that  does  not  improve  your  confidence  in  them  with  regard  to 
other  places  ? — A.  I  cannot  speak  concerning  them  in  that  relation. 

Q.  In  other  words,  Mr.  Howland,  these  Dominion  estimates  are  auder- 
estimates  in  your  judgment? — A.  They  are.  I  speak  more  confidently 
regarding  Prince  Edward  Island. 

By  Hon.  W.  Kellogg : 

Q.  Are  these  returns  made  from  the  custom-house,  or  by  ofiicers  under 
obligations  to  collect  them  ? — A.  If  cleared,  they  are  made  at  the  cus- 
tom-house. 

Q.  They  are  made  under  the  provisions  of  a  law,  are  they  not!— A. 
Yes.  If  a  vessel  clears  at  the  custom-house  this  appears  in  the  returns; 
but  if  not,  not. 

Q.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  officials,  according  to  the  provisions  of  the 
law,  to  prepare  them  ? — A.  Yes ;  the  returns  apply  to  all  the  vessels 
that  are  entered.  I  think  you  will  find  it  mentioned  in  a  return  that 
238  barrels  of  oysters  were  exported  from  Prince  Edward  Island  when 
the  actual  export  was  nearly  6,000  or  7,000  barrels. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 
Q.  Would  you  state,  with  regard  to  a  report  read  here  the  other  day 
representing  that  very  great  distress  has  existed  amongst  the  fisher- 
men, whether  there  is  any  great  depression  in  connection  with  the  fisb- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


389 


eries,  and  destitation  amoDgst  the  people?— A..  Suoli  does  not  exist. 
We  bad  one  year  when  the  fisheries  were  in  a  depressed  state,  but  yoa 
coald  not  say  exactly  tliat  destitntioa  existed,  because  our  flshermea 
are  partly  tisburmen  and  partly  farmers. 

Q.  There  was  depression  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  year  was  that  f — A.  I  think  it  was  1861. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  It  was  1861!— A.  1861  or  '2. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 
Q.  Was  it  not  1868 1— A.  Yes ;  it  was  1868. 

Q.  Was  it  a  very  serious  matter  at  all  ? — A.  It  was  not  general  over 
the  island. 

Q.  It  was  a  temporary  depression  ? — A.  Yes  ;  it  was  confined  to  one 
particular  place. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Which  part  of  the  island  f — A.  The  northeastern. 
By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Has  anything  of  that  kind  since  occurred  ? — A.  No ;  I  was  repre- 
senting this  district  at  the  time  in  the  government,  and  I  will  tell  you  how 
we  remedied  it.  We  appropriated  £1,000  to  build  a  breakwater  for 
the  use  of  the  fishermen,  and  we  gave  them  money  in  the  spring  of  the 
year  to  buy  seed.  They  repaid  us  in  lumber  in  the  winter.  I  was 
leader  of  the  government  at  the  time. 

Q.  You  mentioned  1861  ? — A.  1  was  mistaken  ;  it  was  1868. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  any  other  year  of  depression  during  the  past 
twenty-five  years? — A.  No. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  What  was  the  cause,  or  was  there  a  cause,  for  the  depression  of 
1868? — A.  It  extended  not  only  to  the  fisheries,  but  also  to  agriculture. 
We  had  a  low  price  for  fish,  and  a  poor  crop,  both  together,  and  a  late 
spring;  the  ice  was  on  the  coast,  as  was  the  case  two  years  ago,  and 
the  farmers  did  not  get  their  crops  in  until  late ;  consequently  they  had 
a  poor  crop. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Was  the  harvest  bad  that  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  this  the  case  elsewhere  than  on  the  island  ? — A.  It  existed 
only  on  that  portion  of  the  coast  which  was  exposed  to  the  northeast 
winds. 

Q.  Did  the  failure  of  the  harvest  extend  to  Nova  Scotia  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Tbey  had  "a  bountiful  harvest,"  to  use  the  words  of  the  governor 
in  Nova  Scotia,  with  a  total  failure  of  the  fisheries  ? — A.  I  could  not 
speak  with  regard  to  New  Brunswick. 

Q.  You  were  afflicted  with  a  failure  of  the  fisheries  and  harvest  to- 
gether?—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  there  not  a  diminution  in  the  catch  of  fish  as  well  as  a  low 
price  for  them  in  1868? — A.  No;  in  1867  the  exports  amounted  to 
$119,195,  and  in  1868  to  $161,836. 

Q.  In  the  aggregate  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Give  us  the  number  of  barrels  for  1867  and  1868  ? — A.  I  cannot 

do  80. 

Q.  Give  us  the  prices  for  1867  and  '8 1— A.  In  1868  the  price  was  as 
low  as  $11,  and  in  1867  it  was  $13.38. 


390 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Two  dollars  less  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  were  the  quantities  for  1867  and  '8  f— A.  For  1807  and  '8 
the  values  exported  were  respectively  $U0,1D5  and  $161,830. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  This  was  the  case  notwithstanding  the  fall  in  the  price  1 — A.  Yes. 
By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Then  you  must  have  exported  a  great  deal  more  when  yoii  were 
poor  than  before? — A.  No.  You  will  remember  that  the  reports  ure 
made  to  the  end  of  the  fiscal  year,  the  31  st  of  December,  for  Prince 
Edward  IslaDd.  The  figures  for  the  Ist  of  January,  1868,  would  be  for 
the  preceding  summer — the  summer  of  1867. 

Q.  Then  you  have  given  the  figures  wrong  ? — A.  No.  As  you  will 
readily  understand,  it  was  in  the  winter  season  of  the  year  of  depres- 
sion that  our  fishermen  principally  felt  the  shortcoming  in  the  crop. 

Q.  What  were  the  exports  for  the  year  after  the  year  of  depression  ?— 
A.  They  then  amounted  to  $109,025. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  price  in  1869? — A.  $17.  You  will  find  from 
the  statement  which  I  have  made  that  the  American  shipping  fell  fruiu 
203,000  tons  to  84,000  tons  in  1868 ;  and  you  will  now  see  the  reason  for 
the  advance  in  price;  84,000  tons  could  not  catch  mackerel  euongli  to 
supply  the  demand. 

Q.  W^hat  was  the  tonnage  of  the  American  vessels  in  1869  ? — A.  I  do 
not  know. 

Q.  With  what  do  you  compare  the  84,000  tons  ?— A.  With  1860 ;  you 
had  203,000  tons  then. 

Q.  Let  us  see  what  your  figures  lead  to ;  in  1800  you  were  prosper- 
ous with  203,000  tons  of  American  fishing  vessels,  and  in  1808,  two 
years  after,  when  the  American  vessels  fell  in  tonnage  to  84,000,  your 
yield  declined  in  value,  and  the  price  to  $11  a  barrel  ? — A.  No ;  when 
I  quoted  you  the  figures  for  1807  they  were  the  figures  for  the  summer 
preceding. 

Q.  What  was  the  American  tonnage  for  the  year  of  depression  ?— A. 
84,000. 

Q.  Now,  I  want  you  to  take  the  last  preceding  year  of  which  you 
have  the  tonnage  and  the  product  of  the  fisheries,  and  make  a  compari- 
son ? — A.  I  make  the  comparison  by  the  price. 

Q.  When  you  had  203,000  tons  of  American  shipping  engaged  iu  the 
fisheries,  by  your  own  showing  your  own  fisheries  were  prosperous?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  when  you  had  only  84,000  tons  of  American  shipping,  thea 
your  own  fisheries  were  in  a  deplorable  condition  ? — A.  The  price  rose 
from  $11  to  $17. 

Q.  But,  then,  the  value  of  your  fisheries  f<I',  '  '  'ley  not? — A.  They 
fell  owing  to  a  bad  season's  catch. 

w'ii«>">   -  from  your  waters,  you  were 
0  competitif"    with  203,000  tons 
were  better  o.i  the  first  year  of 
li   III  our  v»aters. 

ourself  to  the  statistics  we 

and 
you 


Q.  With  the  withdrawal  of  this 
very  much  worse  oflf  than  when  ii 
of  American  shipping  ? — A.  No ; 
the  withdrawal  of  your  fishermen 

Q.  Will  you  be  good  enough  to  confine 
were  talking  about  a  minute  ago,  and  go  v>ii  with  the  comparison, 
not  fly  into  another  branch  of  the  subject;  make  any  compari    !i 


choose  afterward,  but  stick  at  present  to  this.  I  want  you  to  answer 
this  question :  When  there  were  203,000  tons  of  American  fishing  ves- 
sels, your  own,  the  Prince  Edward  Island  fisheries,  were  prosperous, 
were  they  not  T — A.  In  1862,  no,  sir. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


391 


Q.  Is  it  1862  you  are  giving  us  ?  You  called  it  ISiJT.— A.  In  1854 
there  were  a  certnin  number  of  tons  ot  tlsliing  ve8.selH,  and  in  1862 
another  certain  number,  and  in  1808  another  certain  number.  In  1862, 
the  tonnage  «va8  203,000,  and  in  1868  it  waa  84,000. 

Q.  Have  you  no  figures  for  tonnage  between  1862  and  18081 — A.  No, 
I  have  not. 

Q.  And  in  1862,  you  say  that  your  fisheries  were  not  prosperous,  do 
yon  ?— A.  In  1802  the  exports  were  worth  $10,320. 

Q.  Your  fisheries  had  not  begun  to  grow  at  that  time? — A.  In  1861 
the  exports  amounted  to  $11,.")25. 

Q.  Previous  to  18(>l  the  exports  were  hirge,  were  they  not? — A.  We 
started  tioin  1857,  when  tiiey  were  worth  $25,()00 ;  in  185S  they  were 
worth  838,440 ;  in  lS->!>,  $33.8!M) ;  in  180(),  $30,760  ;  and  then  they  fell 
iu  value  from  $30,000  to  $II,.j25  in  IsOl.  In  1862  they  were  worth 
$1!V320;  in  1863,  $27,045  ;  in  1864,  $42,775  ;  in  1865,  $181,075;  in  1866, 
87y,9!H);  in  1867,  $110,105;  in  1868,  $161,836;  in  1860,  $100,625;  iu 
1870,  $176,280;  in  1871,  $146,025;  and  in  1872,  $111,512. 

Q.  What  was  the  year  for  which  you  gave  the  figures  $119,195? — 
A.  1807;  that  would  be  for  the  summer  of  1866. 

Q.  You  have  no  figures  for  years  subsequent  to  1872  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  For  what  years  have  you  the  tonnage  ? — A.  I  take  it  from  a  report 
made  to  the  Congress  of  the  United  States. 

Q.  Whose  report  is  that? — A.  General  Butler's,  and  Judge  Poland's, 
and  Mr.  Beckett's. 

Q.  For  what  years  have  you  the  tonnage  of  the  American  fishincj  ves- 
sels?—A.  In  1854,  this  was  147,000;  in  1802,  203,000;  and  in  1868, 
84,000. 

Q.  What  did  you  say  the  exports  from  Prince  Edward  Island  were 
for  the  vear  when  the  tonnage  was  203,000  ? — A.  In  1862  they  amounted 
to  $19,320. 

Q.  Have  you  got  the  aggregate  i^roduct  for  that  year? — A.  That  in- 
c'udes  it. 

Q.  You  give  the  aggregate  product  of  the  fisheries  as  well  as  the 
exports,  don't  you? — A.  These  relate  to  the  fish  exports  generally; 
there  ia  no  way  of  getting  at  the  other  product  that  I  know  of. 

Q.  Am  I  to  understand  from  you  that  the  official  returns  regarding 
the  other  products,  which  are  found  in  your  papers,  are  not  trust- 
worthy ? — A.  Touching  what  the  people  use  ? 

Q.  I  mean  the  total  product  of  the  fisheries  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 
—A.  There  is  no  way  to  get  returns  iu  Prince  Edward  Island  that  I 
know  of,  except  from  the  customhouse. 

Q.  Then  a  recapitulation  concerning  the  yield  of  the  fisheries  of  Prince 
Edward  Island  for  particular  years  would  not  be  trustworthy  ? — A, 
Only  with  respect  to  the  exports. 

Q.  I  find  a  recapitulation  of  the  yield  of  these  fisheries  for  1876  in  a 
report.—A.  This  may  have  been  obtained  since  we  went  into  confeder- 
ation. They  may  now  secure  the  actual  results  by  sending  to  the  dif- 
ferent places  around  the  coast. 

Q.  And  you  do  not  know  but  that  it  may  be  accurate  ? — A.  It  may 
be  so. 

Q.  Can  you  give  an  estimate  from  your  own  knowledge  regarding 
the  quantity  of  mackerel  eaten  by  the  inhabitants  of  Prince  Edward 
Islaud  ill  a  year  ? — ^A.  I  could  not. 

Q.  How  many  of  them  are  there  ?— A.  100,000. 

Q.  Do  they  eat  a  great  deal  of  mackerel  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  that 
they  do. 


392 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  they  use  a  good  deal  of  pickled  mackerel  ? — A.  I  think  that 
they  do  not  use  mach  of  it. 

Q.  Toa  woald  sappose  that  much  the  largest  proportion  of  it  would 
be  exported Y — A.  1  think  so;  a  good  many  mackerel  are  sold  in  the 
fresh  state. 

Q.  But  that  would  not  be  anything  like  the  quantity  exported!— 
A.  No 

Q.  Then  there  must  be  some  mistake  where  I  find  it  claimed  that  you 
eat  five  times  as  many  as  you  export  f — A.  A  good  many  fish  are  sent 
from  the  island  in  this  manner;  for  instance,  from  the  fisheries  of  the 
northern  section  of  the  island.  It  is  about  35  miles  from  North  Cape  to 
Point  Escuminac,  at  the  entrance  to  the  river  Miramichi,  where  a  very 
large  number  of  vessels  are  to  be  found  in  the  summer,  and  a  great 
many  fish  are  taken  thither  and  sold  among  the  shipping.  Of  course 
these  sales  do  not  appear  among  the  exports. 

Q.  What  proportion  would  these  sales  bear  to  the  exports  f — A.  I  do 
not  think  it  would  be  more  than  10  per  cent,  from  that  section. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  more  than  ten  per  cent,  of  the  mackerel  sold 
does  not  get  into  the  exports  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  per  centage  would  you  suppose  ? — A.  Perhaps  fifteen  per 
cent. 

Q.  Thai:  is  your  estimate  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  would  add  fifteen  per  cent,  to  the  amount  of  exports  ?— 
A.  Y^es ;  this  would  be  about  it  as  near  as  J  could  tell. 

Q.  Taking  the  last  return  I  have  here,  for  1876,  I.  find  that  your 
exports  amounted  to  $80,289,  and  fifteen  per  cent,  of  that  would  be 
$12,000,  would  it  notf — A.  1  do  not  kno»v  whether  those  figures  are 
procured  from  the  custom-house  or  w'bether  they  are  made  up  from  in- 
formation received  from  the  different  fishing  stations. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  Hom«».  respectable  person  is  responsible  for  these 
statistics,  and  that  his  opinion  is  as  good  as  the  opinion  which  one  can 
probably  get  from  the  average  of  witnesses  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Adding  the  $12,000  that  would  make  $92,000  worth  of  mackerel 
sold.  Do  you  think  that  they  would  eat  $96,000  worth  more  on  the 
island  f — A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  You  would  suppose  that  $92,000  would  represent  the  value  of  the 
fish  thus  sold  or  exported.  Mow,  could  you  give  an  estimate  of  the 
value  of  the  fish  thej'  would  eat  and  consume  on  the  island !— A.  I 
speak  more  particularly  respecting  the  section  of  the  country  with 
which  I  am  acquainted.  I  should  think  that  there  would  be,  taking  the 
three  counties  together,  about  25  per  cent,  eaten. 

Q.  Twenty-five  per  cent,  of  $92,000  ?— A.  Twenty-five  percent,  of  the 
exports  would  be  consumed  at  home. 

Q.  And  one-quarter  of  $92,000  would  be  $23,000?— A.  Yes, 

Q.  Then  $116,000  would  be  your  total  estimate  ¥— A.  I  could  not  say 
positively,  but  I  presume  it  would  be  about  that  figure ;  I  think  it  would 
be  about  25  per  cent,  of  the  exports  returned  from  the  custom-house, 
and  1  consider  that  you  would  then  have  the  value  of  the  fish  exported 
and  consumed,  and  25  p  v  cut.  of  $80,000  added  to  it  would  make 
$100,000. 

Q.  Then  adding  the  15  per  cent,  mentioned,  your  total  estimate  of  the 
yield  would  be  about  $112,000! — A.  Yes;  if  what  you  state  is  »;orrect. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  tiuie  when  the  proportion  of  fish  sold  bat 
which  did  not  get  into  the  returns,  and  the  proportion  consumed  and 
exi>ort«d,  would  vary  in  your  judgment  from  the  estimates  you  have 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


393 


now  given  as? — A.  I  do  not  think  that  there  would  be  much  varia- 
tion. 

Q.  We  will  get  a  tolerably  fair  idea  of  what  the  yield  is  from  this 
estimate  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  do  not  eat  much  more  than  you  used  to,  or  sell  more,  that 
does  not  go  through  the  custom-bouse? — A.  The  rule  applying  to  fish 
as  well  as  to  everything  else  is,  that  the  more  you  get,  the  more  you  eat 
and  sell. 

Q.  Does  your  experience  show  you,  with  reference  to  custom-house 
returns,  that  where  there  is  a  return  of  a  particular  article  at  a  port  of 
export  and  a  return  of  some  article  at  a  port  of  import,  the  returns  for 
the  port  of  import  are  almost  always  more  carefully  made  and  more 
accurate  than  the  other  ? — A.  I  should  judge  that  this  would  be  the  case ; 
and  particularly  so  if  it  related  to  dutiable  goods. 

Q.  And  as  duties  are  levied  on  most  things  imported,  these  returns 
are  a  good  deal  more  accurate  than  those  which  are  prepared  merely 
for  statistical  purposes  ? — A.  Yes ;  unless  vessels  were  lost  on  the  voy- 
age. 

Q.  So  you  would,  as  a  general  rule,  regard  the  statistics  of  the  port  of 
import  as  more  trustworthy  than  those  of  the  port  of  export  ? — A.  Yes, 
with  respect  to  dutiable  goods. 

Q.  And  this  would  not  be  the  case  in  any  event  ? — A.  No,  not  if  it 
coDcerued  free  goods.  I  do  not  think  that  the  same  attention  is  paid 
to  them  as  to  dutiable  articles. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  your  estimate  of  the  value  of  the 
fish  exported  from  Prince  Edward  Island  for  1870  is  $80,000  ?— A.  No, 
sir;  I  did  not  say  I  knew  what  it  Avas. 

Mr.  Foster.  I  assumed  that  from  a  book  which  I  have  in  my  hand. 

Sir  Alexander  Galt.  We  have  had  other  evidence  on  the  point. 

Mr.  Foster.  I  take  it  from  a  report  regarding  the  fisheries  for  the 
year  ending  the  3lst  of  December,  1876.  What  ])uzzled  me  and  led  me 
to  malie  these  inquiries  was  the  extraordinary  discrepancy  existing  be- 
tween the  yield  of  the  fisheries  put  down  and  the  exports.  It  puts  down 
the  yield  of  the  fisheries  at  25,383  barrels,  at  $8  a  barrel,  making  a 
valuation  of  $203,064;  and  then  the  exports  are  set  down  at  $80,289  in 
value.  It  seemed  to  me  very  extraordinary  that  so  much  fish  should 
have  been  eaten  on  the  island,  and  I  wanted  to  see  what  was  the  state 
of  the  ciise. 

Sir  Alexander  Galt.  I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Ilowlan  which  of 
these  two  statements  he  considers  to  be  most  in  accordance  with  the 
facts.  This  gives  the  cutch  of  mackerel  at  25,383  barrels,  valued  at  $8 
a  barrel,  making  $203,0(J4.  What  becomes  of  the  yield,  Mr.  Howlan  f— 
A.  Otie  portion  of  it  becomes  an  item  ot  export,  and  another  portion  an 
item  of  use  among  our  own  people ;  and  then,  as  I  stated  with  regard 
to  the  Northern  Fishery,  a  very  large  number  of  vessels  are  found  dur- 
ing the  summer  sea.son  about  Miramichi  Bay,  and  our  fislierm<*n  go 
over  and  supply  them.  Again,  opposite  the  eastern  extremity  of  the 
iaiaud  there  is  a  large  population,  and  the  fishermen  from  about  Murray 
Bay  cross  over  in  their  boats  and  sell  fish  to  these  miners;  and  these 
sales  necessarily  do  not  find  their  way  into  the  exports.  These,  taken 
in  connection  with  the  returns  from  the  custom-house,  would,  no  doubt, 
afford  a  very  correct  estimate  of  the  yield. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 
Q.  Is  the  fish  sold  to  the  Americaus  and  carried  away  in  their  ves- 


394 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


sels  included  iu  the  exports? — A.  These  sales  would  not  appear  in  oar 
retarns,  but  in  those  of  the  United  States. 

Bj  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 
Q.  Explain  the  distinction  with  regard  to  the  product  of  the  fisheries  • 
some  fish,  you  say,  are  sold  in  Miramicbi  Bay,  and  some  are  sold  to 
Americans  on  ship-board  ? — A.  The  sales  in  the  former  case  are  made 
to  British  lumber-ships  of  600,  700,  and  1,200  tons;  the  fishermen  cross 
for  the  purpose  from  North  Cape  to  the  entrance  to  the  Miramiclii  River. 
I  see  that  for  1876  the  quantity  of  mackerel  exported  from  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island  is  put  down  at  9,347.J  barrels,  having  an  aggregate  value 
of  $80,289,  and  that  the  yield  of  these  fisheries  is  put  down  at  2."),.'i83 
barrels.  There  seems  to  be  a  diflference  of  some  16,000  barrels.  The 
number  9,347^  barrels  must  certainly  be  incorrect,  for  a  great  many 
more  are  taken.  If  my  memory  serves  me  right,  in  1870  some  10,000 
barrels  were  taken. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  It  is  not  possible  that  there  is  any  disposition  to  make  the  export 
to  the  United  States  look  pretty  small  f — A.  No,  I  think  that  it  is  a  mis- 
print. 

Q.  The  $80,000  ?  -A.  Yes,  and  tiie  25,000.  I  might  mention  another 
fact.  Iu  two  instances  I  had  vessels  which  were  bound  to  Boston, 
driven  off  shore,  and  I  had  to  write  to  the  comptroller  of  Boston  de- 
tailing the  circumstances  and  sending  a  certificate.  The  vessel  did  not 
have  a  clearance,  and  of  course  that  item  in  our  exports  would  not  ap- 
pear in  the  returns  of  Prince  Edward  Island  for  that  year.  I  make  this 
statement  in  order  that  you  may  know  why  I  think  that  is  evidently  a 
mistake. 

Q.  Which  way  is  it,  do  you  think  ? — A.  I  think  that  there  must  be 
more  than  25,000  barrels  of  mackerel  caught. 

Q.  You  think  that  there  is  a  much  larger  export  to  the  United  States 
than  the  return  shows  ? — A.  I  do. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg: 

Q.  You  said  that  there  are  100,000  people  living  on  Prince  Edward 
Island,  and  that  25  per  cent,  of  them  are  engaged  in  the  prosecution  of 
these  fisheries ;  and  afterwards  you  stated  that  5,000  were  so  engaged. 
I  did  not  quite  understand  you  in  this  respect  ? — A.  The  number,  25,000, 
includes  men,  women,  and  children. 

Q.  The  men,  women,  and  children  do  not  all  go  fishing  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  And  that  is  the  reason  why  you  say  that  5,000  are  so  engaged  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 
Q.  You  stated  that  you  got  your  figures  from  General  Butler's  re- 
port!— A.  Yes. 
Q.  And  you  now  have  that  report  in  your  hands  ? — A.  Yes. 


No.  8. 


The  Conference  met. 


Wednesday,,  A  K«/K«(  8. 


Geobgb  Harbour,  of  Sandy  Beach,  in  the  county  of  Gaspe,  farmer 
and  fisherman,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic 
Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


395 


By  Mr.  Doutre : 

Question.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  fisheries  in  your  neighbor* 
hood ?— Answer.  Yes;  with  the  mackerel  fishery  more  especially  than 
any  otlier. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  acquainted  with  them  ? — A.  Since  T  was 
a  very  small  boy.  I  was  born  there  and  brought  up  there,  and  when  I 
was  able  to  go  in  a  boat  I  went. 

Q.  When  were  you  born  ?^A.  In  1836. 

Q.  Have  the  Americans  been  in  the  habit  of  fishing  near  your  place  ! 
—A.  Tbey  have  for  many  years  past. 

Q.  Well,  where  have  they  been  in  the  habit  of  fishing? — A.  Along 
the  shore  as  far  as  Madeleine  River,  and  as  far  as  Seven  Islands. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  in  Gaspe  Bay  1 — A.  Yes ;  they  have  been  there  both 
bobbing  and  seining. 

Q.  What  is  the  depth  of  the  bay  ? — A.  1.")  miles. 

Q.  What  is  the  largest  number  of  vessels  you  have  seen  fishing  in 
your  neighborhood  at  one  time  or  during  one  summer  ? — A.  300  is  about 
the  average.    I  have  seen  as  much  as  60  at  one  time  in  our  harbor. 

Q.  During  the  season  you  have  seen  as  many  as  300? — A.  Upon  the 
average  there  have  been  as  many  as  300. 

Q.  Outside  of  the  bay  have  you  seen  them  above  and  below  your 
place  ? — A.  I  have. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fish  Jo  they  go  for  ? — A.  Mackerel. 

Q.  At  what  distance  have  you  seen  them  from  the  shore  outside  of 
the  bay? — A.  Very  handy  in.  I  have  seen  them  not  more  than  300 
yards. 

Q.  Where  is  the  mackerel  caught  generally  ? — A.  Inshore. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  I  have  seen  them  right  in  by  the 
rocks.    The  bait  comes  in  and  the  mackerel  follow  the  bait. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  an  American  skipper  would  consider  a  proper 
load  to  go  home  with  ? — A.  300  barrels  would  be  considered  a  good  fair 
catch. 

Q.  Well,  is  it  about  that  number  that  they  catch  ? — A.  Well,  that  is 
at  one  time,  but  they  generally  make  two  trips. 

Q.  What  do  they  catch  in  the  season  ? — A.  Upon  the  average  they 
would  catch  500  barrels  in  the  season  in  their  two  trips ;  they  would  do 
very  fairly  doing  that  in  the  two  trips. 

Q.  Can  you  point  out  the  shore  where  you  live? — A.  Yes  (points  to 
Sandy  Beach  on  the  map) ;  I  live  three  miles  below  what  they  call 
Gaspe  Village. 

Q.  What  is  the  size  of  the  bay  at  the  mouth  ? — A.  It  is  seven  miles 
across;  it  narrows  as  it  runs  up.  Opposite  where  I  live  it  is  only  3 
miles  from  land  to  land,  but  as  you  see  there  is  a  sand  spit  which  runs 
out,  making  it  only  a  mile  and  a  half  from  that  to  the  northern  shore. 

Q.  Well,  they  are  taken  within  I^  miles  of  the  land  ?— A.  They  are 
got  within  three-quarters  of  a  mile  of  the  land  if  they  go  in  the  middle. 

Q.  Well,  it  is  in  the  bay  ? — A.  It  is  in  the  bay  decidedly. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  tonnage  of  the  American  vessels  you  have 
seen  fishing  ?— A.  65  tons. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  of  men  ? — A.  15  men  per  vessel. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  anything  about  the  cod-fishing  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Have  you  any  cod  ? — A.  I  have  caught  cod  myself  in  no  very  large 
quantity,  but  I  have  seen  quantities  caught ;  there  are  lots  taken  in  our 
bay. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  places  where  cod  are  in  the  habit  of  spawningt — 
A.  Tes ;  right  up  iu  this  shallow  part  of  the  bay  (referring  to  map). 


396 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHEE7   COMMISSION. 


»t»iii. 


Q.  What  have  you  seen  of  that  ? — A.  I  have  seen  small  cod-fish  Iq 
the  spring  not  larger  than  two  inches  and  upwards ;  according  as  the 
season  advances  they  get  larger;  in  the  fall  they  are  about  5  inches 
perhaps  not  quite  so  much  as  that.  I  have  seen  quantities  right  up 
there  (i.  e.,  near  Sandy  Beach,  in  the  bay).  I  have  seen  them  in  large 
qaantities  up  there,  so  that  if  you  threw  bait  overboard  the  water  would 
be  thick  with  them  ;  in  fact  you  could  not  heave  down  bait  but  it  would 
be  gone  in  a  second. 

Q.  Outside  in  the  bay,  have  you  fished  forced? — A..  Not  as  a  bus- 
iness, but  I  have  been  in  a  schooner  outside,  and  have  caught  codfish 
for  our  use  on  board  the  schooner;  that  is,  in  aOaspe  schooner. 

Q.  How  far  outside  in  the  bay  did  you  catch  cod  f — A.  We  have 
caught  them  at  different  distances,  from  a  mile  to  five  or  six  miles  frum 
the  shore. 

Q.  Do  you  find  some  within  three  miles? — A.  Plenty. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  American  vessels  fishing  or  seining  in  Gaspe  Bay?— 
A.  I  have,  sir ;  both  bobbing  and  seining. 

Q.  How  long  did  it  take  them  to  get  a  fare? — A.  There  was  oue  man 
that  loaded  in  three  weeks. 

Q.  He  went  back  with  how  many  barrels? — A.  350  barrels,  accordiug 
to  the  statement  of  some  of  the  men. 

Q.  When  was  that  ? — A.  That  was  nine  years  ago,  to  the  best  of  my 
knowledge.  The  second  year  he  returned,  and  two  of  my  brothers  were 
fishing.  They  were  catching  mackerel  very  fast,  when  he  surrounded 
them  with  his  seine,  and  they  had  to  go  away.  It  was  reported  after- 
ward that  one  of  his  schooners  was  made  a  prize  of. 

Q.  How  was  your  brother  fishing? — A.  He  was  in  a  boat  bobbing  for 
mackerel,  at  anchor. 

Q.  Then  that  American  came  along  and  your  brother  had  to  go  away? 
— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  you  show  on  the  map  about  the  place  where  your  brother 
was  fishing,  and  show  the  whole  extent  of  the  fishing  grounds  where  you 
have  seen  other  people  fishing? — A.  I  can  (Refers  to  map  and  points 
out  fishing  grounds.)  It  was  right  inside  of  the  sandy  point  where  they 
swept  around  with  their  seine  and  obliged  my  brother  to  go  away.  There 
is  where  most  of  the  Gaspe  fishermen  fish  for  mackerel.  The  schooners 
likewise  all  come  round  there.  That  is  the  place  where  the  mackerel 
come  and  deposit  their  spawn  in  that  bay.  A  schooner  would  not  be 
200  yards  from  the  rock  on  the  north  shore  in  St.  Margaret's  Bay.  I 
have  n»'ver  seen  them  fish  farther  up  than  Mai  Bay.  They  would  strike 
from  tha:  oft'  to  the  banks. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  Americans  curing  fish  on  their  vessels  ? — A.  1 
have  seen  them  curing  mackerel. 

Q.  What  di«l  they  do  with  the  offal  ?— A.  That  is  thrown  overboard. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  throwing  the  offal  overboard  ? — A.  The  efi'ect 
is,  that  if  it  is  thrown  overboard  the  codfish  eat  it,  and  they  will  not 
take  the  hook.  Another  thing  is,  that  it  makes  the  water  impure  ami 
kills  the  eggs  tuat  are  deposited.  It  will  also  kill  the  young  fry.  It 
makes  the  water  very  impure.  I  have  passed  over  the  water  where 
there  was  a  very  disagreable  smell  arising  from  this  stuff"  rotting  on  the 
bottom. 

Q.  How  deep  was  it  ? — A.  It  was  fifteen  fathoms  in  places  where  I 
perceived  that  smell.  After  you  pass  the  deep  water  you  come  to  a 
bank  where  it  is  only  eight  fathoms,  and  in  some  places  fifteen  fathoms. 

Q.  Did  you  see  their  people  fishing  or  seining  mackerel  outside  of 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


397 


tbree  miles  ? — A.  I  have  never  seen  them  fishing  for  mackerel  outside 
of  three  miles.    Only  codfish  I  have  seen  them  fishing  outside  of  that. 

Q.  From  your  exi)erience  do  you  think  it  wouhl  be  worth  while  for  the 
Americans  to  come  fishing  in  Canadian  waters  if  they  were  excluded 
from  within  three  miles  ? — A.  Not  for  mackerel.  I  do  not  think  from  my 
knowledge,  it  would  be.  I  have  been  told  by  Americans  themselves  that 
if  excluded  from  the  inshore  fisheries  for  mackerel  it  would  not  pay  them 
to  come  for  mackerel  at  all.    I  have  heard  that  from  more  than  one. 

Q.  How  do  you  see  them  come  to  fish  ! — A.  They  come  alongside  of 

08. 

Q.  How  does  that  affect  you  ? — A.  It  is  very  injurious.  In  this  way : 
In  the  first  place  they  have  a  better  fit-out  than  we  have.  In  the  second 
place  they  have  a  kind  of  bait  which  is  far  superior  to  ours.  When  they 
come  among  us  and  throw  this  over  it  will  entice  the  mackerel  to  take 
to  theirs  and  they  do  not  eat  ours.  In  the  next  place,  they  are  fitted  out 
with  mills,  and  grind  the  bait  fine. 

Q.  They  have  no  taste  for  your  bait  when  they  have  tasted  the  Amer- 
ican ? — A.  O,  no. 

Q.  Have  you  experienced  that  yourself! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  are  left  alone,  do  the  mackerel  take  your  own  bait  f — ■ 
A.  They  do ;  they  take  it  well.    They  don't  know  the  difference  then. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  Americans  using  the  hauling  seines  ? — A.  I 
have. 

Q.  Do  they  use  them  in  Gaspe  Bay  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  see,  also,  the  purse  seines  used  ? — A.  Yes.  In  Oaspe  Bay 
I  have  seen  both  purse  seines  and  hauling  seines.  They  are  very  inju- 
rious in  this  way  :  they  take  in  all  sorts  of  fish,  and  when  they  are  hauled 
on  shore  the  good  ones  are  taken  out,  and  those  that  are  no  good  are 
lett.  As  a  natural  consequence  it  destroys  the  fish  that  are  no  good 
when  caught,  but  which  would  be  good  if  left  until  later.  Those  bad 
fish  are  left  on  shore.  They  are  hauled  on  the  beach  and  left  there.  If 
the  tide  is  rising  some  of  them  may  get  off  and  live,  but  if  the  tide  is 
falling  they  all  die. 

Q.  Is  it  injurious,  also,  to  the  codfish,  that  seining  in  the  bay  ? — A. 
It  takes  these  young  fish  and  destroys  them,  of  course.  They  lie  there 
and  die ;  they  never  grow. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  had  any  conversation  with  the  Americans  in  regard 
to  this  practice  of  seining,  what  its  effect  is  f — A.  I  have  had  conversa- 
tions with  the  Americans 

Q.  What  opinions  have  they  expressed! — A.  That  it  is  injurious  to 
the  fishery,  decidedly  so. 

Q.  You  have  heard  that  from  them? — A.  I  have  heard  that  from  Ameri- 
cans myself,  and  of  my  own  certain  knowledge  I  know  it  to  be  so. 

Q.  How  is  the  cod  fishery  around  you  !  Is  it  declining  or  increasing! 
—A.  The  cod  fishery  is  on  the  increase  since  1871  in  Gaspe  Bay. 

Q.  Have  you  any  explanation  for  the  increase! — A.  I  presume  the 
reason  is  that  a  great  many  American  vessels  are  drawn  from  the  banks, 
which  is  the  great  nursery  for  our  fish.  (The  shore  fishery  is  fed  from 
the  banks  mostly.)  If  they  leave  the  banks  quit;t  the  fish  will  certainly 
increase.    This  proves  to  be  the  case. 

Q.  Has  it  been  the  case  with  your  bay  as  with  other  places,  that  the 
two  last  years  the  fishery  has  not  been  good ! — A.  These  two  last  years 
the  cod  fishery — not  the  mackerel  fishery — has  been  very  good.  The 
mackerel  fishery  was  very  poor.  In  a  manner  there  was  none  last  year 
and  the  year  before.  This  year  the  prospect  for  mackerel  is  better  than 
it  has  been  for  a  number  of  years. 


'  1 


398 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Have  you  seen  any  American  vessels  this  year? — ^A.  I  have  seen 
none  yet  this  year. 

Q.  The  season  for  mackerel  fishing  is  not  over? — A.  It  is  just  now 
commencing. 

Q.  Do  you  expect  they  will  come  ? — A.  I  do  expect  they  will  come. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  they  come  to  your  place  after  having  tried  Prince 
Edward  Island? — A.  O,  yes. 

A.  So  they  generally  go  later  ? — A.  In  August,  and  from  that  to  Sep- 
tember, is  the  best  time  in  Gaspe. 

Q.  Is  there  any  difference  between  our  mackerel  and  the  mackerel 
taken  in  American  waters  ? — A.  I  have  never  been  there  and  can  give 
no  personal  opinion.  I  have  heard  from  American  men  that  ours  are 
far  superior  and  bring  a  better  price.  The  reason  is  that  the  bait  is  very 
plenty.  When  they  come  inshore  with  such  abundance  they  very  soou 
get  fat,  and  then  when  they  are  taken  they  are  in  a  beautiful  condition. 
It  makes  them  superior  fish  to  their  own. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  if  the  mackerel  which  you  find  around  your 
place  has  been  bred  there  or  has  it  come  from  Prince  Edward  Island?— 
A.  I  think  it  can  be  proved  positively  that  they  breed  in  the  bay.  In  the 
first  place  the  mack«jrel  taken  about  the  1st,  2d,  3d,  and  4th  of  July,  have 
a  very  small  roe.  We  keep  on  catching  up  to  the  15th  or  20th  July, 
when  all  at  once  the  catching  ceases. 

Q.  How  do  you  explain  this  cessation  ? — A.  They  go  to  the  bottom. 
In  some  cases  we  catch  them  in  the  very  bottom ;  they  are  then  spawn- 
ing; after  that  the  roes  are  all  out. 

Q.  In  what  condition  are  they  after  spawning,  ^at  ? — A.  They  are  very 
poor. 

Q.  How  lonf;  does  it  take  them  to  recover? — A.  To  the  best  of  my 
knowledge,  a  fortnight  after  the  mackerel  spawn  they  are  in  very  good 
condition.  Afterward  they  still  keep  on  increasing  and  become  better 
still  until  October.  I  have  never  caught  them  myself  later  than  the  4th 
of  October. 

Q.  Is  there  any  herring  in  your  waters? — A.  In  the  spring  there  is 
plenty  as  a  general  thing. 

Q.  Which  is  the  fish  that  first  makes  its  appearance,  the  herring  or 
the  mackerel  ? — A.  The  herring  is  first. 

Q.  In  what  month  do  they  come? — A.  In  May.  The  10th  of  May  is 
about  the  time  for  the  herring  to  come  into  our  bay. 

Q.  The  Americans  don't  come  for  herring? — A.  No,  not  at  all. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  food  of  the  mackerel  ? — A.  In  our  bay 
of  Gaspe  the  mackerel  feed  on  three  different  kinds  of  food ;  they  Lave 
the  shrimp,  which  is  a  very  little  fish,  about  three-quarters  of  an  inch 
long ;  then  there  is  the  lante ;  and  they  also  have  a  kind  of  food  of 
which  I  do  not  know  the  name,  but  I  have  heard  it  called  brit.  It  is 
almost  like  seed;  it  looks  very  much  like  turnip  seed. 

Q.  Is  it  a  fish  ? — A.  I  could  not  give  an  opinion,  but  to  the  best  of  my 
knowledge  it  is  a  fish,  or  the  mackerel  would  not  eat  it.  It  just  looks 
like  small  seed. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  that  brit  in  the  water  ? — A.  I  could  not  say.  I 
have  seen  the  water  discolored ;  very  likely  it  .was  caused  by  this.  I 
could  not  say  positively  whether  it  was  that  or  not. 

Q.  What  color  is  the  shrimp? — A.  It  is  of  a  reddish  cast,  a  little  fish 
about  three-quarters  of  an  inch  long.  It  frequents  the  waters  in  great 
abundance. 

Q.  Is  it  enough  to  make  the  water  look  red  ? — A.  I  dare  say  it  would. 
As  a  general  thing  it  is  inshore.    The  shrimp  is  either  inshore  or  to  the 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


399 


bottom  iD  deep  water.  I  have  never  seen  it  to  the  surface  in  deep  water, 
bntl  know  it  is  to  the  bottom  because  I  have  caught  codfish  off  the 
bottom  with  it  in,  and  I  have  caught  whales  with  barrels  of  it  in  them. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  Americans  landing  to  dry  their  nets  ? — A.  I 
have  seen  them  drying  seines ;  I  have  seen  them  landing  to  dry  their 
seines  as  well  as  to  repair  them. 

Q.  Is  that  an  advantage  for  them  to  be  able  to  land  in  that  way  f — 
A.  Decidedly  it  is.    Of  course  it  is  an  advantage.    It  is  no  easy  matter 
to  meud  a  very  large  seine  on  board  if  it  is  torn,  as  is  often  the  case.  It 
is  not  easy  to  spread  it  on  board  to  dry  and  meud  it ;  but  it  is  easy 
enough  to  do  so  on  the  t>each. 

Q.  What  is  the  length  of  those  seines  ? — A.  They  vary  from  80  fathoms 
to  250  fathoms. 

Q.  Are  you  talking  now  of  all  kinds  of  those  seines  which  are  dried  on 
land?— A.  No;  I  am  only  speaking  of  the  mackerel  seines.  That  is 
the  only  kind  I  have  ever  seen  dried.  That  is  the  only  kind  I  have 
ever  seen  used  up  in  our  bay.  On  the  coast  of  Labrador  1  have  seen 
plenty  of  codfish  seines,  but  that  does  not  concern  this. 

Q.  You  have  stated  that  the  American  vessels  often  make  two  fares ; 
could  they  make  those  two  fares  without  transshipping  ?  Would  they 
have  time  to  go  back  and  unload  and  then  come  back  ?  Do  you  think 
it  is  by  transshipjnng  that  they  are  enabled  to  have  two  fares? — A. 
Traussliipplng  their  cargoes  certainly  gives  them  a  great  advantage, 
and  I  scarcely  think  they  could  make  two  fares  if  they  had  not  that 
privilege.  They  might  in  certain  cases,  but  as  a  general  thing  they 
could  not  make  two  fares.  It  would  take  too  much  time,  and  before 
they  returned  the  mackerel  season  would  be  over. 

Q.  As  to  keeping  the  fish  fresh,  could  they  do  so  without  being  sup- 
plied with  snow  ? — A.  Not  for  any  length  of  time,  so  far  as  my  judg- 
ment goes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  they  could  have  time  to  go  home  with  that  fish  and 
keep  it  fresh  without  something  to  preserve  it,  such  as  snow  ? — A.  As 
to  that  I  could  not  give  an  opinion  decidedly.  I  have  heard  them  say 
they  have  taken  a  cargo  home  in  their  own  ice ;  but  I  know  they  have 
come  up  into  Gasp<S  Bay  to  buy  snow.  They  have  come  to  ray  brother- 
in-law. 

Q.  Is  it  snow  or  ice  they  use  ? — A.  I  have  never  seen  it  myself.  In 
Gaspe  we  use  all  snow. 

Q.  Is  it  preferable  ? — A.  It  is.  I  will  explain.  If  you  take  a  lump  of 
ice  and  break  it  ever  so  small,  when  you  come  to  pack  up  the  fish  in  it 
the  broken  pieces  of  ice  will  bruise  the  flsh  and  injure  it.  The  snow  is 
perfectly  safe,  for  when  it  is  beaten  down  it  does  not  hurt  them  at  all. 

Q.  Are  there  many  people  around  your  place  who  preserve  snow? — 
A.  There  are  a  great  many  people  that  have  it  for  their  own  use,  for  in 
the  Bay  of  Gasp6  they  sell  all  their  salmon  fresh.  They  keep  them  in  their 
suow  houses  until  they  have  enough  to  take  up  to  the  village.  There 
they  are  sold  to  a  firm  by  the  name  of  A.  Fraser  &  Co.  From  that  they 
are  sent  all  over  Canada. 

Q.  Do  you  know  about  the  classification  of  mackerel  as  Nos.  1,2,  and 
3?— A.  I  know  something  about  it. 

Q.  What  is  the  proportion  of  No.  1  in  the  mackerel  caught  in  GasptS 
Bay  and  around  it? — A.  They  are  about  half  No.  1,  to  the  best  of  my 
knowledge,  in  Gasp6  Bay.  We  very  seldom  have  No.  3,  except  in  the 
very  early  part  of  the  season. 

Q.  Uave  you  any  idea  of  the  profits  realized  out  of  a  season  of  mack- 
erel fishing  by  a  vessel  of  the  capacity  of  75  to  70  tons! — A.  I  think  I 


400 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


have.  As  I  stated,  tbeir  fare  woald  be  about  500  barrels,  provided  they 
make  two  trips.  Those  would  sell  in  the  States  I  presume,  from  what  I 
have  been  told,  at  $12  a  barrel,  taking  the  good  and  the  bad.  I  think 
those  figures  will  give  a  pretty  good  idea. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  do  you  think  it  requires  to  pay  the  expeuses  of 
the  season's  fishing? — A.  One  hundred. 

Q.  Above  100  it  is  all  profit  ? — A.  It  would  be  profit  to  the  crew  and 
owners.    As  I  understand,  they  are  all  sharesmen. 

Q.  That  would  make  400  barrels,  at  $12,  to  divide  between  the  owner 
and  the  crew  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  crew  you  have  stated  is  between  12  and  15  ? — A.  About  15, 
and  from  their  own  statements  they  are  all  sharemen,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  cook.    He  is  always  paid,  I  believe. 

Q.  The  Americans  do  not  get  bait  near  your  place  ? — A.  No ;  they 
bring  it  with  them.  There  is  one  thing  I  wish  to  state.  I  have  been 
told  by  themselves  that  if  they  were  allowed  to  frequent  our  waters  for 
the  space  of  ten  years  our  fish  would  be  extinct. 

Q.  Through  excessive  seining  ? — A.  Seining  and  bobbing  as  well,  and, 
as  I  told  you,  from  this  ofi'al  being  thrown  overboard. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  them  say  anything  about  the  effect  of  their  methods 
of  fishing  in  their  own  waters? — A.  They  did  tell  me  that  it  ruined  their 
banks,  so  much  so,  that  you  could  not  get  fish  enough  on  them  for  a 
breakfast. 

Q.  Did  you  state  that  around  your  place  and  the  places  you  have 
mentioned  and  pointed  to  on  the  map,  the  mackerel  was  taken  all  ex- 
clusively within  three  miles  of  the  coast? — A.  All  that  ever  I  have  seen 
were  taken  within  three  miles. 

Q.  You  have  not  seen  mackerel  taken  outside? — A.  I  have  not  seen 
the  mackerel  taken  beyond  three  miles  of  the  coast. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  Which  was  it,  the  cod  or  the  mackerel,  that  got  so  bad  that  they 
could  not  catch  fish  enough  for  breakfast  ? — A.  The  Americans  told  me 
their  codfish  on  their  own  banks  had  been  ruined. 

Q.  It  was  nine  years  ago  that  an  American  vessel  got  its  fare  in 
three  weeks  ? — A.  To  the  best  of  knowledge,  it  was. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  name  of  the  schooner  ? — A.  I  remember  the 
name  of  the  man ;  it  was  Captain  Marshall. 

Q.  You  remember  that  the  schooner  was  seized  next  year.  Do  you 
happen  to  know  how  much  fare  he  got  in  three  weeks? — A.  I  was  told 
that  he  got  350  barrels.    I  merely  tell  you  I  was  told  by  other  parties. 

Q.  That  was  such  an  unusual  amount  that  some  people  informed,  and 
next  year  he  was  captured;  is  that  so? — A.  The  next  year,  when 
he  surrounded  my  brother's  boat,  there  happened  to  be  a  man  from  the 
southwest,  and  he  went  right  up  the  basin  and  told  the  cutter  there 
that  they  had  been  surrounded  by  the  American  vessel  with  a  seiue. 

Q.  What  sort  of  a  seiue  was  it  ? — A.  I  could  not  tell  you. 

Q>  Was  it  a  hauling  or  a  purse  seiue  ? — A.  I  almost  think  it  was  a 
purse  seine.    I  was  not  there ;  I  was  tuid  by  my  brother. 

Q.  Do  you  think  purse  seines  were  used  at  all  nine  years  ago  ?-A. 
I  am  quite  positive  they  were. 

Q.  Now  hauling  seines  are  used  from  the  shore,  are  they  not  f— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Which  have  you  noticed  to  be  used  most  in  your  bay  ?— A.  The 
hauling  seines. 

Q.  Then  the  chief  ^art  is  done  by  men  going  on  shore  ? — A.  Yes, 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMIHSSION. 


401 


Q.  Tbey  cannot  haul  these  seines  without  going  on  shore  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Well,  do  yon  understand  that  they  have  not  a  right  to  go  on 
shore  T— A.  The  time  of  the  treaty,  I  thinlc,  they  did. 

Q.  So  tbis  is  one  of  the  privileges  yon  suppose  they  are  to  pay  for. 
When  tbey  nse  purse  seines  they  go  into  deep  water  f — A.  Sometimes. 

Q.  How  deep  must  the  water  be  ?— A.  The  water  inside  of  our  cove 
j$.  eight  fathoms. 

Q.  Close  up  to  the  shore  ?— A.  It  is  five  fathoms  deep  at  a  distance 
from  the  shore  not  farther  than  to  your  seat. 

Q.  You  gave  the  width  of  the  bay  where  you  live.  At  the  month, 
between  Gape  Gaspd  and  Point  Saint  Peters,  what  is  it  f — A.  Seven 
miles,  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Now,  the  mackerel  Ashing  in  Gasp^  Bay  amounted  to  almost  noth- 
ing last  year.  Did  you  notice  any  American  vessels  there  then  f — A.  I 
did  not. 

Q.  1875  was  abad  year  T— A.  Pretty  bad. 

Q.  Did  you  notice  any  Americans  there  in  1875  f — A.  I  think  I  was 
away. 

Q.  Where  do  you  think  you  were  ?~A.  On  the  north  shore.  I  spent 
four  months  on  the  north  shore. 

Q.  Whereabouts  ? — A.  At  Mingan. 

Q.  Yon  did  not  hear  of  American  vessels  being  there  that  summer  f — 
A.  There  was  no  mackerel. 

Q.  Go  back  to  1874. — A.  Beyond  that  time  there  were  Americans. 
There  were  a  few  in  1874. 

Q.  How  many  f — A.  I  could  noc  give  you  the  number. 

Q.  Nothing  like  the  number  you  used  to  have  when  the  fishing  was  in 
very  good  condition  ! — A.  No. 

Q.  Your  Gaspe  fisheries  began  to  fail  far  back  T — A.  Yes ;  they  did 
begin  to  fail. 

Q.  And  tbey  have  been  growing  poorer  and  poorer  ever  since  ? — A. 
Until  this  summer. 

Q.  Well,  yon  have  not  got  through  with  this  summer  yet,  and  you  do 
not  know  what  is  going  to  happen.  Have  yon  found  any  vessels  in  your 
bav  this  summer  1 — A.  No ;  I  came  away. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  in  1873,  1874,  1875,  or  1876  the  Americans 
langht  many  mackerel  in  Gasp6  Bay  t — A.  Tbey  did  not  catch  a  great 
quantity. 

Q.  Precious  few  ?— A.  Not  a  great  many.  They  had  destroyed  them 
before,  and  as  a  natnral  consequence  they  could  not  get  many. 

Q.  Then  you  think  your  bay  fishing  is  destroyed  f — A.  I  think  it  will 
be  replenished. 

Q.  What  ?  With  all  these  Americans  with  purse  seines,  oflfal,  &c.f — 
A.  So ;  not  if  they  are  allowed. 

Q.  They  will  come,  though,  under  the  treaty,  if  there  are  any  fish 
there,  unless  they  get  more  on  their  own  shores  ? — A.  No  doubt  of  that. 

Q.  But  for  the  last  four  years  there  has  been  no  temptation  to  them 
to  come! — A.  No;  there  has  been  no  encouragement. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  their  drying  their  seines  on  shore.  Those  are  mack- 
erel seines  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  used  from  the  shore  7 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Who,  about  this  matter  of  snow  and  ice ;  are  there  establishments 

in  your  vicinity  where  tbey  keep  it  for  sale  T — A.  They  don't  keep  it  for 
sale,  but  for  their  own  use. 

Q.  Where  do  the  Americans  get  snow  !— A.  Not  in  the  Bay  of  Gasp6. 
20  P 


402 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


I  bave  seen  one  oonie  in  to  buy  snow,  and  he  offered  a  good  price,  but 
conld  not  get  it. 

Q.  Of  coarse  tbey  do  not  find  it  lying  around  in  summer,  and  as  your 
people  will  not  sell  it  to  tbeni,  they  don't  get  it  there  ? — A.  I  would  not 
say  they  don't  sell  it,  but  on  this  particular  occasion  I  refer  to  tliey  did 
not  get  it. 

Q.  There  is  no  snow  in  Gasp^  Bay  for  sale? — A.  It  might  be  made  a 
beautiful  depot  for  snow  and  ice. 

Q.  And  if  it  looked  like  a  profitable  business,  have  you  people  of  en- 
terprise that  would  go  into  it? — A.  Certainly,  it  is  a  very  easy  matter. 

Q.  Then  whether  you  will  have  snow  and  ice  for  sale  or  not  depends 
upon  whether  the  prospects  are  sufficient  to  induce  men  of  enterprise 
to  go  into  the  business  ? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  If  you  should  build  houses  and  store  snow  and  ice,  and  sell  it  to 
Americans  at  a  profit,  it  would  be  a  benefit  to  you  ? — A.  It  would  be  a 
benefit  just  then,  but  it  would  be  an  injury  in  a  general  way,  because 
they  take  the  mackerel  that  lielongs  to  us  and  sell  them. 

Q.  That  is  the  catching  of  fish  would  be  an  injury  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  noticed  that  your  fishermen  caught  less  fish  ou  ac- 
count of  having  the  Americans  there  ? — A.  Of  mackerel  they  have. 

Q.  Have  they  caught  more  since  the  Americans  ceased? — A.  No. 

Q.  Does  it  not  come  very  much  to  this,  that  when  the  mackerel  are 
there,  they  are  nearly  as  abundant  as  the  sand  on  the  seaesbore,  and 
when  they  are  not  there  nobody  can  get  them  f — A.  Not  exactly.  The 
mackerel  are  pretty  abundant,  but  the  Americans  are  in  abnudance, 
too. 

Q.  But  in  years  when  the  mackerel  have  been  there  and  the  Ameri 
cans  too,  for  they  seem  to  come  together,  have  not  your  own  people  got 
a  good  catch  ? — A.  Pretty  fair ;  but  I  am  positive  they  would  have  got 
much  more  if  the  Americans  had  not  been  there. 

Q.  What  fleet  have  yon ;  is  it  boats  or  vessels  ? — A.  All  boats. 

Q.  How  many  ?— A.  Those  are  hard  questions  to  answer.  The  peo- 
ple are  mostly  fishermen  and  farmers  as  well.  If  the  mackerel  comes 
in  plenty,  they  nearly  all  fit  out  and  come  out  at  a  certain  time  for  macic- 
erel. 

Q.  What  is  the  greatest  number  you  have  ever  known  boat  fishing  ?— 
A.  I  have  known  as  many  as  100  boats. 

Q.  That  is  all  around  the  Bay  of  Gaspo  ? — A.  It  is  only  about  three 
miles  from  the  land  spit  where  they  catch.    It  is  close  in. 

Q.  What  part  of  Gasp<S  Bay  is  it  that  they  catch  mackerel  in  ?— A. 
(Pointing  to  the  land  spit  in  Gaspd  Bay.)  It  is  around  that  the  seines 
are  hauled,  and  there  is  where  we  catch. 

Q.  Are  there  mackerel  to  be  found  in  the  lower  part  of  the  bay  iu 
good  years  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  about  transshipping,  explain  that  ? — A.  Well,  the  American 
vessel  has  say  250  barrels,  or  whatever  the  number  may  be.  She  ruus 
to  Charlottetown,  Picton,  or  anywhere  she  likes,  and  there  transsbiivs 
or  stores  it. 

Q.  Well,  if  it  is  transshipped  to  the  States,  does  it  go  iu  sailing 
vessels  or  steamers  ? — A.  That  I  cannot  answer.  I  was  never  there  to 
know.    I  have  been  informed  that  they  transship  it  or  store  it. 

Q.  You  seem  to  know  about  the  habits  of  the  mackerel.  How  long 
does  it  take  a  mackerel  to  grow  up  to  maturity  ? — A.  I  think  you  cau 
not  get  at  that. 

Q.  You  think  nobody  knows  that  ?   I  did  not  know  but  what  you  kiiev 


*i*f* 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


403 


whether  it  would  be  large  enough  to  catch  io  the  second  summer  ? — A . 
Noj  I  presume  they  are  not. 

By  Mr.  Doutre : 

Q.  Is  it  to  your  knowledge  that  when  you  had  no  mackerel  in  Gaspu 
there  were  some  in  Prince  Edward  Island  and  other  places  where  the 
Americans  are  fishing  f— A.  I  have  heard  so. 

Q.  You  have  not  seen  it  ? — A.  No,  but  1  have  heard  it  from  good 
sonrcea. 

Q.  It  might  have  been  a  failure  in  Gasp^,  but  not  a  failure  in  other 
places  ?— A.  Just  so ;  it  was  not  a  failure  in  other  places.  That  I  kuow 
to  be  the  case.  There  are  times  when  the  mackerel  pass  by  Gaspe  and 
go  right  up  the  river. 

Q.  In  regard  to  your  mode  of  fishing  in  boats,  do  you  consider  it  is 
more  profitable  for  your  people  to  fish  in  that  manner  than  to  fit  up 
costly  vessels  ? — A.  It  is  more  profitable  provided  the  bay  is  left  alone. 
Bat  when  the  Americans  frequent  the  bay  they  take  the  mackerel  out. 
It  would  be  much  more  profitable  if  the  bay  was  left  <iuiet,  and  there 
were  no  vessels  to  entice  the  mackerel  away. 

(j.  If  left  alone  you  could  carry  on  both  agriculture  and  fishing  suc- 
cessfully.— A.  Yes.  They  are  combined.  They  have  only  to  go  a  mile  and 
a  half.  In  the  morning  they  go  out  and  take  a  fare  of  fish,  and  then  go 
to  work  on  their  farms  until  four,  when  the  sun  begins  to  go  down. 
Then  tbey  go  out  again.  They  land  in  the  morning  at  8, 9,  or  10  o'clock 
and  never  go  out  until  4  o'clock  so  that  they  have  plenty  of  time  on 
shore. 

Q.  As  it  is,  when  the  Americtins  go  to  your  place  you  are  reduced  to 
farming  almost  exclusively !— A.  Well,  the  mackerel  fishing  there  does 
uot  pay  much. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  You  hav'n't  had  any  mackerel  to  catch  since  the  Americans  stopped 
going  there? — A.  Well,  how  could  we  have  when  you  caught  them  all! 

Q.  Well,  that  is  what  I  want  to  see.  You  have  known  of  Americans 
being  there  and  taking  quantities  of  mackerel.  What  was  the  last  year 
when  that  occurred  ?  Give  the  date.  Is  it  as  much  as  five  years  since  ? 
—A.  Yes,  there  has  never  been  any  great  catch  since  that. 

Q.  Take  the  year  1872.  How  many  American  vessels  were  there 
thenf — A.  That  was  one  of  the  greatest  years  for  the  Americans. 
There  was  at  least  300  sail.  They  would  come  and  go.  If  they  found 
the  mackerel  there  satisfactory  they  would  fish.  If  uot  they  would  run 
up  the  shore  or  down  the  shore. 

Q.  Now  do  you  pretend  to  say  that  that  year,  when  you  saw  300  sail 
of  American  vessels,  your  fishermen  were  prevented  from  fishing  ? — A. 
I  do  not  pretend  to  say  they  were  prevented ;  ou  the  contrary,  they  could 
lish,  provided  they  kept  out  of  the  American  schooners'  way. 

Q.  A  good  many  of  your  people  had  boats  and  used  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  fish  would  they  catch  in  the  boats  ? — A.  I  know  of  one 
boat  that  got  through  the  season  200  barrels. 

Q.  How  many  men  were  there  in  her  ? — A.  There  would  be  two  men 
all  the  time,  two  of  my  brothers.  Then  they  had  some  small  boys  with 
them.  A  little  fellow  can  haul  a  mackerel  in.  Sometimes  there  would 
be  four  boys,  which  would  make  a  crew  of  six  in  all.  Sometimes,  in 
stormy  weather,  the  smaller  boys  would  not  go. 

Q.  That  would  be  an  extraordinary  catch  ? — A.  Yes,  it  would. 

Q.  What  would  be  an  ordinary  catch  I — A.  Fifty  barrels  would  be 
an  average. 


404 


AWARD   OF   lUB   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  many  weeks  does  the  mackerel  season  last  tbere  *—\.  We 
commence  catching  after  August.  Sometimes  in  July,  from  the  first  to 
the  middle,  and  from  that  on  as  late  as  the  4th  October,  which  is  the 
latest  I  ever  caught.  As  a  general  thing  the  20th  September  end^  the 
season. 

Q.  The  average  is  50  barrels  ? — A.  Yes,  for  four  men. 

No.  9. 

William  A.  Sinnett,  of  Griffin's  Cove,  county  of  Gasp^,  was  called 
on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  ex- 
amined. 

By  Mr.  Doutre : 

i^uestion.  Where  do  yon  live! — Answer.  About  15  miles  above Gasp^ 
in  a  place  called  Griffin^  Gove. 

Q.  What  is  your  age ! — A.  Forty-flve  years. 

Q.  Have  you  always  lived  there  f — A.  I  have  always  lived  there. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  mackerel  fishery  around  your  place?— 
A.  Yes,  I  am. 

Q.  What  o<!cn8ion  have  you  had  to  become  acquainted  with  it?— A.  I 
have  fished  myself  and  I  have  seen  others  fishing. 

Q.  What  h\  the  best  place  to  fish  around  your  place  ? — A.  You  mean 
outside  or  inside  ? 

Q.  Either  outside  or  inside. — A.  Inside  is  the  best  place  with  us. 

Q.  You  know  that  fishery  better  than  the  fishery  in  Gasp6  Bay?— A. 
Yes,  I  never  fished  in  Gaspe  Bay. 

Q.  Is  it  near  your  residence  that  you  have  been  in  the  habit  of  fish- 
ing f — A.  Yes,  right  where  I  live.    We  fish  right  there. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  American  vessels  fishing  there  ? — A.  I  did, 
sir. 

Q.  When  was  the  last  time  T — A.  The  last  time,  it  was  about  nine 
years  ago,  I  suppose.  I  do  not  see  many  of  them  lately ;  but  before 
that  they  generally  came  every  year,  lots  of  them. 

Q.  During  the  fishing  season  how  many  American  sails  have  yon 
s6eii  T— A.  I  never  took  the  trouble  to  count  all  of  them  exactly,  but  in 
conversation  with  American  captains  they  have  told  me  that  there  were 
300  sometimes,  and  sometimes  as  high  as  500.  I  did  not  see  all  of  that 
nnmber  at  one  time. 

Q.  What  quantity  have  you  seen  yourself? — A.  I  have  seen  about  60 
odd  sail  at  one  time  near  Madeleine  Biver. 

Q.  How  far  have  you  seen  the  American  skippers  fish  ? — A.  I  have 
seen  them  two  miles  from  the  shore,  and  inside  of  a  mile. 

Q.  That  is  in  the  mackerel  fishery  ? — A.  Yes ;  mackerel  fishing  I 
mean. 

Q.  Where  do  3'on  generally  see  them  fishing  for  mackerel?  Not  fur- 
ther than  a  mile  from  the  shore  ? — A.  I  never  saw  them  further  than 
that.    They  generally  fish  in  by  the  shore. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  them  fishing  outside  of  three  miles  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  they  were  in  the  habit  of  going  on  the  north  side  f 
Do  you  know  anything  about  that  ? — A.  I  have  been  there ;  not  with 
them,  but  I  have  found  myself  there.  I  did  not  see  them  fishing,  but 
seining  lante  and  caplin. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  had  occasio?  to  go  on  board  these  vessels  ?— A. 
Yes  ;  I  have  been  fishing  with  the:  a  little  while. 

Q.  How  long  f — A.  I  have  been  three  weeks  in  them.    That  is  all. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


405 


Q.  Were  you  engaged  as  a  flsherman  f— A.  I  \ra8  engaged  as  a  pilot 
and  fiHhiag  at  the  same  time. 

Q.  When  was  that  f — A.  Twenty-five  or  twenty-six  years  ago. 

Q.  Where  was  that  vessel  from  f — A.  Oloauester,  I  think. 

Q.  Were  you  with  them  when  they  finished  their  fare  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Uow  many  barrels  had  they  when  you  leftf — A.  They  had  200  bar- 
rels. They  had  not  talcen  that  much  while  I  was  with  them.  They  only 
got  50  barrels  while  I  was  with  them. 

Q.  Where  did  they  take  them  T — A.  Along  the  shore. 

Q.  Uow  far  out  f — A.  From  half  a  mile  to  a  mile. 

Q.  Is  it  to  your  knowledge  that  they  have  fished  mackerel  at  Fox 
Kiver?— A.  Yes;  I  was  with  them  when  they  got  them  at  Fox  Biver, 
and  also  at  Grand  Yallee. 

Q.  Is  that  above  Madeleine  River  ? — A.  It  is  about  nine  miles  from 
Madeleine  Biver. 

Q.  What  is  the  tonnage  of  the  American  vessels  you  have  seen  fish- 
ing!—A.  I  think  they  averaged  about  65  or  70  tons. 

Q.  How  many  men  have  they  f — A.  The  one  I  was  aboard  of  had  15. 
They  have  generally  12  or  15,  so  far  as  I  could  understand. 

Q.  From  what  you  have  seen  and  heard,  what  is  the  ordinary  catch 
of  a  vessel  when  it  unloads  or  transships  f — A.  I  have  never  been  ou 
board  when  they  transshipped,  but  they  have  told  me  it  was  about  500 
barrels  a  year.    They  told  me  that  themselves. 

Q.  That  is  during  the  season,  whether  one  trip  or  several  7 — A.  Yes ; 
some  catch  less  and  some  more. 

Q.  Have  you  known  of  any  very  big  catches,  above  1,000  barrels  f — 
A.  Yes ;  I  was  not  with  them,  but  the  captain  told  me  he  had  caught  as 
high  as  1,300  barrels.  He  told  me  she  could  carry  1,400.  She  was  a  ves- 
sel with  two  topmasts. 

Q.  Yon  do  not  know  where  those  were  taken  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  speak  with  American  fishermen  to  know  at  what 
distance  from  shore  they  were  in  the  habit  of  taking  mackerel?— A. 
Yes ;  and  I  have  seen  them  do  it  myself. 

Q.  Speaking  of  a  vessel  that  would  take  500  barrels,  how  many  would 
it  require  to  cover  expenses  ? — A.  I  could  not  say  exactly. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  Americans  fishf — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  efiect  of  their  method? — A.  It  is  very  bad ;  it  destroys 
a  great  many  kinds  of  fish  that  are  thrown  out.  They  haul  every  kind 
offish  to  the  shore.  I  only  saw  them  once,  but  a  good  many  folks  have 
seeu  tbem. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  what  was  thrown  out  ? — A.  Yes ;  all  kinds  of  fish, 

Q.  Is  there  a  large  quantity  ? — A.  Yes;  a  good  quantity  enough.  I 
suppoHti  a  barrel  or  so  of  all  kinds  of  little  fish. 

Q.  These  fish  would  have  been  good  next  year? — A.  Yes ;  or  the  year 
after. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  they  cure  their  fish  on  board  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  the  offal  ? — A.  They  heave  it  overboard. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  that  ? — A.  I  think  the  effect  is  to  damage 
the  fish.  I  think  it  gluts  the  fish  and  the  fish  will  not  bite,  so  far  as  I 
understand.    It  also  raises  a  kind  of  slime  or  dirt  which  poisons  the 

Tater  and  damages  the  fish,  so  far  as  I  could  understand. 

Q>  Do  you  think  it  would  pay  an  American  to  come  from  Boston  or 

Gloucester  to  fish  for  mackerel  in  our  waters  if  prevented  from  fishing 

within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  they  would  come, 

for  1  do  not  think  it  would  pay  them  at  all. 
Q.  Did  you  talk  with  the  Americans  about  that  ? — A.  I  have  spoken 


406 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


to  some  of  them.  They  told  me  that  to  fish  outside  they  wouhl  not 
come,  for  it  would  not  pay.  The  tide  is  too  strong  about  our  way.  Tliey 
come  inshore  to  catch,  where  there  is  no  tide  or  very  little  tide. 

Q.  Well,  is  it  any  advantage  to  the  Oanadiana  to'flsh  alongside  these 
American  vessels  I — A.  No ;  it  is  no  advantage.    They  have  no  chance. 

Q.  What  prevents  them  t— A.  We  are  not  as  well  fitted  out  for  inack- 
erel-fishing,  in  the  first  place.  In  the  next  place,  we  have  got  used  to 
using  the  hanging  nets.  While  all  the  Americans  are  lying  in  the 
stream  we  are  obliged  to  haul  our  nets  ashore;  otherwise  we  would 
get  our  nets  hooked  in  their  chains  and  break  them.  We  are  obliged  to 
go  ashore. 

Q.  Did  you  say  anything  about  the  bait  they  used  ?— A.  I  have  seen 
their  bait.  1  do  not  know  where  they  get  it.  In  the  Gut  of  Canso,  I 
believe,  or  somewhere. 

Q.  When  they  throw  that  bait,  can  you  fish  with  advantage  with 
your  own  baitt — A.  W^e  could  if  they  were  not  there,  but  when  they 
are  there  we  cannot  catch  with  ours,  for  theirs  is  better. 

Q.  You  are  obliged  to  haul  your  seines  ashore  when  they  come,  as 
they  would  spoil  your  seines  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Explain  ? — A.  Sometimes  they  iished  at  anchor,  and,  if  miy  lishor- 
man  attempted  to  come  close  by,  they  would  order  him  ofl',  ami,  if  ho 
did  not  go  at  once,  they  would  stone  him  and  send  him  away. 

Q.  If  ha  would  not  go  away,  he  ran  the  risk  of  being  forced  to  move .' 
— A.  Yes,  of  a  certainty. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  our  mackerel  are  of  the  same  quality  as  the 
American  mackerel,  or  whethc  the  former  are  better  than  the  latter  f— 
A.  I  know  what  they  themselves  say  about  it. 

Q.  What  do  they  say? — A.  That  the  mackerel  about  oarshoie  are 
better  than  theirs.  Ours  are  later  than  theirs,  and  a  great  deal  larger 
and  fatter. 

Q.  This  is  just  because  they  are  taken  later? — A.  Yes;  I  think  that 
they  take  the  mackerel  as  they  come  along  up  the  shore,  following  them 
into  our  l)ay. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  mackerel  are  classified  into  numbers  one,  two, 
and  three? — A.  Yes  ;  but  I  do  not  know  the  ditference  as  to  prices. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  mackerel  No.  1  is  ijenerally  taken  in  c  ir 
waters  in  your  neighborhood? — A.  I  think  tney  are  fourteen  inches 
long. 

Q.  Do  you  take  more  of  the  first  than  of  the  second  quality  ?— A.  It 
is  according  to  the  reason.  Late  in  the  season  a  good  many  more  num- 
ber ones  than  number  twos  are  caught.  When  the  fish  arrive  in  our 
vicinity,  they  are  generally  small  in  size ;  but  later  they  are  bigger  ami 
better.    I  suppose  about  one-half  of  the  vMvAx  is  number  one. 

Q.  What  do  the  mackerel  feed  on  ? — A.  Up  our  way.  their  food  con 
slsts  of  shrimps  and  small  lantz.    There  are  a  great  many  of  them  ah)u^' 
our  shore,  and  the  mackerel  are  there  evary  year. 

Q.  Have  you  large  quantiiies  of  shrini|)s  along  your  shore?— A.  0, 
yes. 

Q.  Are  codfish  found  in  your  neighborhood  r — A.  Yes;  they  are  what 
we  mostly  catch. 

Q.  During  the  last  two  yours  very  few  mackerel  were  found  alonjf 
your  coast — has  this  not  Itcen  the  case  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  hardly  canght 
any. 

Q.  Did  codfish  visit  your  coast  during  this  period  ? — A.  Yes.  ^Vc 
La»l,  however,  more  cod  this  year  than  last  year. 

Q.  How  far  from  theco.vst  do  you  fish  for  cod  f— A.  At  one  and  a 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


407 


balfor  two  miles  from  tbe  coast,  bat  no  farther  than  that  up  our  way. 
Uo  banks  are  situated  in  our  vicinity. 

Q,  There  are  many  on  your  side  of  the  coast  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  (juantity  of  cod  can  be  taken  by  men  lifie  you  and  your  neigh- 
l)orsnear  their  own  homes? — A.  AH  cannot  catch  .^sh  alike;  some  boats 
secure  from  150  to  250  draughts.  One  season's  fishing  extends  from  the 
tiist  or  the  middle  of  May  to  the  middle  of  August,  and  another  from  the 
middle  of  August  to  Toussaint. 

Q,  ITow  many  can  a  man  catch  during  the  whole  summer  1 — A.  Home 
jjet  3(H)  draughts.    A  draught  is  224  pounds. 

Q.  That  is  two  quintals  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  a  fanner  like  yourself  may  take  during  the  sum- 
mer  300  draughts? — A.  Yes ;  during  the  season— the  summer  and  fall. 

Q.  What  is  the  valne  of  this  codflsh  ? — A.  Last  year  it  was  worth 
il')0  a  draught,  but  this  j'ear  its  value  is  about  |3  a  draught  in  our 
(juarter, 

Q.  Because  more  are  caught  this  year  ? — ,\.  Yes;  and  there  is  less 
appearance  of  a  market  for  them. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  Americans  drying  their  nets  on  shore  ? — A.  No. 
Stay;  1  think  1  saw  them  <loing  so  once  on  the  Bay  of  Gaspc. 

Q,  Is  it  easier  to  dry  seines  on  land  than  on  water? — A.  Certainly; 
a  seine  will  dry  better  on  a  sandy  beach  than  on  deck. 

il  Do  the  American  vessels  generally  make  two  trips  a  year? — A. 
Tlify  have  told  xne  so. 

(}.  lliivo  they  time  to  go  to  Boston  and  return  for  a  second  fare,  or  do 
they  transship  the  first  cargo? — A.  I  could  not  exactly  say,  but  I  think 
tliey  have  told  me  of  their  transshipping  a  cargo  son)ewhere  in  the  Gut 
(it  ('anso.    This  gives  them  time  to  come  back  and  get  another  load. 

Q.  It  is  an  advantage  to  be  able  to  do  so,  is  it  not  ? — A.  Ves  ;  cer- 
tainly it  is. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  is  used  in  fishing  for  halibut  ?— A.  Herring  and 
mackerel ;  anything  like  that. 

tj,  Have  you  seen  American  vessels  fishing  for  halibut  ? — A.  I  saw 
them  only  once  setting  their  trawls,  but  1  did  not  see  them  haul  the 
trawls  up. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  where  they  get  their  bait? — A.  No ;  I  could  not 
say. 

Q  Have  you  ever  heard  of  any  Canadians  going  to  fish  in  American 
vatersi— A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  thin  that  this  would  be  a  i)rofital)le  venture  for  them  ? — 
A.  Xo;  since  Americans  came  here  themselves  to  fish,  it  would  not  pay 
Canadiiins  to  go  there ;  it  should  not. 

Q.  You  have  never  heard  of  any  Canadians  going  there,  even  when 
there  was  not  good  fishing  here* — A.  O,  no;  it  is  not  in  our  way  at  all 
to  go  there. 

IJy  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  say  that  the  Americans  sometimes  injure  your  .seines? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  How  are  your  seines  set  ? — A.  I  will  show  you :  Say  a  lot  of 
American  vessels  heave  to  about  hjilf  a  Uiilo  off  our  shore,  when  the 
tide  is  running  in,  our  fishermen  will  go  ahead  of  the  ves.sels  atid  come 
ill  with  the  tide;  then  the  vessels  will  be  right  in  our  way,  and  we  will 
he  obliged  to  haul  our  nets  up. 

Q.  You  go  above  them  in  order  that  the  tide  may  take  your  boats 
<lowu?-.:\.  Yes. 


408 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Are  the  Americans  then  <it  anchor  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Swinging  to  the  tide? — A.  They  are  at  anchor;  they  fish  there 
day  and  night;  they  swing  with  the  tide. 

Q.  How  far  ahead  of  the  American  vessels  would  you  go  with  your 
boats  ? — A.  Some  will  go  a  mile,  others  a  couple  of  miles  or  half  a  mile ; 
and  while  coming  in  they  will  drift  with  the  tide. 

Q.  How  dc  yon  use  your  nets  f — A.  We  tie  them  to  one  en<l  of  the 
boat,  then  the  tirst  thing  that  will  happen,  will  be  our  being  brought  u{) 
by  the  American  vessels. 

Q.  The  nets  are  not  made  fast  on  shore  f — A.  O,  no. 

Q.  How  many  boats  would  there  be  to  one  net? — A.  One  boat  gen 
crally  takes  two  nets. 

Q.  How  large  are  the  nets? — A.  From  20  to  25  fathoms  iu  length, 
and  ttom  4^  to  5  fathoms  in  depth. 

Q.  I  do  not  understand  how  you  can  use  with  one  boat  a  net  as  large 
as  you  describe. — A.  That  is  easy  enough.  We  place  the  nets  in  the 
evening  and  in  the  morning  we  bring  them  ashore.  Then  wo  flsb  for 
cod  when  we  can  catch  enough  bait;  theu  the  next  ''vi"uiig  when  the 
tide  begins  to  run  in  we  go  out  again. 

Q.  How  can  one  boat  manage  two  nets  :'  ^A.  J'hat  is  easy  enough. 
One  boat  can  manage  five  or  six  nets. 

Q.  How  do  you  fasten  them  ? — A.  One  after  the  other. 

Q.  They  are  not  made  fast  to  the  shore? — A.  No. 

Q.  And  the  nets  drift  with  the  tide  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  are  fastened  to  the  boat? — A.  Yes. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  How  are  they  spread  ?— A.  In  the  water. 
By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  Are  they  furnished  with  corks  ? — A.  Some  are  made  with  corks 
and  others  with  wooden  floats. 

Q.  How  do  you  keep  them  from  coming  together? — A.  The  tide 
stretches  them  out. 

Q.  And  your  objection  is  that  at  last  you  drift  on  the  American  ves- 
sels?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  many  flsh  in  your  nets' — A.  Yes;  bnt  not  every 
time.    Sometimes  we  do. 

Q.  What  do  you  catch  ? — A.  We  cat^,h  mackerel  with  lines  and  nets, 
and  we  fish  every  day,  when  possible,  and  when  we  can  secure  bait. 

Q  Do  not  the  large  nets  catch  mackerel  ? — A.  No.  The  mesh  is  too 
small.    Our  herring-nets  have  only  a  2^-iuch  mesh. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  any  other  fish  in  the  nets  ? — A.  Whatever  gets  into 
them  we  catch. 

Q.  Does  the  whole  fish  get  into  the  net  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  you  fasten  them  in  when  there  f — A.  The  mesh  is  small, 
and  when  the  fi»h  get  into  the  meshes  they  stop  there  until  we  haul 
them  up. 

Q.  You  say  that  a  boat  can  manage  two  or  three  nets  ? — A.  Yes;  but 
they  generally  nse  two. 

Q.  How  many  fish  are  caught  in  the  nets? — A.  It  depends  upon  the 
size;  some  take  from  300  to  400  herrings;  others  take  less,  and  soniu 
secure  as  many  as  1,000  herring. 

Q.  Don't  you  catch  anything  else  than  herring  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Don't  you  use  seines  for  mackerel  ? — A.  We  do  not. 

Q.  What  is  the  difficulty  ?— A.  We  do  not  fish  for  them.    There  are 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


409 


DO  more  mackerel,  save  very  few,  now  on  our  shore.  Then  that  is  not 
at  all  our  trade. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  if  there  were  mackerel  enough  you  would  use  the 
geiue ;— -A.  Perhaps  we  might.  I  could  not  say.  We  are  not  accus- 
tomed to  that  fishing  at  all.    It  is  uot  our  trade. 

Q.  You  say  that  one  reason  in  connection  with  this  competition  be- 
tween your  fishing  vessels  and  the  Americans  is  that  the  Americans  are 
generally  better  fitted  out ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  have  better  bait ! — A.  I'es. 

Q.  Why  don't  you  beat  the  Americans  in  this  respect  ? — A.  We  are 
uot  iu  as  good  a  place  as  they  are  to  get  bait,  I  suppose. 

Q.  They  bring  their  bait  from  home? — A.  Some  do.  Some  of  them 
have  told  me  that  they  have  gone  ashore  and  bought  it  in  the  Gut  of 
C'anso. 

Q.  Menhaden  and  pogies? — A.  Something  like  that,  and  clams. 

Q.  It  is  now  ten  or  twelve  years  since  a  great  many  American  fish- 
ing vessels  were  in  your  neighborhood  f — A.  It  is  a  good  many  years 
since  this  was  the  case. 

Q.  When  did  their  number  begin  to  grow  less! — A.  I  think  it  was 
alxmt  nine  or  ten  years  ago. 

Q.  And  they  have  kept  diminishing  in  number  up  to  this  time? — A. 
Tiieir  number  has  been  getting  smaller. 

Q.  And  lately  hardly  any  have  visited  your  coa.st? — A.  Last  year 
there  were  hardly  any.  They  come  no  more  because  there  is  no  more 
niHcktrel  to  catch. 

i}.  What  do  you  do  with  your  boats  in  these  times  ? — A.  We  catch 
cod. 

(J,  And  not  mackerel  ? — A.  No ;  we  fit  out  to  catch  cod  ;  sometimes, 
however,  we  catch  mackerel. 

Q.  And  you  duu't  undertake  tbt-  mackerel  business  ? — A.  It  does  nut 
pay  us  to  catch  mackerel. 

Q.  You  take  small  and  young  cod  ? — A.  We  take  them  as  they  come. 

Q.  Do  you  get  none  but  small  ones  ? — A.  We  take  some  big  ones  ; 
but  not  iu  any  great  quantity. 

Q.  Yonr  boats  are  not  intended,  I  suppose,  to  go  very  far  from  shore? 
-A.  They  are  open  boats. 

(J.  Your  custom  is  to  come  in  every  night  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  out  a  few  hours,  and  then  you  come  in  and  «lo  farm  work! 
-A.  In  the  spring  we  do  our  work  on  the  farm,  and  then  we  turn  to 
and  fish. 

Q.  Your  most  prohtable  way  of  doing  business  along  the  coa.st  is  to 
farm  and  fish  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  the  Anu-ricans  were  there  and  fished  within  a  mile  of  the 
shore  they  did  not  have  seines,  did  they  1 — A.  They  did  uot  seine  on 
our  shore.    It  is  rough  and  rocky.    It  would  ?iot  do  to  use  seines  there. 

Q.  Unless  they  do  as  you  do  ? — A.  We  use  nets. 

Q.  The  mackerel  begin  to  grow  larger  and  f  itte»^  Vi-ing  the  latter  part 
0'  tlie  sunmier — say  in  Heptember  ? — A.  This  is  tl     ^y.  »e  about  August, 

'v'.  And  they  are  b<*tt«'r  still  in  October  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  don't  you  know  that  it  is  the  custom  of  American  vessels  io 
tollow  tlie  mackerel  down  to  the  American  coast,  and  catch  them  iu  No- 
vember?—A.  I  do  not  know,  I  am  sure. 

Q.  Then  you  doa't  undertake  to  say  that,  taking  the  whole  season 
around,  on  their  own  coast  and  here,  the  Americans  do  uot  catch  a  great 
number  of  the  largest,  best,  and  fattest  fish  ?— A.  They  themselves  told 
■nt  tliat  they  would  rather  have  the  mackerel  about  our  way  than  what 


410 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


I 


they  catch  at  home,  a  good  deal,  because  ours  are  better  than  theirs,  i 
understand  that  they  wake  about  two  trips  a  season  to  the  bay.  Tbey 
themselves  told  me  so. 

Q.  Yon  say  that  yon  don't  know  anything  about  the  November  mack- 
erel fishing? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  complain  a  little  about  the  Americans  throwing  offal  over- 
board from  their  vessels  ? — A.  Yes;  I  have  only  got  an  idea  of  that. 

Q.  You  don't  complain  of  it  yourself  f — A.  Not  altogether. 

Q.  That  is  what  you  have  been  toM  by  others  ! — A.  Yes ;  and  1  have 
seen  a  little  of  it  myself.    I  would  not  swear  to  it  exactly. 

Q.  You  have  heard  a  good  deal  said  about  it  lately  !— A.  Yes ;  and  1 
have  myself  seen  something  of  it. 

Q.  Besides  what  you  have  seen,  and  that  is  not  much  ? — A.  I  have 
seen  a  good  deal  of  it. 

Q.  You  said  you  had  seen  but  a  few  cases  of  it  i—A.  I  have  been  Ash- 
ing alongside  of  them  when  they  have  thrown  it  overboard.  Previously 
we  would  be  catching  a  good  many  fish,  but  immediately  after  the  ofifal 
w  as  thrown  overboard  we  would  not  catch  any  more.  The  cod  amuse 
themselves  by  picking  up  what  is  thrown  overboard. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  cod  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  have  done  so  all  the  time. 

Q.  You  do  not  speak  with  reference  to  what  they  did  regarding  mack- 
erel ? — A.  I  could  not  tell  you  about  that.    1  allude  to  cod-fishing. 

Q.  What  motives  have  the  Americans  to  sp^i!  their  own  flsliing- 
grounds,  if  the  throwing  overboard  of  oft'al  drives  away  the  fish  ?— A. 
They  have  to  dress  tbe  mackerel ;  they  cannot  go  on  shore  to  do  it ;  aud 
then  they  heave  the  ott'al  overboard.  They  do  not  stay  long  in  cue 
place,  but  they  go  to  other  places  when  that  is  done. 

Q.  The  Americans,  while  catching  a  good  many  cod,  would  not  be 
likely  to  throw  otfal  overboard  and  drive  the  cod  away  ? — A.  Tbey  do 
so  in  our  neighborhood  ;  and  when  they  heave  the  offal  overboard  we 
catch  no  more  fish  at  that  place. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  then  catch  any  more? — A.  I  have  not  seen  the 
Americans  catching  cod. 

Q.  Are  they  able  to  catch  fish  afterwards,  the  same  as  if  this  bad  not 
been  done  f — A.  No ;  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  Why  should  they  do  it? — A.  They  are  obliged  to  do  it. 

Q.  In  catching  cod  this  is  not  the  case? — A.  I  have  not  seen  tbem 
catching  cod. 

Q.  Tbe  cod-fishers  are  not  at  once  obliged  to  throw  the  offal  over 
board? — A.  They  are  obliged  to  do  so  sometimes. 

Q.  '•^hey  may  keep  oft'al  on  board  for  24  or  4S  hours  ? — A.  I  li.n  e  ml 
seen  the  Americans  catching  cod. 

Q.  Never?— A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  say  that  they  throw  ott'al  overboard  in  these  pljiwsf- 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Cod  offal  ?— A.  No,  mackerel  ott'al. 

Q.  Then  this  is  all  you  have  seen  them  throw  overboard  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  not  cod  ott'al  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  This  goes  back  a  long  time  ago  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Have  you  seen.anv  thrown  overboard  during  the  last  ten  ye;u>  .'- 
A.  No. 

By  Mr.  Doutre : 

Q.  You  sav  that  you  have  not  seen  this  lion*  for  the  last  ten  years ?- 
A.  No. 

Q.  Have  they  discontinued  the  practice  '—A.  I  do  not  sniipose  that 
they  have. 


jfN 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


411 


Q.  Did  yon  see  them  discontinue  it  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Yoa  have  only  had  no  occasion  to  see  them  doing  sof — A.  I  have 
not  seen  them  throwing  it  overboard  lately. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  that  they  were  doing  it  lately  ? — A.  1  have  not. 

Q.  When  you  have  spoken  of  the  fishing-grounds  as  being  either 
abandant  or  as  having  no  fish  on  them,  you  have  always  alluded  to 
those  iu  your  own  locality  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  did  not  refer  in  this  regard  to  Prince  Edward  Island  or  the 
Bay  ofCbaleurs  fishing- grounds,  but  merely  to  those  in  your  own  neigh- 
borhood ?— A.  That  is  all,  sir. 

No.  10. 


Gregoire  Grenier,  49  years  ci.  age,  fish  trader,  residing  at  New- 
jKirt,  in  the  county  of  Gaspe,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government 
nf  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Dontre : 

Question.  Is  Newport  on  the  coast ! — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  lived  there  } — A.  I  was  born  there. 

(j.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  character  of  the  fishing  in  your  neigh- 
borhood?— A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Mention  the  places  with  which  you  are  acquainted. — A.  I  am  ac- 
ijuaiiited  of  course  with  our  own  fishing-grounds.  I  have  seen  American 
vessels  come  and  fish  there;  I  am  acquainted  with  the  cod-fishery. 

Q.  When  is  the  cod  taken? — A.  We  take  them  from  tbe  Ist  of  Juno 
to  tbe  25th  of  May,  and  to  the  last  of  the  season  in  the  fall. 

Q.  Where  do  you  go  for  cod  ? — A.  We  catch  them  at  from  about  halt 
,1  mile  to  a  mile  and  a  half  from  the  coast,  and  sometimes  twenty-one 
luiles  off. 
,  Q.  That  is  towards  the  other  side  of  the  bay  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  When  you  get  as  far  as  21  miles  from  your  residence,  how  far  are 
von  from  tbe  shore? — A.  This  is  on  Mi''<^ou  Bank;  and  then  we  are 
.sometimes  about  ten  miles  from  the  first  shore. 

Q.  Where  have  you  been  in  the  habit  of  taking  the  largest  quantities 
of  cod?— A.  We  used  to  catch  a  good  many  in  the  spring  on  our  shore, 
and  on  the  Bank  too  sometimes,  but  not  often. 

Q.  How  far  from  your  shore? — A.  From  half  a  mile  to  a  mile  and  a 
half. 

Q.  Have  you  made  a  business  of  it  ? — A.  I  have  myself  fished  for  fif- 
teen years. 

Q.  Were  you  doing  that  exclusively,  or  had  you  other  occupations  ? — 
A,  [  used  to  fish  all  the  time. 

(J.  From  morning  until  night  ? — A.  Yes. 

»c».  For  cod  ?— A.  Yes. 

<i'.  In  wliat  kind  of  boats? — A.  In  op^-n  boats. 

<i'.  What  quantity  used  vou  to  catch  during  the  season  ! — A.  From 
""•  to  IL'O  quintals  of  dry  fish. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  this  quantity  did  you  take  on  your  own  shore, 
and  what  proportion  Oi»  Miscou  Bank  ?— A.  W^e  took  two  thirds  on  our 
"wn  shore. 

Q.  And  one-third  on  the  Bank  ? — A.  Yes. 

^i.  When  you  speak  of  your  own  shore,  you  mean  along  the  shore  ? — 
A.  Yes;  from  a  mile  to  a  mile  and  a  half  from  it. 

Q.  Not  over  two  miles  from  it  ? — A.  No. 


412 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


fir 


Q.  Yoa  have  not  fished  for  mackerel  ?— A.  Yes ;  but  only  for  bait.  I 
way  say  I  have  seen  others  fish  for  them. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  Americans  fishing f — A.  Yes;  just  inside  on 
the  point.  I  may  say,  at  a  distance  of  twenty-five  yards  from  tlie 
l)oint. 

Q.  Fishing  for  mackerel? — A.  Yes.  They  were  so  close  that  they 
had  to  haul  their  anchors  and  be  off.    They  were  too  close. 

Q.  How  many  have  yon  seen  fishing  there  during  the  fishing  season, 
from  spring  to  fall  f — A.  Our  place  is  not  exactly  the  best  place  for  tisli- 
ing  there  is ;  but  I  have  seen  more  thpu  100  ^here,  and  more  than  20  at 
a  time  coming  to  anchor  in  front  '>f  our  pUce. 

Q.  And  during  the  fishing  season  you  aave  soen  about  100  there  7— 
A.  I  have  seen  over  100. 

Q.  What  is  the  tonnage  of  those  you  have  seen  ? — A.  I  would  judge 
that  they  were  from  60  to  GO-odd  tons. 

Q.  How  many  men  were  on  board  I — A.  From  12  to  15.  Tbey  have 
often  told  me  that  this  was  the  number. 

Q.  For  a  few  years  past— perhaps  for  more  than  two  years — the  mack 
erel  have  been  scarce  ? — A.  There  were  not  many  of  them  about  three 
years  ago. 

Q.  When  did  you  last  see  the  Americans  fishing  for  mackerel  ?— A. 
This  was  about  seven  years  ago. 

Q.  You  have  not  seen  them  fishing  since? — A.  We  see  some  of  'hem. 

Q.  But  not  in  the  same  number  as  previously  f — A.  No. 

Q.  On  what  extent  of  shore  have  you  seen  the  one  hundred  vessels 
and  over,  of  which  you  have  spolcep  1 — A.  The  most  of  them  were  a 
good  deal  inside  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  But  I  mean  along  the  shore? — A.  I  have  seen  some  near  the  island ; 
some  at  Paspebiac,  and  some  as  far  away  as  Pabos ;  but  not  often.  This 
was  only  when  I  used  to  pass  there.  I  only  speak  of  what  I  saw  ou  our 
shore.    I  saw  many  along  the  shore. 

Q.  For  how  many  miles  along  the  shore  have  you  seen  them  fishing?— 
A.  For  about  6  or  7  miles,  I  should  say. 

Q.  How  far  do  you  live  from  Gasp6  Bay  1 — A.  About  80  miles. 

Q.  Do  you  live  above  or  below  it? — A.  Above.  We  are  just  on  the 
edge  of  the  county.    I  live  near  Point  Maquereau. 

Q.  Is  Gasp^  Bay  above  or  below? — A.  Below — down  the  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Do  you  live  on  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs  ? — A.  No ;  we  are  on  the  edge 
of  it. 

Q.  Then  you  live  below  Gaspe  Bay  ? — A.  We  always  speak  of  goiug 
up  to  the  Bay  of  Cbaleurs. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  What  is  Newport  ? — A.  A  village. 
By  Mr.  Doutre : 

Q.  Then  you  live  at  the  mouth  of  the  Bay  of  Cbaleurs  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  you  last  see  the  Americans  fishing  ? — A.  About  seven 
years  ago. 

Q.  You  say  you  have  seen  sonie  of  them  fishiug  since,  but  not  a 
great  number  ? — A.  No ;  I  have  not  seen  many  of  them  during  the  past 
t?iree  years. 

Q.  iSut  you  have  seen  some  of  them  during  this  period  ?— A.  Yes; 
now  and  then. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  nuruber  of  barrels  of  mackerel  that  they 
would  take  during  the  fishing-season,  from  spring  to  fall? — A.  I  would 


AWARD   OF   THE   FIOHERY   COMMISSION. 


413 


gay  that  tbe  vessels  whiob  came  to  our  place  woaUl  carry  from  400  to 
450  barrels  each. 

Q.  Would  that  be  for  one  trip  or  for  the  whole  season  ? — A.  It  wonkl 
be  for  one  voyage. 

Q,  Do  you  know  whether  they  make  more  than  one  voyage  during  a 
seaion  f — A.  Some  of  them  have  told  us  that  they  made  two  trips  a 
year. 


Q.  Could  you  state  what  is  the  average  catch  of  the  American  vessels 
daring  tbe  fishing-season  t— A.  To  tbe  best  of  my  judgment  they  used 
to  take  from  500  to  600  barrels. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  as  to  the  number  of  barrels  which  it  would 
take  to  pay  expenses  1 — A.  I  have  heard,  but  I  am  unable  to  give  a  per- 
»oaal  opinion  on  this  point. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  what  the  catch  was  some  ten  years  ago  ! — A.  1  heard 
it  lately,  and  about  six  or  seven  years  ago. 

Q.  And  did  what  yon  heard  lately  agree  with  what  you  heard  six  or 
seven  years  ago ! — A.  Yes ;  I  heard  it  from  those  who  were  on  board  the 
schooners,  and  who  had  sold  their  shares  of  the  mackerel. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  would  it  require  to  pay  the  exi)en8es  of  tbe 
lisbing-season  t — A.  All  schooners  will  not  catch  the  same  quantity  of 
tish,  and  one  captain  may  hire  men  at  less  rates  than  others. 

Q.  Some  men  work  on  wages  and  others  on  shares  ? — A.  Yes ;  those 
on  shares  get  half  the  fish ;  and  they  have  to  pay  the  cook. 

Q.  Wbopay  the  cook  ? — A.  The  men.  Tbe  expenses  would  cost  from 
$G  CO  $7  a  month. 

Q.  Would  that  be  for  the  cook  ? — A.  No,  for  each  man. 

Q.  Would  it  not  be  more  than  that? — A.  No;  because  they  are  fed. 

Q.  Wben  they  have  ended  tbe  season,  how  many  barrels  of  mackerel 
do  yon  think  it  would  require  to  pay  expenses,  not  the  wages  of  the 
nieo,  but  tbe  expenses  connected  with  everything  that  has  l^en  eaten 
and  drunk  and  consumed  on  board  of  the  vessel  during  the  season  T — 
A,  I  may  say  that  it  would  take  about  120  barrels. 

Q.  And  that  information  you  have  received  from  the  Americans  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  tbe  remainder  of  tbe  ^are  is  clear  profit,  to  be  divided  be- 
tween the  owner  and  the  crew  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Wben  you  speak  of  expenses,  you  include  everything  that  is 
used!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  These  include  the  shipping  of  barrels  and  bait, and  everything? — 
A.  They  include  all  expenses. 

Q.  Are  there  any  herring  and  cod  in  your  locality  ? — A.  There  are 
some,  of  course,  in  tbe  spring,  and  then  again  in  the  fall ;  but  there  are 
not  many  to  be  got  in  that  quarter.  There  are  plenty  in  the  spring,  but 
tliey  are  poor  herring. 

(i.  You  catch  them  for  bait?— A.  That  is  all. 

Q.  Before  yon  left  the  place  where  you  live,  did  you  know  whether 
tlie mackerel  were  coming  up  this  year! — A.  They  were  then  just  be- 
ginning to  catch  a  few  mackerel. 

Q.  When  you  left  I— A.  Yes. 

^l  What  were  tbe  reports  ? — A.  That  tliere  Mere  a  good  many  near 
the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Do  tlie  Americans,  when  fishing,  use  baud  lines  or  seines  ? — A. 
Most  of  them  fish  with  lines;  but  I  have  seen  tbem  use  purse  seines. 
Tbey  were  seining  close  to  the  shore  at  our  place. 

Q.  Is  this  mode  of  fishing  injurious  or  beneficial  ? — A.  Tbey  take  all 
kinds  of  fish  in  these  seines. 


414 


AWARD   OF  THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  do  they  do  with  thein  ?— A.  They  only  .keep  wbat  they 
want,  and  throw  the  rest  away. 

Q.  Does  what  is  thrown  away  constitute  a  large  proportion  of  what  is 
thus  caught? — A.  Of  course ;  I  am  sure  of  it. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  that  you  could  give  the  percentage  of  w-bal:  is  use- 
less to  them  in  the  catch  of  a  seine  1  Is  \t  a  tenth  part?— A.  I  have 
seen  them  seining  for  mackerel,  but  I  never  saw  the  mackerel  in  the 
seine. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  what  was  thrown  away  ? — A.  I  have  seen  them 
working  the  seines,  but  I  have  not  been  alongside  to  see  what  was 
done. 

Q.  When  the  Americans  are  curing  fish  on  board  their  vessels,  what 
do  they  do  with  the  entrails,  or  offal  f — A.  They  throw  it  overboanl, 
and  this  is  what  spoils  the  codfishing,  because  at  the  place  where  they 
have  thrown  this  overboard  you  need  not  try  to  catch  coil  for  a  long 
spell.    I  have  proved  that  myself. 

Q.  You  have  tried  it  ? — A.  When  I  was  a  fisherman  £  used  to  spit 
l)eside  the  boat,  and  where  I  spat  I  could  not  catch  fish,  and  I  would 
then  have  to  move  to  another  place. 

Q.  Can  you  explain  why  you  had  to  move  ! — A.  I  would  say  that  fish 
eat  too  much  of  what  is  thrown  overboard,  and  that  they  are  not  able 
to  take  any  more  bait  afterwards  more  than  that.  I  think  that  this 
makes  the  water  in  the  vicinity  impure. 

Q.  They  would  not  take  bait  till  they  had  digested  all  this  o£faI  ?— A. 
They  would  not  do  so  for  a  long  spell. 

Q.  Then  you  have  made  experiments  in  this  relation  f— A.  Yes ;  I 
would  throw  some  in  the  water  and  that  moment  we  had  to  move  from 
that  place.    No  more  fish  were  to  be  caught  there. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  American,  or  even  Canadian,  vessels  fishing  for 
mackerel  beyond  three  miles  from  the  coast  f — A.  I  have  seen  some  fish- 
ing on  the  bank. 

Q.  On  Miscou  Bank  ? — A.  Yes ;  between  Miscon  Island  and  Point 
Maquereau.  The  majority  of  the  vessels,  however,  fished  inside  ot 
three  miles  from  the  shore. 

Q.  If  you  were  called  upon  to  state  what  proportion  of  the  whole 
catch  of  the  American  vessels  was  taken  within  the  three  miles  of  the 
shore,  and  what  proportion  outside  of  this  limit,  what  would  be  your 
answer  ? — A.  I  think  that  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  catch  has  been 
taken  inside  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Within  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  on  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  ? — A.  No ;  never. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  American  vessels  come  amongst  Canadian  fisher 
men  when  the  latter  were  engaged  in  fishing  f — A.  Yes ;  many  times. 
Many  American  vessels  have  come  alongside  of  the  shore  and  tbrowu 
out  bait,  and  taken  the  mackerel  away,  and  after  a  spell  none  of  our 
fishermen  could  catch  any.  A  week  after  the  Americans  began  to  work 
in  our  waters  there  would  be  no  chance  for  our  fishermen.  The  latter 
could  not  take  any  bait  in  order  to  catch  cod.  Our  fishing  was  thus 
ruined. 

Q.  They  could  not  ever-  take  bait  ?— A.  No.  We  never  fish  much  for 
mackerel,  but  we  used  to  catch  mackerel  in  order  to  take  codfish. 

Q.  Codfishing  is  your  own  lino  of  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  prevented  you  getting  bait  f — A.  Yes ;  be 
cause  they  used  to  take  the  mackerel  away. 

Q.  Were  you  fishing  on  your  own  acconntf— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then,  when  the  Americans  had  thus  .^nticed  the  mackerel  away 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


415 


(lid  they  fish  with  hand  lines  or  with  seines?— A.  With  hand  lines;  they 
would  come  to  broadside  and  heave  to,  and  fish  with  hand  lines. 

Q.  Did  they  fish  with  these  lines  from  the  decks  of  their  vessels  or 
from  small  boats?— A.  When  a  little  off  the  shore  they  would  flsh  from 
on  board  their  vessels,  but  when  close  to  the  shore  they  would  flsh  iu 
dories,  or  small  boats,  here  and  there  along  the  shore. 

Q.  Some  on  board  the  vessels  and  others  in  dories  f— A.  They  would 
fish  inside  the  coves  with  small  boats,  and  about  half  a  mile  from  the 
shore  in  their  schooners. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  Americans  use  purse  seines f — A.  Yes;  twice  I 
saw  them  throw  the  seines,  but  I  am  not  able  to  say  how  many  mack- 
erel tbey  caught,  but  I  know  that  they  caught  mackerel,  because  the 
boats  used  to  take  them  from  the  seine  to  the  schooner. 

Q.  Is  not  the  purse  seine  drawn  on  board  the  schooner? — A.  No;  but 
from  two  small  boats. 

Q.  Where  do  they  empty  these  boats?— A.  They  bring  their  flsh  in 
the  boats  on  board  of  the  vessel. 

Q.  Can  these  small  boats  hold  much  fish  ? — A.  O,  yes ;  some  of  them 
can  carry  from  ten  to  fifteen  barrels*. 

Q.  Is  it  to  your  knowledge  that  the  An^ericans  have  either  purchased 
or  tisbed  fur  bait  in  your  neighborhood  t — A.  Once  I  saw  a  schooner 
come  on  nhore  and  buy  some  herring. 
Q.  Did  they  buy  a  large  quantity? — A.  No;  only  a  barrel. 
Q.  You  only  saw  one  schooner  buy  it? — A.  Yes;  only  one. 
Q.  Is  the  cod-fishing  on  the  increase  or  decrease? — A.  It  is  a  good 
deal  on  the  increase ;  it  has  doubled  within  the  past  two  years. 

Q.  How  do  yon  explain  that? — A.  It  is  because  the  fishermen  can  get 
mackerel  for  bait  now. 

Q.  Is  this  due  to  the  fact  that  the  Americans  have  not  been  there? — 
A.  Exactly ;  two  years  ago  only  a  few  of  them  were  there,  and  that  is 
the  reason  why. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  other  reason  explaining  it? — A.  I  know  nothing 
except  that.  During  the  best  part  of  the  season,  previously,  our  fish- 
ermen could  often  not  get  bait. 

Q.  And  then  they  got  bait  and  the  catch  of  cod  increased  in  quan- 
tity?—A.  Previously  there  were  plenty  of  small  fish,  but  not  of  big  fish ; 
the  latter  were  all  taken  away.  Since  then,  however,  we  have  taken  big 
fish,  and  more  of  them  during  these  two  years  than  we  did  during  the 
previous  twenty  years. 

Q.  Without  our  bait  I  suppose  it  is  no  use  for  the  Americans  to 
fish  t— A.  No. 
Q.  Not  without  bait  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Suppose  the  bait  of  an  American  vessel  were  exhausted — if  under 
such  circumstances  they  could  not  buy  it  on  our  shores,  they  would 
have  to  go  home  for  it  ? — A.  I'es  ;  if  they  have  no  bait  they  cannot 
catch  fisb. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  it  is  an  advantage  for  them  to  be  able  to  buy 
halt  in  our  waters  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  an  American  vessel  could  take  from  250  to  300 
barrels  of  mackerel,  and  have  time  during  the  season  to  go  home  and 
return  for  a  secocd  fare,  if  they  could  not  transship  one  cargo? — A. 
Many  vessels  used  to  transship — not  exactly  at  home,  but  into  some 
other  vessel  which  was  returning. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  they  would  have  time  to  go  to  Boston  or  Glou- 
cester and  return  for  a  second  cargo  except  in  good  weather  ? — A. 
They  might  early  in  the  season. 


416 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHEKY   COMMISSION. 


{}.  In  good  weather  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  yoa  ever  hear  of  Canadians  going  to  flah  in  Atnericaii 
waters  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  yon  seen  Americans  fishing  for  halibut  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Judging  froin  your  experience  and  the  conversation  yon  have  had 
during  the  last  twenty-flvo  and  thirty-five  years  with  the  people  who 
have  Ashed  and  come  here  on  board  of  American  vessels,  do  yoo  think 
that  it  would  be  profitable  for  the  Americans  to  come  into  the  Bay  of 
the  Saint  Lawrence,  or  into  any  part  of  it  to  fish,  if  they  were  prevented 
fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  shore,  save  say  near  the  Magdalen 
Islands  and  Labrador  coast  ?— A.  They  would  not  come  under  such  cir- 
cnmstances. 

Q.  They  would  not  f — A.  No ;  because  it  wouhl  not  be  profitable  for 
them  to  do  so. 

Tly  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  say,  you  thought  it  would  take  120  bar- 
I'els  of  mackerel  to  pay  the  expenses  of  a  trip  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  is  before  there  would  be  anything  to  divide  for  the  wages 
of  the  men,  or  the  owners  of  the  vessel,  is  it  not  f — A.  I  meant  to  say 
that  it  would  take  120  barrels  to  pay  all  expenses. 

Q.  And  that  does  not  include  the  pay  of  the  crew  for  their  time  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Paying  them  how  much  T  The  crew  are  paid  by  shares,  are  they 
not  f — A.  By  shares  or  wages. 

Q.  Then  yon  include  the  wages  for  the  crew  in  the  120  barrels  f— A. 
Of  course. 

Q.  Yon  think  that  120  barrels  of  mackerel  would  pay  all  expenses  T— 
A.  It  would  pay  all  except  the  owner ;  the  crew  has  nothing  to  do  with 
the  captain.  The  owner  has  his  own  share  besides.  I  understand  that 
the  crew  get  one-half,  and  the  owner  one-half,  of  the  catch. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  the  wages  paid  the  crew  would  be  found  by 
means  of  these  120  barrels  f — A.  Yes ;  because  I  have  heard  from  them 
that  they  were  paid. 

Q.  It  would  include  their  pay  !— A.  They  are  paid  by  the  month  or  by 
shares. 

Q.  When  you  say  that  120  barrels  are  sufficient  to  pay  the  expenses, 
do  you  suppose  the  men  are  paid  by  shares  or  by  the  month  ?— A.  It 
makes  no  difference.  From  what  I  hear  the  men  used  to  be  paid  $12  a 
month.  If  they  worked  on  shares,  of  course  some  years  they  would 
catch  more  and  other  years  less. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  crew  were  not  paid  by  wages  at  all  but  had  a 
share  in  the  catch,  how  many  barrels  of  mackerel  would  there  have  to 
be  caught  to  pay  expenses,  and  before  there  would  be  anything  to  be 
divided  between  the  owners  and  captain,  and  crew  ? — A.  It  would  be 
difficult  to  say. 

Q.  Why  harder  than  in  the  other  instance  f — A.  Of  course,  I  coald 
tell  from  what  I  have  heard  concerning  the  prices  of  one  or  two  years ; 
but  perhaps  after  two  or  three  years  the  price  might  fall. 

Q.  Take  the  same  condition  of  things  as  those  under  which  you  made 
the  estimate  of  120  barrels  and  tell  us  how  many  barrels,  under  these 
circumstances,  would  pay  the  cost,  excepting  the  wages  of  the  crew  f— 
A.  Is  that  for  the  whole  vessel  or  only  for  the  crew  ! 

Q.  We  are  talking  about  the  expenses  of  the  voyage,  and  you  stiid 
that  120  barrels  would  pay  them  ? — A.  I  meant  the  crew. 

Q.  But,  excepting  the  time  of  the  crew,  how  many  barrels  would  pay 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


417 


the  ez|)AU8e8  of  tbe  voyage  ? — A.  I  think  that  120  barrels  woald  cer- 
tainly pay  tbe  expenses  of  the  voyage. 

Q.  Does  tbat  include  tbe  wages  of  the  crew  or  not  f — A.  I  mean  for 
tbe  voyage. 

By  Mr.  Dontre : 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  wishes  to  know  whether  your  estimate  includes  the 
expenses  of  tbe  season  f — A.  It  includes  tbe  cost  of  tbe  voyage. 

Q.  Does  it  cover  tbe  share  or  tbe  wages  of  the  crew  t— A.  It  covers 
the  wages  of  tbe  employes. 

Q.  Then  tbe  remainder  is  clear  profit  for  the  owner  of  the  vessel  T — 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Suppose  tbat  tbe  crew  were  engaged  on  shares,  how  many  barrels 
would  be  necessary  to  pay  the  expenses  apart  from  the  division  of  tbe 
tub  between  tbe  crew  and  the  owner  f — A.  I  mean  all  the  expenses ;  I 
ioclade  tbe  wages  in  tbe  estimate. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 
Q.  Suppose  tbat  tbe  crew  were  hired  with  wages  of  120  or  il5  each, 
do  you  mean  to  say  tbat  120  barrels  would  pay  all  expenses  f — A.  Yes; 
only  I  calculated  tbe  wages  at  $12  a  month. 

By  Mr.  Dontre: 

Q.  Suppose  tbe  crew  worked  on  shares,  to  be  well  remunerated  if  fish 
are  abundant  and  less  so  if  tbe  case  be  otherwise,  then  how  much  prior 
to  the  division  of  the  catch  between  them  and  the  proprietor  would  be 
necessary  to  pay  all  expenses  f — A.  I  think  that  tbe  expenses  for  tbe 
season  would  be  at  least  about  one-third. 

Q.  Of  what?— A.  Of  the  results. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  tbe  boats  would  catch  from  100  to 
120  quintals  in  tbe  season  f — A.  Yes ;  of  dried  fish. 

Q.  How  many  nets  would  each  use  f — A.  Two. 

Q.  And  for  bow  many  days  would  you  fish  ? — A.  God  knows ;  we 
sotnetimes  only  fish  half  the  time. 

Q.  How  long  is  the  average  ? — A.  Perhaps  half  tbe  season,  or  about 
tToand  a  bait  months. 

Q.  How  many  days  would  that  be ;  65,  if  you  did  not  fish  on  Sun- 
day!—A.  Yes;  I  think  so. 

Q.  Would  you  catch  from  100  to  120  quintals  in  65  days? — A.  Yds; 
and  I  have  seen  them  catch  more  than  tbat. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  this  estimate  is  a  fair  average? — A.  Yes. 

No.  11. 

William  McLeod,  farmer,  formerly  seaman  and  fisherman,  Port 
Daniel,  district  of  Gasp6,  called  on  behalf  of  tbe  Government  of  Her 
Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 
Qaestiou,  Where  do  you  live  ? — Answer.  I  live  in  Gaspe,  Canada. 
Q.  How  long  have  you  lived  there? — ^A.  Forty  years  or  more. 
Q.  How  old  are  you? — A.  Sixty-three  years  this  mouth. 
Q.  You  live  on  Gasp6  Bay  ? — A.  I  live  in  tbe  district  of  Gasp6,  in  the 
1  coanty  of  Bonaventure. 
Q.  How  far  from  Gaspd  ? — A.  Sixty  miles  or  more  west.    At  Port 
Uaniel. 

27  F 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


#S 


V 


/. 


{/ 


s 


.<■'  «?■, 


/- 


1.0     I^il-  IIIIIM 


I.I 


IIIIIM 

IIIIIM 

1.8 


1.25      1.4      1.6 

^ 

6"     

► 

V] 


<^ 


/a 


^l 


CS 


^m 


%  > 


^% 


%  .^/' 


y 


^ 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


23  WIST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  M5B0 

(716)  872-4503 


418 


AWARD   OF    I'HE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


Q.  You  live  on  Bay  CLaleurs  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Port  Daniel  i8  on  the  north  side  of  Bay  Ghaleurs  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Bonaventure  belongs  to  the  district  of  Gaspe  ? — A.  Yes ;  there  are 
two  counties  in  that  .istrict,  Bonaventure  and  Gasp6  Counties. 

Q.  The  two  counties  make  the  district  of  Gaspd  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  been  acquainted  with  the  fishing  there  as  long  as  you 
recollect  ? — A.  I  have  been  acquainted  with  the  fishing  there  forty  years. 

Q.  That  would  make  you  twenty-three  years  when  your  attention  was 
first  directed  to  fishing  T — A.  About  that  age. 

Q.  Did  you  go  into  the  business  yourself  at  that  time  ?— A.  I  went 
into  business  for  another  person  at  that  time. 

Q.  In  what  capacity? — A.  As  an  assistant  in  trading — pur.ibasiii'' 
fish  along  the  shores. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  buying  up  the  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  From  those  who  caught  them? — A.  From  those  who  canglit  and 
cured  them. 

Q.  You  bought  cured  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  that  be  along  the  whole  of  Bay  Chaleurs  ?— A.  Aloug  Bay 
Chaleurs  and  6asp<S  also. 

Q.  You  traveled  the  whole  coast  round  ? — A.  We  sailed  all  the  coast 
round  in  a  vessel. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  engaged  in  that  work  ?— A.  Four  mouths  that 
season. 

Q.  At  what  time  of  the  year  did  you  commence  ? — A.  Some  time 
about  the  last  of  July  or  first  of  August. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  what  year  it  was  ? — A.  I  think  it  would  be 
in  1830. 

Q.  During  that  year  did  you  notice  whether  the  Americans  were 
fishing? — A.  I  saw  a  few  Americans  in  Bay  Chaleurs  at  that  time, 
maybe  half  a  dozen. 

Q.  Did  you  along  the  coast  towards  Gaspe  notice  any  fishing  going 
on  ? — A.  I  did  not  notice  any  Americans  fishing  going  along  there  at 
th  vt  time. 

Q.  At  that  time  how  was  the  Canadian  fishing  done? — A.  It  was 
chiedy  codfishing;  some  mackerel  were  caught  by  the  inhabitants  gen 
erally — men,  women,  and  children. 

Q.  Were  the  mackerel  caught  for  exportation  or  mainly  for  home 
use? — A.  Not  for  exportation  to  any  foreign  country,  but  chiefly  fc 
Quebec. 

Q.  Were  they  caught  in  large  numbers  in  those  days  ? — A.  Not  in 
very  large  quantities,  because  they  were  not  prepared  to  cure  large 
quantities;  but  there  was  an  abundance  of  fish. 

Q.  The  codfishing  was  chiefly  prosecuted  at  that  time? — A.  CodtishiDg 
was  the  chief  business  of  the  fishermen  at  that  time. 

Q.  Was  the  codfishing  done  chiefly  by  the  Jersey  firms  located  ou 
Gaspt;  and  Bay  Ghaleurs? — A.  The  majority  of  the  fish  were  cured  by 
the  Jersey  firms,  yet  a  large  portion  was  sent  to  Halifax,  West  Indies, 
and  Quebec. 

Q.  After  that,  what  was  the  next  employment  you  had  in  counectioD 
with  fishing  ? — ^A.  In  the  following  year  I  fished  for  cod. 

Q.  On  your  own  account  or  for  some  other  person  ? — A.  I  engaged 
with  employers,  but  I  was  to  have  the  fish  I  caught,  they  curing  them. 

Q.  Was  that  in  a  Canadian  schooner  f — A.  No ;  in  a  boat. 

Q.  Was  that  oflf  Port  Daniel  ?— A.  Ott"  Pabos,  in  the  county  of  Gasiic, 
about  5  miles  below  the  county  line. 

Q.  Off  Grand  Pabos?— A.  Ye?. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


419 


Q.  That  is  light  out  in  the  gulf? — A.  Yes;  Just  outside  the  county 

Hue. 
Q.  Did  you  fish  altogether  that  year  ? — A.  Up  to  the  latter  part  of 

August. 

Q.  lu  codfishing  altogether?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  what  your  catch  was  that  year  1 — A.  I  cannot  tell 
vou  the  quantity  of  fish  taken,  but  I  remember  the  amount  of  money  I 
received. 

Q.  What  was  it?— A.  About  £10. 

Q.  At  wb  it  time  did  you  commence  to  fish  ? — A.  At  the  latter  part  of 
May  or  tirsi  of  June. 

Q.  You  were  employed  for  two  months  or  more,  and  you  received  that 
amount '? — A.  Yes ;  that  is  exclusive  of  my  fit-out. 

Q.  That  was  over  and  above  all  expenses  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  did  yon  not  continue  fishing  later  than  August  ? — A.  Be- 
cause I  had  an  engagement  elsewhere  which  paid  me  better. 

Q.  Durin;^  that  time  did  jou  take  mackerel  ? — A.  Only  for  bait. 

{}.  Were  there  plenty  of  mackerel  ? — A.  Plenty  for  bait. 

(}.  If  you  had  been  prosecuting  mackerel  fishing  would  you  have  found 
plenty  of  fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  if  disposed  to  fish  for  mackerel,  there  were 
plenty  of  fish. 

Q.  The  mackerel  trade  had  not  sprung  up  to  such  large  dimensions  at 
that  time  ? — A.  I  know  of  no  mackerel  being  then  sent  except  to  Que- 
bec, where  the  price  was  very  low. 

Q.  What  was  the  price  ? — A.  $4  or  $5  per  barrel. 

(J.  The  trade  with  the  United  States  had  not  then  sprung  up  ? — A. 
No. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  the  Commission,  as  far  as  you  are  aware,  how  the 
mackerel  come  into  the  bay,  where  they  come  from,  and  how  they  strike 
tbe  shores  ? — A.  The  mackerel,  up  to  the  last  two  or  three  years,  have 
made  annual  visits  to  the  bay  and  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence,  about  the 
last  of  June  or  Ist  of  July.  They  have  come  in  very  large  schools. 
They  make  generally  for  the  head  of  the  bay  for  the  purpose,  as  our 
iishermen  say,  and  as  I  believe,  of  spawning. 

Q.  That  is  at  the  gulf  ?— A.  At  the  head  of  Gaspi*  Bay,  likewise  on 
the  north  shore  of  Seven  Islands  and  up  Bay  Chaleurs  right  into  tide- 
water, into  fresh  water ;  and  up  the  south  shore  of  the  St.  Lawrence  to 
Matane. 

il  Are  those  the  spawning  grounds  ? — A.  They  are  supposed  to  be 
tbe  spawning  grounds,  and  I  believe  such  is  the  case. 

Q.  How  far  up  the  St.  Lawrence  f — A.  Pretty  nearly  to  Bic. 

Q.  Does  your  observation  lead  you  to  believe  that  these  are  the 
spawning  grounds  for  mackerel  t — A.  I  do  believe  so,  for  1  have  seen, 
what  were  said  to  be  fry,  coming  off  the  sand. 

Q.  In  all  those  places? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  the  mackerel  come  into  the  bay  where  do  they  first  strike  ? — 
A.  As  nearly  as  my  observation  would  lead  me  to  Judge,  they  come 
right  into  the  channel  from  deep  water  or  from  the  Grand  Banks  per- 
haps. I  don't  know  that  such  is  the  case,  but  I  believe  they  come  from 
the  Banks,  which  naturally  would  be  their  feeding  grounds.  They  come 
straight  in  like  all  other  fish  which  make  for  spawning  grounds;  nature 
•lirectf  them. 

Q>  Are  you  aware  whether  they  strike  Prince  Edward  Island  and 
^ork  north  ? — A.  1  am  not  aware ;  I  believe  the  schools  of  fish  visit  their 
own  grounds  from  year  to  year. 


420 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  tbey  spawn  on  Prince  Edward  Island  shores  ?— A.  I  am  not 
aware  that  tbey  do;  I  cannot  say. 

Q.  Do  they  strike  the  island  lirst  and  then  go  straight  north  f— A.  I 
believe  a  portion  do,  but  I  don't  believe  the  same  schools  do  that  as  go 
np  the  gulf.  I  believe  the  fish  that  go  up  the  south  side  of  the  gult 
come  from  Bichibucto  and  in  that  direction. 

Q.  They  are  different  schools,  you  think  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  the  mackerel-iishing  at  Gasp^  Bay  better  than  the  mackerel 
fishing  at  Prince  Edward  Island? — A.  I  am  not  awai-e;  I  am  not  so 
well  posted  up  in  regard  to  Prince  Edward  Island ;  I  have  caught  fish 
there  in  the  latter  part  of  June. 

Q.  Is  that  earlier  than  the  fish  generally  visit  Gasp^JBay  ? — A.  I  have 
caught  fish  coasting  outside,  not  close  in. 

Q.  What  fish  first  visit  your  coatt  in  spring! — A.  The  fish  we  flml 
on  our  coast  in  spring  are  herring. 

Q.  What  time  do  they  come? — A.  It  depends  upon  what  time  the  ice 
breaks  up.  I  believe  they  come  under  the  ice  frequently;  we  find  them 
frequently  there  in  May. 

Q.  As  soon  as  the  ice  leaves  the  coast  ? — A.  I  have  seen  them  taken 
through  ice-holes. 

Q.  Do  they  stop  under  the  ice  all  winter? — A.  No;  they  come  in  un- 
der the  ice. 

Q.  After  them  comes  cod  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  soon  after  herring? — A.  We  sometimes  catch  cod  there  aboat 
the  first  week  in  June,  not  in  abundance,  but  between  that  and  July  the 
heavy  schools  come. 

Q.  Do  they  catch  cod  as  a  rule  within  three  miles  of  the  shore,  or  in 
deep  water  beyond  ? — A.  In  our  bay,  the  fishing  is  all  within  three  miles 
of  the  shore,  particularly  in  spring.  In  spring  for  three  or  four  weeks, 
the  fish  are  close  inshore  because  the  bait  is  there. 

Q.  As  soon  as  the  season  advances,  do  they  go  out  into  the  bay?— A. 
As  the  season  advances  the  bait- fish  commence  to  move  ofi'  into  Cieeim 
water,  and  then  they  sometimes  run  with  another  kind  of  bait.  There 
are  ditt'erent  sorts  of  bait  which  visit  our  shores. 

Q.  Do  the  codfish  move  out  ? — A.  They  move  out  also. 

Q.  At  what  time  do  they  begin  moving  out?  —A.  At  the  latter  part 
of  Jnly,  sometimes  in  August ;  sometimes  it  will  be  as  late  as  Aiigast. 

Q.  At  what  time  do  the  mackerel  move  out? — A.  I  have  yet  to  learn 
that ;  not  till  late  in  October. 

Q.  Do  they  remain  there  all  the  fishing-season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  mackerel  usually  feed  on  ? — A.  Lants,  shrimp,  another 
similar  bait  which  we  call  brit.  It  is  generally  supposed  that  it  is 
attached  to  the  bottom ;  it  is  a  marine  insect,  and  when  there  is  au 
unusual  sea  disturbing  the  water  where  they  lie,  they  float  to  the  surface. 

Q.  The  heavy  sea  disturbs  them  at  the  bottom? — A.  Yes;  ou  a  shoal 
bottom,  and  they  are  seen  floating. 

Q.  Do  the  mackerel  feed  on  them  at  the  bottom  ?— A.  They  most 
feed  on  them  at  the  bottom,  because  I  have  often  caught  mackerel 
which  have  been  at  the  bottom,  and  their  entrails  have  been  tiled  with 
this  kind  of  bait.  I  believe  they  will  fatten  on  that  better  than  on  any 
otlsr  food,  because  they  have  not  to  chase  after  it. 

Q.  On  all  the  grounds  you  have  spoken  of  you  have  seen  mackerel 
fipy  ? — A.  I  have  seen  mackerel  fry  at  the  head  of  Bay  Chaleurs,  at 
Herring  Island,  at  Maria,  Seven  Islands,  and  at  Madeleine. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  mackerel  fry  in  Gasp6  Bay? — A.  I  have  notseeu 
them  there,  but  I  have  been  told  there  is  a  large  amount  occasiouallf 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISUEBT   COMMISSION. 


421 


Q.  You  have  not  had  occaRion  to  look  there  for  them  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Where  do  the  cod  spawn  ? — A.  There  are  several  distinct  schools 
of  cod  in  a  season. 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  distinct  species? — A.  No;  distinct  schools. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  there  are  many  separate  schools?— A.  I  mean  that 
tbe  schools  keep  separate,  and  they  come  at  different  seasons,  and  can 
only  be  caught  with  the  bait  of  the  season.  You  may  procure  any 
amonut  of  bait  out  of  season — that  is  to  say,  bait  which  is  not  for  that 
distinct  school  of  fish,  and  you  cannot  get  them  in  abundance,  not  in 
quantities  sufficient  to  pay. 

Q.  Do  the  schools  come  at  different  times,  oue  after  the  other  ? — A. 

Yes. 

Q.  Would  two  distinct  schools  be  inshore  a!)  the  same  time? — A.  Not 
tbat  I  am  aware  of;  they  either  go  off  or  move  out. 

Q,  You  never  saw  two  schools  in  the  same  water  at  the  same  time  f — 
A.  No. 

Q.  How  often  have  you  tochange  your  bait  forced  during  the  season  T — 
A.  Tlie  fishermen  know  from  the  bait  itself;  when  the  fish  strike  inshore 
the  fishermen  know  what  kind  of  bait  is  required.  First  there  is  cap- 
ling.  Formerly  tbe  greatest  portion  of  the  catch  was  taken  with  capliug. 
Then  those  who  can  procure  them,  use  clam. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  that  before  you  commence  using  clam,  cupling 
will  have  left  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  How  many  days  will  capliug  generally  remain  ? — A.  In  one  place 
it  might  remain  a  fortnight,  and  extend  itself  along  the  shore  from  one 
end  of  a  county  to  the  other;  it  might  remain  one  month. 

Q.  Take  any  particular  place,  how  long  would  capling  remain  there? — 
A.  About  a  fortnight. 

Q.  They  replace  them  with  clams? — A.  That  is  when  they  can  be 
procured. 

Q.  Does  any  other  fish  come  in  and  replace  capling  ? — A.  Herring  is 
next. 

Q.  You  can  take  cod  with  herring  ? — A.  Yes ;  but  after  capling  leaves 
tbe  ground-clams  would  be  the  next  resource,  where  they  could  be  pro- 
cared,  and  we  would  send  40  or  50  miles  to  procure  them. 

Q.  Why  do  you  not  use  herrings  instead  of  clams? — A.  Because  the 
fish  would  not  bite  them  as  well. 

Q.  After  clams  what  do  you  next  use  for  bait? — A.  Herring. 

Q.  After  the  clam  bait  is  exhausted,  do  cod  take  herring  as  well  ? — 
A.  They  take  herring  more  readily  than  any  other  flsh  after  that;  fish- 
ermen can  work  with  them  better  than  with  clam,  because  it  is  tough. 

Q.  Is  it  another  school  of  flsh  which  take  herring  instead  of  clam  ? — 
A.  Yes;  that  is  my  experience.  The  reason  why  I  state  so  is  because  I 
bave  tried  fishing  with  clam  and  herring  on  the  schools. 

Q.  At  one  time  clam  would  answer  and  herring  would  not  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  at  another  time  herring  would  answer  and  clam  would  not? — 
A.  Certainly. 

Q.  Did  you  notice  any  difference  in  the  characteristics  of  the  flsh  ? — 
A.  Yes;  tbe  flsh  which  take  herring  are  heavier  and  fatter  than  the 
fish  which  take  clam,  in  proportion  to  their  size.  They  are  not,  per- 
liaps,  very  much  larger,  but  they  are  firmer  and  fatter  and  much  bet- 
ter fish. 

Q.  Otherwise  they  are  the  same  flsh  ?— A.  Yes. 

9-  What  do  you  use  after  herring? — A.  Mackerel. 

Q.  Are  they  other  schools  of  cod  ? — A.  They  are  other  schools.    There 


422 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION, 


is  what  fisherman  call  a  mackerel  school.    The  codfish  are  coming  after 
the  mackerel. 

Q.  Then  you  take  young  mackerel  for  bait  ? — A.  We  take  mackerel 
of  any  size  we  can  get  hold  of  about  that  time. 

Q.  And  they  last  the  season  out  ? — A.  No ;  we  next  use  squid.  They 
are  next  to  mackerel  and  the  best. 

Q.  About  what  time  do  squid  make  their  appearance  ? — A.  About  Ist 
August. 

Q.  Do  you  find  them  in  large  quantities? — A.  In  vast  quantities  at 
times.    I  have  seen  them  driven  on  shore  in  abundance  and  many  bar 
rels  taken  at  different  times. 

Q.  How  do  you  catch  them  ? — A.  With  a  jig.    It  is  made  of  a  piece 
of  lead  fitted  with  a  number  of  hooks  at  the  bottom,  with  a  short  line 
and  a  piece  of  rag  attachf^d ;  each  man  uses  one  on  each  side  of  tlie 
boat.    All  they  have  to  do  is  to  keep  hauling  and  they  pull  up  num 
bers  at  a  time.    I  have  known  men  take  300  in  the  course  of  two  hours. 

Q.  They  don't  bite?— A.  I  believe  they  bite  the  rag,  but  they  are  sup- 
plied with  a  number  of  feelers,  and  when  they  touch  anything  they  stick 
to  it. 

Q.  That  makes  the  best  bait  of  all  ? — A.  That  makes  the  best  bait 
for  codfish  I  know,  except  capling. 

Q.  What  is  the  bait  next  used  ? — A.  When  they  cannot  procure  squid 
they  seine  for  smelt,  which  remains  all  winter.  They  get  smelt  when- 
ever they  can  get  a  seine  in  the  water. 

Q.  How  do  they  answer  for  bait  ? — A.  They  are  poor  bait. 

Q.  At  what  time  are  you  obliged  to  take  smelt? — A.  In  September 
and  November. 

Q.  There  is  not  much  mackerel  fished  in  November  '! — A.  I  saw  none 
after  November. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  any  caught  as  late  as  that  ? — A.  I  don't  think 
I  have. 

Q.  Witnesses  have  spoken  about  mackerel-fi  bing  ending  toward  the 
middle  of  October? — A.  The  middle  of  October  and  last  of  October. 
I  have  caught  them  myself  on  20th  October  in  our  bay. 

Q.  After  you  had  fished  that  season  inshore,  what  was  your  next  em- 
ployment in  connection  with  fishing  ? — A.  I  then  removed  to  Port  Daniel 
and  fished  again  for  myself. 

Q.  Cod  or  mackerel  ? — A.  Cod. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish? — A.  In  Port  Daniel  and  about  the  mouth  of 
Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  You  fished  in  boats,  I  presume  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  a  small  boat  inshore. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  the  whole  season  1 — A.  The  whole  season. 

Q.  How  many  boats  ? — A.  Only  one  boat. 

Q.  How  many  men  besides  yourself  were  in  the  boat  ? — A.  One  man, 

Q.  iiow  did  you  catch  your  fish  ? — A.  With  lines  and  hooks. 

Q.  When  did  you  land  ! — A.  We  landed  every  day. 

Q.  At  the  end  of  each  day  ? — A.  Sometimes  we  did  not  fish  over  two 
or  three  hours,  sometimes  a  whole  day,  according  to  the  fish  we  took. 
There  are  days  when  fish  are  plenty,  but  they  will  not  bite. 

Q.  If  the  fish  were  plentiful,  how  long  would  it  take  to  fill  the  boat?- 
A.  It  would  take  two  fishermen  four  hours  to  fill  one  of  our  moderate- 
sized  fishing-boats,  with  5,  6,  7,  or  8  quintals. 

Q.  Would  you  wait  to  fill  your  boat  before  you  went  to  shore  f—i- 
We  would  if  the  fish  were  in  suflQcient  quantities. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  the  cod  within  the  three-mile  limit,  or  out  in  the 
bay,  oflFshore  ? — A.  Within  the  three-mile  limit. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COM^lISSION. 


423 


Q,  Then  you  landed  and  dried  them  !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  continued  all  the  season  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  catch  per  season  f — A.  About  80  quintals. 

Q.  What  was  the  price  at  that  time  ? — A.  $4. 

Q,  To  whom  would  you  sell  them? — A.  To  the  Jersey  establishments. 

Q.  Would  you  take  them  there? — A.  When  properly  dried,  some- 
times we  would  do  so.  When  we  make  an  arrangement  with  one  of  the 
Jersey  establishments  for  them  to  take  the  flsh  when  cured,  they  will 
collect  the  fish  when  they  are  in  merchantable  order. 

Q.  Where  had  the  Jerseymen  their  establishments  at  that  tima  ?— A. 
At  Paspebiac  and  Perce. 

Q.  At;  the  north  side  of  the  Bay  Chaleurs,  in  the  county  of  B  juaveu- 
turef— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  else? — A.  At  Gasp^  and  Grande  River. 

Q.  How  did  they  collect  the  flsh  ? — A.  They  have  shallops  or  small 
schooners  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  fish.  They  send  and  collect  the 
tish  when  cured,  and  afterward  classify  the  fish  according  to  qualities. 

Q.  You  say  there  was  one  man  with  you  in  the  boat ;  would  you  re- 
qnire  another  man  on  shore  for  the  purpose  of  cleaning  and  drying  the 
lish  ?— A.  We  did  not  in  that  case,  because  the  family  I  resided  with 
iured  the  fish. 

Q.  If  such  bad  not  been  the  case,  would  you  have  required  another 
nan!— A.  Yes. 

o  You  require  drying  stages  ? — A.  Yes :  salting  stages  and  forms  to 
dr,.  them  on. 

Q.  Do  these  Jersey  firms  encourage  mackerel  fishing? — A.  They  have 
not  done  so  up  to  this  time. 

Q.  Don't  they  discourage  it  ? — A.  They  do. 

Q.  Their  employes  are  chiefly  French  ? — A.  They  are  chiefly  French ; 
a  majority  of  them  are  so,  but  there  are  a  great  number  of  other  nation- 
alities. 

Q.  The  great  body  are  French  ? — A.  The  great  body  of  them  are 
French  Canadians. 

Q.  And  they  want  entirely  the  cod  business  to  be  attended  to  ? — A. 
That  is  their  business. 

Q.  They  have  a  monopoly  of  it  ? — A.  They  have  sometimes  purchased 
a  fm  quintals  of  No.  1  mackerel  to  ship  to  Jersey  for  their  own  use. 

Q.  They  have  a  very  large  trade  with  the  Mediterranean  ? — A.  Yes ; 
with  the  Mediterranean  and  the  Brazils. 

Q.  Is  the  trade  a  monopoly  ? — A.  Yes ;  almost  exclusively  a  mo- 
nopoly. 

,Q.  What  did  you  do  next  year? — A.  Next  year  I  was  engaged  in 
clearing  up  a  piece  of  land  for  myself,  and  doing  a  little  fishing. 

Q.  Pass  to  some  year  in  which  you  were  exclusively  engaged  in  fish- 
ing!—A.  In  1851 1  engaged  on  board  an  American  schooner. 

Q.  What  was  her  name  ? — A.  The  Ida,  of  Gloucester. 

Q.  Who  was  her  commander  ? — A.  Charles  Maston. 

Q.  What  were  the  terms  on  which  you  shipped  ? — A.  I  was  to  have 
half  of  the  flsh  I  caught. 

Q.  Did  you  engage  at  Port  Daniel  ?— A.  Yes;  I  did  not  go  to  Glou- 
cester. 

Q.  Kxplain  what  is  the  practice  when  men  ship  on  terms  of  receiving 
half  their  own  catch ;  have  they  each  separate  barrels  ? — A.  Each  n)au 
•uaiks  his  own  barrels  as  he  fills  and  packs  them.  If  his  catch  is  ten 
harrols  he  gets  five  barrels  as  his  own,  and  has  to  pay  for  packages  and 


424 


AWABD   OP  THE   FISHERY    COMMI38ION. 


re- 


bait  out  of  that.    There  is  always  some  deduction  made  when  be 
ceives  pay  for  the  fish. 

Q.  The  object  is  to  cause  each  man  to  be  interested  in  the  catch  ?— A. 
Yes.  There  are,  however,  instances  u\  which  men  have  been  hired.  If 
a  master  can  make  a  good  bargain  with  a  very  experienced  pilot  he  will 
engage  him  at  so  much  and  take  his  catch  himself. 

Q.  He  does  not  get  the  benefit  of  any  person's  catch  except  bis 
own  ? — ^A.  No. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  when  on  board  the  Ida  ? — A.  We  fished  prin- 
cipally in  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  commence  fishing? — A.  Some  time  in  August. 

Q.  Is  not  that  late  f — A.  It  is  not  late.  A  great  number  of  vessels 
only  come  into  the  bay  at  that  season  to  make  up  full  catches. 

Q.  When  you  went  on  board  had  they  caught  any? — A.  Aboat 
twenty  barrels. 

Q.  Where  had  they  been  fishing  ? — A.  The  first  fish  they  caught  wis 
over  at  Bonaventure  Island. 

Q.  Did  they  fish  for  the  rest  of  the  season  in  Bay  Chaleurs  ?— A.  Th*y 
fished  up  to  about  October  1,  in  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  In  the  middle  of  the  bay  or  inshore  ? — A.  Chiefly  inshore. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  middle  of  the  channel  ? — A.  Sometimes  a  quarter 
of  a  mile  and  sometimes  a  mile  from  shore. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  get  beyond  the  three-mile  limits? — A.  We  might 
sometimes  have  caught  a  very  few  outside  three  miles.  The  fish  at  that 
particular  season  are  inshore. 

Q.  Did  yon  go  round  the  bay  as  far  as  Restigouche  ? — A.  As  far  as 
Herring  Island. 

Q.  Did  you  come  down  the  south  shore  ? — A.  Yes,  by  Bonaventure 
and  Maria. 

Q.  Is  the  fishing  better  at  the  mouths  of  the  rivers  which  run  into  the 
bay  on  the  south  shore? — A.  The  mouth  of  Nipisquit  River,  which 
empties  into  Bathurst  harbor,  is  the  best  fishing-ground  ou  Bay  Cbalenrs. 

Q.  That  is  the  best  fishing-ground  on  the  south  shore  ? — A.  That  is 
what  I  found  best. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  From  one  mile  to  one  mile  and  a 
quarter. 

Q.  Outside?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  acquainted  with  Bay  Chaleurs ;  is  there  any  really  good 
mackerel  or  cod-fishing  four  or  five  miles  from  land ;  s  ly  in  the  center 
of  the  bay  for  instance  ? — A.  At  certain  seasons  cod-fishiug  is  best  iu 
the  center  of  the  bay. 

Q.  What  season  of  the  year  do  you  meau? — A.  I  should  say  October^ 
perhaps  some  time  early  in  November. 

Q.  Can  you  keep  on  cod-fishing  until  the  ice  makes? — A.  So  long  as 
you  can  keep  out  in  the  stormy  weather. 

Q.  What  about  mackerel  ? — A.  Mackerel  at  that  season  are  about 
moving  southward. 

Q.  Is  there  any  season  at  which  the  mackerel  are  caught  in  the  center 
of  the  bay  more  than  three  miles  from  land  ? — A.  The  heaviest  fishing 
I  ever  knew  caught  in  the  bay  was  in  the  center  of  the  bay,  but  it  was 
only  once.    It  was  exceptional. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  what  year  that  was  ? — A.  It  was  the  first  year 
of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty — 1854. 

Q.  You  know  it  was  an  immense  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  it  taken  by  any  vessel  in  which  you  were  concerned  ?— A.  1 
had  nothing  to  do  with  it. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


425 


Q.  Was  it  taken  by  an  American  vessel  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  taken  1 — A.  By  hand-lines. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  an  instance  of  such  an  occurrence  before  or 
siDce?— A.  I  have  known  that  they  have  taken  fish  occasionally,  bat 
not  in  such  abundance— not  in  such  heavy  draught. 

Q.  When  fishing  in  the  bay  in  1851,  did  you  try  outshore  fishing  f — 
A.  We  did. 

Q.  Did  you  succeed  in  catching  anything  ! — A.  Very  little ;  we  never 
could  catch  more  than  half  a  barrel  at  one  time. 

Q.  You  then  come  inshore  again  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  worked  round  the  north  side  of  the  bay,  down  the  south  side; 
and  where  else  ? — A.  We  had  succeeded  in  filling  the  vessel  before  we 
left  the  bay. 

Q.  How  many  barrels ! — A.  About  280  barrels. 

Q.  Wbat  was  the  tonnage  of  the  vessel ! — A.  Sixty-five  tons. 

Q.  Was  that  a  full  fare  t— A.  Yea. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  then  ? — A.  We  went  to  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  About  what  time  did  you  complete  your  fare  ? — A.  Early  in  Oc- 
toter. 

Q.  Did  you  transship  at  Cape  Breton! — A.  We  transshipped  40  or 
50  barrels. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  transship  the  v>  hole  catch  ? — A.  What  we  trans- 
shipped was  to  a  vessel  which  was  not  fully  loaded,  and  which  wanted 
supplies.  We  had  sufficient  supplies  to  go  on  further,  and  we  purchased 
barrels  at  Mabou,  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  It  was  not  a  vessel  belonging  to  the  same  owner  ? — A.  I  think  we 
belonged  to  the  same  firm,  but  I  could  not  be  certain.  I  don't  remember 
the  name  of  the  vessel,  but  she  was  commanded  by  Captain  Smith. 

Q.  That  was  pretty  late  in  the  season,  in  October  ? — ^A.  It  was  about 
9tb  October  we  transshipped  that  fish. 

Q.  Did  you  go  back  to  the  bay  t — A.  We  fished  off  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  toward  the  bay,  or  outside  1 — A.  North  and  west. 
We  fished  at  Shippegan  and  Miscou. 

Q.  By  the  time  you  caught  45  barrels,  how  far  was  the  season  ad- 
vanced ?— A.  About  the  20th  we  completed  the  fare. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  ? — A.  Forty-five  barrels. 

Q.  Then  you  went  to  Gloucester? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  coming  down  from  Bay  Chaleurs  to  the  Gut  of  Canso,  where 
you  transshipped,  did  you  try  to  take  any  fish  off  Prince  Edward  Island? 
—A.  No ;  because  we  had  a  full  fare. 

Q.  The  fish  you  took  off'  Miscou  and  Shippegan — did  you  take  them 
inshore  or  out  in  the  bay? — A.  All  inshore. 

Q.  Within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  Within  half  a  mile  of  the 
shore. 

Q.  It  is  a  pretty  bold  and  rocky  coast  ? — A.  It  is  bold  and  rocky,  with 
deep  water  right  inshore. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  what  the  price  of  mackerel  was  at  that  time  ? — 
A.  I  recollect  perfectly  well. 

Q.  You  have  said  you  had  280  barrels  and  the  45  barrels ;  what  was 
tbe  proportion  of  No.  1  and  No.  2  mackerel  ? — A.  About  three-quarters 
were  No.  1. 

Q.  At  the  north,  in  Gasp^  Bay  and  Bay  Chaleurs,  are  not  the  greater 
proportion  of  mackerel  taken  No.  1  ? — A.  That  depends  on  the  season. 
The  fish  taken  up  to  the  1st  August  are  inferior. 

Q.  You  say  it  depends  on  the  season  ? — A.  On  the  time  of  year.   The 


426 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


^    f     ■      ■    ■ 


are 

iin- 


A. 


fish  caught  iu  the  early  part  of  the  season  are  inferior  fish  ;  iu  fact,  so 
mncb  inferior  that  they  are  hard  to  cure. 

Q.  Those  taken  later  in  the  season  are  good?— A.  Yes;  they 
good.  From  the  middle  of  Angust  they  begin  to  get  better,  and 
prove  to  the  end  of  the  season.    They  are  more  valuable. 

Q.  And  the  large  majority  are  No.  1  ? — A.  Yes,  at  that  time. 

Q.  You  say  three-quarters  of  your  fare  that  season  were  No.  1  ?- 
They  proved  so  on  inspection. 

Q.  What  price  did  you  obtain  for  them  ? — A.  Mackerel  were  selliuf 
at  $16  for  No.  1  and  $12  for  No.  2.    We  had  no  No.  3  mackerel. 

Q.  How  many  composed  the  crew  of  the  vessel  ? — A.  Twelve,  in  all. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  yourself  did  a  great  deal  of  fishing  f— A.  Not  so 
much  as  some  of  the  other  men,  because  I  was  not  so  much  experi- 
enced. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  had  you  for  your  share  ? — A.  I  caught  13  bar- 
rels, and  had  6|  barrels  for  my  share. 

Q.  Others  got  a  good  deal  more  ? — A.  Yes,  a  good  deal  more. 

Q.  It  requires  a  good  deal  of  experience  to  catch  the  fish  ?— A.  It  re- 
quires experience  and  activity,  so  much  so  that  on  the  first  day,  when 
other  men  bad  filled  a  barrel,  I  had  caught  only  a  dozen  fish. 

Q.  There  is  a  knack  about  it  which  experience  only  teaches?— A. 
Undoubtedly  so. 

Q.  What  did  you  receive  for  your  (JJ  barrels  ? — A.  They  paid  me  so 
much  a  barrel.  I  don't  know  who  purchased  them ;  they  were  packed 
at  Gloucester,  and  the  master  of  the  ^'essel  paid  me. 

Q.  How  much  a  barrel!— A.  $16  for  the  best  fish,  $12  for  the  others. 

Q.  When  was  your  next  fishing  season  ?— A.  The  following  season, 
1852. 

Q.  With  whom  did  you  fish  then  ? — A.  I  remained  in  the  United 
States  that  winter  and  came  back  to  Gloucester  on  an  appointment  and 
fished,  I  believed  for  the  same  firm,  under  Captain  Watson. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  firm  ?— A.  Friends  &  Co.,  or  Friends 
Bros. 

Q.  What  vessel  did  you  go  in  ? — A.  The  Bioan. 

Q.  When  did  you  sail  from  Gloucester  ? — A.  On  13th  June. 

Q.  Describe  which  route  you  took? — A.  We  made  direct  for  the  nioutb 
of  Bay  Chaleurs.  The  first  fish  we  caught  was  off  Bay  Parbos,  with 
with  the  exception  of  one  off  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  You  went  straight  through  the  Gut  of  Canso  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  did  not  stop  at  Prince  Edward  Island? — A.  We  just  hove  to 
and  caught  one  mackerel. 

Q.  You  did  not  stop  at  Banks  Bradley  or  Miscou  ? — A.  We  did  not 
try  the  Banks,  but  went  straight  into  the  bay.  I  believe  the  Captain 
had  a  motive  in  doing  so.  He  agreed  with  me  to  take  me  to  my  own 
place  of  residence  wh^n  we  sailed,  and  he  consequently  thought  that 
was  as  good  fishing-ground  as  any. 

Q.  He  knew  you  had  had  experience  of  the  ground  ? — A.  That  was 
no  doubt  his  reason.  I  had  been  ia  communication  with  the  parties 
while  in  the  interior  of  the  United  States,  and  I  arrived  at  Gloucester 
by  appointment. 

Q.  Were  you  thoroughly  acquainted  with  Bay  Clialeurs  and  the 
coast  of  Gasp6? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  answered  as  a  pilot  as  well  ?— A.  That  was  supposed  to 
be  the  nature  of  the  case.    That  was  the  inducement. 

Q.  Where  did  you  commence  ?— A.  Off  Pabos  Bay.  The  first  time 
we  lay  to  there  we  caught  about  40  barrels. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


427 


Q.  How  long  did  it  take  you  to  catch  them  t — A.  Two  hours  and  a 

half. 
Q.  How  many  men  formed  the  crew?— A.  Fifteen. 

Q.  You  were  experienced  and  caught  more  than  a  dozen  that  day  ? — 
A,  I  caught  two  barrels  that  day. 

Q.  And  others  of  the  crew  in  proportion? — A.  Yea,  some  of  them 
more,  of  course. 

Q.  Were  they  good  mackerel? — A.  No;  they  were  rather  poor. 

Q.  They  would  be  No.  2 1 — A.  Chiefly  No.  3 ;  some  were  No.  2. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  distinction  at  the  time  of  the  catch  ? — A.  It 
ATouId  never  do  to  mix  different  qualities  of  fish,  because  it  would  injure 
them  for  the  market.  After  the  mackerel  are  caught  they  are  packed 
according  to  quality. 

Q.  Has  each  man  three  barrels? — A.  When  fishing  each  man  puts 
his  fish  into  his  own  barrel,  and  after  the  fishing  is  completed  the  men 
tarn  to,  and  perhaps  two  men  assist  each  other  in  splitting  up  and  pre- 
paring the  fish  for  salting. 

Q.  Do  they  do  this  at  the  end  of  the  day's  fishing? — A.  They  do  it 
immediately  they  quit  fishing. 

Q.  Could  you  not  fish  all  day  long? — A.  Yes,  if  the  fish  would  remain 
alongside,  but  they  don't  usually  bite  all  day. 

Q.  When  you  clean  fish  what  do  you  do  with  the  ofifal  ?— A.  Heave  it 
overboard. 

Q.  Did  you  do  that  on  your  first  voyage? — A.  We  do  it  always. 

Q.  You  never  knew  then  of  vessels  landing  to  dress  their  fish  ? — A.  No 

Q.  Were  the  40  barrels  caught  within  the  three-mile  limit? — A. 
Within  a  mile  and  a  half  of  the  shore. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  throwing  offal  overboard  on  the  fisheries  ? — 
A.  In  what  way? 

Q.  Is  it  injurious  or  otherwise  to  the  fisheries? — A.  It  is  injurious, 
decidedly  so.' 

Q.  State  why  you  entertain  that  opinion  ? — A.  In  the  first  place,  if  it 
is  done  on  grounds  where  fishermen  are  fishing  for  cod,  it  will  glut  the 
tish.  Mackerel,  so  far  as  I  am  aware  of,  will  not  take  the  oflal,  but  cod 
will  feed  on  it  when  it  is  fresh.  Our  fishermen  are  not  able  to  take  cod 
with  their  bait  when  this  offal  is  thrown  overboard.  If  a  very  large 
quantity  of  offal  is  thrown  overboard  from  a  large  fleet  of  vessels  it  is 
injurious  in  another  way;  it  makes  the  warer  putrid  and  poisons  the 
small  fish. 

Q.  Have  you  noticed  the  water  putrid  ? — A.  I  have. 

Q.  In  how  many  fathoms? — A.  In  4  or  5  fathoms.  That  is  easily 
explained.  On  our  coast,  in  most  cases,  there  is  a  strong  current  set- 
ting up  or  down,  at  a  certain  distance  from  the  shore,  and  inside  of  that 
there  are  eddies,  and  that  foul  matter  comes  into  the  eddies  and  tends 
to  injure  the  fish. 

Q.  It  does  not  get  out  of  the  eddies  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  smelt  it  ? — A.  Any  one  not  {accustomed  to  fishing, 
coming  to  a  place  where  a  large  amount  of  offal  has  been  thrown  over- 
board, will  distinguish  it  very  quickly. 

Q.  Then  do  I  understand  you  that  without  offal  being  thrown  in- 
shore, but  out  in  deep  water,  you  can  smell  it  at  sea? — A.  For  one  or 
two  miles. 

Q.  Fish  will  not  enter  the  water  at  that  point  ?— Not  to  any  great  ex 
tent,  until  the  ofi'al  is  displaced  by  the  tide. 

Q.  Are  these  places  where  mackerel  spawn  ? — A.  Not  in  all  cases. 

Q.  In  many  cases  ? — A.  In  some  cases. 


428 


AWARD   OP   THE   FIHHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Wbat  effect  will  this  have  upon  mackerel  spawn  and  fry  f— A.  It 
will  be  injuriona  to  the  mackerel  fry  in  particalar,  especially  in  places 
like  Seven  Islands.  If  a  large  quantity  of  offal  is  thrown  in,  it  will  not 
get  washed  away  until  the  tide  has  flowed  for  a  long  time ;  perhaps  a 
spring  tide  will  be  required  to  do  it. 

Q.  Must  there  not  be  an  equally  injurious  effect  upon  the  spawn  it- 
self f — A.  I  should  gupt)Ose  naturally  so ;  I  am  not  positive  that  it  would 
be  so,  but  I  should  think  so. 

Q.  You  are  not  able  to  catch  fish  until  sone  time  has  elasped  at  the 
place  where  offal  has  been  thrown  in  ? — A.  As  a  great  thing  our  flsber- 
men  give  up  the  attempt. 

Q.  For  the  same  reason  f — A.  That  is  the  reason,  I  suppose. 

Q.  That  they  cannot  catch  fish  ? — A.  Not  until  they  move  to  another 
ground,  one  or  two  miles  away. 

Q.  In  your  judgment  it  destroys  the  fishing-ground  whenever  ofl'alis 
thrown  over? — A.  I  believe  it  on  oath.  I  don't  pretend  to  be  a  very 
practical  man  in  fishing,  but  I  am  stating  my  experience ;  there  are 
hundreds  of  men  more  experienced  than  I  am. 

Q.  But  yon  have  had  practical  experience,  and  you  are  stating  your 
judgment? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  judgment  of  Americans? — A.  They  have  stated  that  to 
me  also. 

Q.  They  have  stated  what  ? — A.  They  have  stated  what  I  say  to  you, 
that  when  a  large  quantity  of  offal  is  thrown  overboard  it  is  injurious  to 
fishing. 

Q.  Is  it  really  destructive  ? — A.  I  should  suppose  for  the  last  three 
years  it  has  been.  During  the  la!«t  two  years  seining  has  done  a  great 
deal  more  injury  than  line-fishing.  An  immense  amount  of  seining  ha« 
been  done  in  the  gulf. 

Q.  Fish  have  been  scarce  for  the  last  year  or  two. — A.  Mackerel  have 
been. 

Q.  Do  yon  attribute  it  to  offal  having  been  thrown  overlioard  in  pre- 
vious years ;  do  you  think  that  had  anything  to  do  with  it  ? — A.  Not 
that  alone. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  has  been  one  of  the  causes  operating  ? — A.  It 
has  no  doubt  had  a  tendency  that  way. 

Q.  During  the  last  year  or  two  the  Americans  have  not  been  there  so 
much? — A.  They  have  not.    This  year  the  fish  are  approaching  agaiu. 

Q.  With  regard  to  your  voyage  in  1052,  where  did  you  go  after 
taking  40  barrels  off  Pabos  ? — A.  To  Port  Daniel,  my  place  of  residence, 
which  we  left  for  the  mouth  of  Saint  Lawrence  Eiver. 

Q.  You  went  down  to  Anticosti  ? — A.  We  went  to  Gasp6  Cape.  The 
best  fish  we  caught  were  about  12  miles  above  Gasp^  Head. 

Q.  You  were  keeping  inshore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yon  went  round  the  north  part  of  Gasp^,  and  up  the  Saint  Law- 
rence nearly  as  far  as  Bic  ? — A.  Up  as  far  as  Matane. 

Q.  By  that  time  yon  had  got  a  full  fare  ! — A  By  the  time  we  got  back 
we  had  got  a  full  fare. 

Q.  You  crossed  over  to  the  north  shore  and  went  to  the  north  end  of 
Anticosti  and  fished  there? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  during  the  whole  time  you  kept  fishing  within  the  three  mile 
limit  ? — ^A.  Always,  except  when  cutters  drove  us  off. 

Q.  Did  cutters  interfere  with  you  ? — A.  They  did. 

Q.  Where  did  they  find  you  ? — A.  Inshore.  All  along  the  north  shore 
of  the  Saint  Lawrence. 

Q.  Were  the  cuisers  along  there  ? — A.  They  cruised  from  Gasp6  to 


AWABD   OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


429 


Matane.  Where  there  is  a  fleet  of  500  sail  aloug  the  shore  there  is  a 
signal  kept. 

Q,  Were  they  steam  oraisersf — A.  Some  steam  and  some  Railiag. 

Q,  With  the  steamers  you  couUl  see  the  smoke  f — A.  Yef.  With 
sach  an  extent  of  coast  and  so  large  a  nnmber  of  vessels,  when  a  cruiser 
appears  one  of  the  vessels  at  the  outside  of  the  line  makes  a  signal  and 
then  the  vessels  strike  off. 

Q.  What  was  the  signal  1 — A.  The  vessel's  own  signal. 

Q.  Then  the  vessel  hauled  out  of  the  three-mile  limit  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  did  not  stay  long  outside  ? — A.  Not  long.  As  soon  as  the 
cruiser  was  out  of  sight  we  were  back  again. 

Q.  After  you  had  completed  your  fare,  how  many  barrels  had  you  on 
board  ?— A.  Between  360  and  380. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  the  schooner  ! — A.  90  tons.  The  vessel  car- 
ried more  than  vessels  usually  fitted  out  for  mackerel-fishing,  fur  she 
was  built  to  carry  freight. 

Q.  Were  the  men  engaged  on  the  same  terms  as  on  the  previous 
year  I— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  such  terms  are  made,  the  cook  stands  out  separate  ? — A. 
Not  always. 

Q.  How  can  he  make  a  catch  ? — A.  It  is  very  simple.  If  he  is  a  smart 
man  he  will  arrange  that  the  men  have  a  meal  at  daylight.  I  have  seen 
a  cook  on  board  take  more  than  any  other  man. 

Q.  Was  the  cook  on  this  occasion  paid  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  men  bad  to  pay  their  share  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  else  had  they  to  pay  f — A.  For  bait  and  barrels. 

Q.  Any  proportion  of  the  insurance  premium  ? — A.  I  have  never  been 
charged  for  that.  It  belongs  to  the  owners,  unless  it  is  a  company 
affair  right  through. 

Q.  What  about  salt  ? — A.  I  have  never  been  charged  for  salt. 

Q.  After  your  fare  was  completed  what  did  you  do  i — A.  I  landed  at 
Perce  and  went  home. 

Q.  Where  did  the  vessel  go  ? — A.  To  Arichat,  Cape  Breton,  to  trans- 
ship. It  is  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Straits  of  Canso.  All  the  fare 
was  transshipped  there. 

Q.  In  what  time  had  you  succeeded  in  completing  your  fare? — A.  I 
landed  on  the  13th  of  August  at  Perce.  I  started  from  my  place  on 
5th  July. 

Q.  Then  there  was  time  for  another  trip  1 — A.  It  was  stated  to  me  in 
the  following  spring  that  the  vessel  had  fitted  up  again.  I  don't  recol- 
lect on  what  grounds  they  fished,  except  that  it  was  in  the  gulf. 

Q.  What  was  your  share  of  the  catch  that  year? — A.  I  don't  recollect 
the  quantity ;  my  fish  went  to  Gloucester  and  I  received  my  pay  by  a 
bill  on  Halifax. 

Q.  What  did  it  amount  to  !— A.  $130. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  during  the  remainder  of  the  season  l — A.  Not  particu- 
larly fishing.  I  was  in  a  fishing-vessel  that  season  afterward,  but  I 
did  not  only  fish. 

Q.  During  the  season  of  1852  how  many  fishing- vessels  were  in  the 
Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence  ?— A.  About  600  in  all— that  is,  in  the  gulf. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  were  the  ordinary  fares  that  year? — A.  I  be- 
lieve about  250  barrels ;  that  was  about  the  average. 

Q.  When  you  say  there  were  600  vessels  do  you  mean  American 
vessels  ? — A.  They  may  not  have  been  all  American  vessels ;  they  were 
chiefly  fishing- vessels ;  some  of  them  were  from  Nova  Scotia. 


430 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  many  were  from  Nova  Scotia  ? — A.  I  coald  hardly  tell  you— 
perhaps  30  or  40  vessels ;  there  may  have  been  more  or  less. 

Q.  Then  about  460  or  470  vessels  would  be  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  did  the  price  of  mackerel  rule  that  year  ? — A.  As  I  did  not 
go  with  my  mackerel  to  Gloucester  I  didn't  pay  any  attention. 

Q.  When  you  spoke  of  460  or  470  American  vessels,  or  the  whole 
fleet,  do  you  mean  they  were  all  mackerel  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  any  fishing  for  cod  in  addition  to  those?— A.  Xot  that 
I  am  aware  of. 

Q.  Where  were  you  fishing  in  1853  f — A.  In  the  American  schooner 
Miuerve,  of  Castine,  Maine. 

Q.  Where  did  you  ship  ? — A.  He  came  to  my  place  after  me. 

Q.  He  wanted  you  on  account  of  your  knowledge  of  the  coast  ?— A. 
He  wanted  me  to  go  on  the  Saint  Lawrence  with  him. 

Q.  Did  you  ship  on  the  same  terms  ? — A.  I  shipped  for  a  specified 


Kum. 
Q. 
Q. 
Q. 


For  what  sum? — A.  At  so  much  per  month. 
How  much  per  mouth  ! — A.  Thirty-five  dollars. 
When  you  shipped,  had  the  vessel  any  mackerel  on  board  ?— A. 
Five  barrels. 

Q.  Then  she  had  not  stopped  on  the  way  to  fish  ? — A.  I  suppose  not 
from  that. 

Q.  Where  did  you  commence  fishing? — A.  Outside  of  Bouaventure 
Island. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  inshore  or  outside  ? — A.  Within  half  a  mile  of  land. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  take  there  ? — A.  About  five  barrels. 

Q.  Then  which  way  did  you  go  ? — A.  From  Gasp6  on  the  old  course 
I  have  described. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  on  that  occasion  before  you  got  a  fare !  -A. 
We  did  not  get  a  fare. 

Q.  It  was  not  a  good  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  reason  that  you  did  not  get  a  fare  ? — A.  The  cap- 
tain was  a  very  timid  man  and  the  cutters  were  more  numerous. 

Q.  You  had  to  keep  out!— A.  We  tried  outside,  but  we  did  not  suc- 
ceed in  catching  much  fish ;  we  took  only  80  barrels. 

Q.  Did  he  run  out  when  he  saw  a  cutter  ? — A.  When  a  suspicious  ves- 
sel appeared  he  got  under  way  and  ran  out. 

Q.  He  lost  so  much  time  you  could  not  get  a  catch  ? — A.  That  is  it. 

Q.  Outside  the  limit  you  could  do  nothing  ? — A.  Outside  there  were 
no  fish. 

Q.  And  he  was  too  timid  to  remain  inshore  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  of  the  voyage  ? — A.  The  result  was  that  I 
left  him  after  three  weeks. 

Q.  You  found  it  was  not  a  paying  business  ? — A.  It  would  have  paid 
me.    I  was  paid  according  to  stipulation. 

Thursday,  August  9. 
The  conference  met. 
The  examination  of  William  McLeod  was  continued. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  When  you  left  off  yesterday  you  were  speaking  of  being 
engaged  with  an  American  captain,  who  did  not  fish  much  inshore  be- 
cause he  was  afraid  of  the  cutters,  and  yon  said  you  left  her  at  the  end 
of  three  weeks  ? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  then  ? — A.  After  doing  some  work  at  home,  the 


1S5;3. 

Q. 

11])  to 

Q. : 
il 

2o  or , 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


431 


vessel  cullod  upou  me  again  to  cruise  in  Bay  Ctialeurs,  for  the  purpose 
of  maciierel  fishing  and  trading. 

Q.  Where  was  the  vessel  from  ? — A.  She  loaded  from  Portland.  I 
could  not  remember  whereshe  belonged.  The  captain's  name  was  Foster, 
ami  her  name  was  Forest.  She  fitted  out  from  Portland,  Me.  I  think 
sbe  belonged  to  an  adjacent  port. 

(}.  Did  you  engage  in  her  ? — A.  I  engaged  to  go  in  her  up  Bay  Cha- 
lenis  on  a  voyage,  for  the  purpose  of  taking  and  purchasing  mackerel 
and  purchasing  salmon. 

Q.  What  year  was  that .' — A.  The  same  year  as  I  was  in  the  Minerve — 
185;].    A  few  weeks  after  I  left  the  Minerve. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  i — A.  I  went  first  to  Caraquet  and  proceeded 
up  to  Bathurst  and  Herring  Island,  buying  and  catching  mackerel. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  them  otf  shore  or  inshore  ? — A.  Inshore. 

Q.  Did  you  succeed  in  getting  a  fare  ?— A.  We  caught  very  few,  some 
25  or  30  barrels  altogether  on  that  side,  the  south  side  of  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Did  you  purchase  much  i — A.  We  purchased  some  40  or  50  barrels. 

Q.  Had  you  occasion  when  there  to  make  any  inqniry  as  to  spawning 
p;roiiuds  ? — A.  We  crossed  over  to  the  Canadian  side.  I  was  told  by  an 
old  fisherman,  who  had  been  brought  up  as  a  fisherman  in  the  Orkneys, 
and  from  whom  we  purchased  some  few  mackerel — which  were  inferior 
mackerel — that  he  had  caught  the  fish  in  the  spawning  season.  I  per- 
sonally knew  him.  I  knew  him  to  be  an  old  and  experienced  fisherman 
from  the  Orkney  Islands,  iu  Scotland.    His  name  was  Magnus  Firth. 

Q.  He  told  you  he  had  caught  the  fish  in  spawning  time  ? — A.  We 
bought  from  him  a  few  fish,  but  they  were  inferior ;  he  said  he  conld 
uot  sell  them  there.  He  brought  some  salmon  as  an  inducement  to  take 
tbe  fish. 

Q.  These  fish  were  thrown  in  with  the  salmon? — A.  Yes;  he  said  the 
mackerel  spawned  before  his  own  door ;  he  was  sure  of  that,  because 
be  bad  taken  mackerel  in  that  state,  when  they  were  blind,  with  a  scale 
over  their  eyes. 

Q.  When  spawning  there  is  a  scale  over  their  eyes  ? — A.  I  am  positive 
there  is ;  I  have  caught  them  myself  with  a  scale  over  their  eyes. 

Q.  When  taken  in  that  state  it  is  proof  they  are  spawning  ? — A.  Yes ; 
tbey  bury  themselves  in  sand  and  mud.  He  said  he  had  dragged  them 
out  of  the  sand — a  mud  loam  bottom. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  there  is  a  scale  over  the  eyes  of  the  male 
fish  as  well  as  the  female  f — A.  I  could  not  say ;  I  cannot  distinguish 
tbe  difiference. 

Q.  That,  then,  is  clearly  one  of  the  spawning  grounds? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  After  that  where  did  you  go  ? — A.  W^e  came  down  the  north  side 
of  Bouaventure,  and  caught  some  few  more  mackerel,  and  purchased 
some. 

Q.  Where  then  did  you  go  ? — A.  To  Port  Daniel,  and  I  left  the  ves- 
sel there. 

Q.  What  became  of  her;  do  you  know? — A.  She  proceeded  on  to 
Cape  Breton  to  complete  her  cargo.  She  was  an  American  vessel  which 
weut  to  Miramichi  Kivers  for  tbe  purpose  of  salmon  fishing,  then  sold 
the  salmon,  and  came  on  for  the  purpose  of  catching  mackerel  and 
purchasing  salmon,  and  afterward  returning  to  the  United  States. 

Q.  What  was  her  size  f — A.  About  fifty-five  tons. 

Q.  How  many  men  composed  her  crew  ? — A.  Nine  men  only.  I  put 
a  mast  into  the  vessel. 

Q.  I  think  you  explained — perhaps  you  might  be  more  definite — the 
mode  by  which  men  who  ship  are  paid  by  fish ;  what  is  the  arrange- 


432 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


ment  f — J  .  The  arrangemeot  in  my  time,  when  I  wan  accustomed  to  go 
in  American  fishing  vessels,  was  this:  Each  man  got  half  of  the  fish  he 
caaght  when  landed  in  port ;  he  pays  for  his  own  barrels,  for  half  of  the 
bait,  and  $1  for  the  calling  and  packing  of  the  fish. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  payment  for  half  of  the  bait,  how  do  you  know 
how  much  bait  each  man  uses  ? — A.  The  cost  is  divided  equally.  Que 
man  is  supposed  to  consume  as  much  bait  as  another,  as  it  is  hove 
broadcast.    If  he  does  not  use  as  much  it  is  bis  own  fault. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  How  about  boarding  the  men  ? — A.  The  owner  boards  all ;  he  far- 
nishes  all  supplies.    That  is  my  experience.    There  have  been  cases 
where  it  has  been  a  joint-stock  affair ;  that  I  know  nothing  about. 

By  Mr. Thomson: 

Q.  The  ship  boards  the  men  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  owner  takes  one-half  the  whole  catch  f— A.  Tes.  I  be- 
lieve in  a  general  way  the  owner  does  not  buy  the  fish.  I  believe  it  is 
sold  in  the  market  to  the  highest  bidder. 

Q.  Were  you  engaged  in  1854  in  an  American  vessel  ? — A.  I  was  en- 
gaged on  a  seiner  to  repair  sails. 

Q.  The  vessel  had  come  to  Port  Daniel  f — A.  It  had  come  into  Bay 
Ghalenrs.    I  was  engaged  a  few  days  repairing  sails. 

Q.  They  landed  for  the  purpose  of  having  the  sails  repaired  ?— A. 
They  took  me  on  board  and  moved  off  for  the  purpose  of  fishing  at  the 
same  time.    They  did  not  take  any  fish  daring  my  time  on  board. 

Q.  Then  you  had  nothing  further  to  do  with  her  in  1854  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  whether  a  great  number  of  American  vessels 
were  fishing  in  Bay  Cbaleurs  that  year  ? — A.  Should  say  the  number 
would  be  from  200  to  300  in  1853. 

Q.  In  1855  how  many  were  there  t — A.  I  believe  200  or  300,  probably 
in  that  quarter ;  probably  600  in  the  gulf.  They  told  me  there  were 
about  600  inside  of  Ganso. 

Q.  Were  you  engaged  in  an  American  fishing  vessel  that  year  f— A. 
I  was  not. 

Q.  Did  American  fishing  vessels  fish  much  in  Bay  Ghaleurs?— A. 
They  did. 

Q.  Still  within  the  three-mile  limits,  I  suppose  ? — A.  Mostly  witbia 
three  miles. 

Q.  All  mackerel  fishers,  I  suppose  ? — A.  Ghiefly ;  no  American  cod 
fishermen  came  inside  except  for  bait  and  water. 

Q.  In  1856,  were  there  many  ? — A.  About  the  usual  number. 

Q.  You  were  not  engaged  yourself! — A.  No  further  than  assisting 
them  to  make  repairs  when  thny  came  into  harbor. 

Q.  In  1857,  what  was  the  number  ? — A.  The  same  number — about  the 
same. 

Q.  In  1858  !— A.  I  think  on  the  whole,  up  to  1860  or  1862,  it  was  about 
the  same  thing. 

Q.  We  pass  then  to  1863.— A.  In  1803 1  could  not  say  the  number,  for 
daring  a  portion  of  the  time  I  was  away  from  home. 

Q.  In  1864  ? — A.  The  same ;  I  was  away  from  home. 

Q.  In  1865?— A.  The  same. 

Q.  In  1866?— A.  The  same. 

Q.  Were  you  at  home  in  1867  ? — A.  I  was. 

Q.  Was  there  more  than  the  usual  number  that  year? — A.  There 
were  more  than  there  had  been  during  the  last  three  years  to  my  knowl- 
edge. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


433 


Q.  You  had  been  away  daring  three  years  ? — A.  Not  out  of  the  bay, 
but  away  from  my  own  place. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  would  there  be  in  the  bay  in  1867  ? — A.  From 
300  to  400. 

Q.  Inside  Bay  Chaleurs  f — A.  Tes ;  I  have  seen  250  lying  at  anchor 
in  Port  Daniel  Bay,  and  as  many  more  at  Paspebiac  on  the  same  day. 
Paspebiac  is  eighteen  miles  from  Port  Daniel  on  the  Canada  side.  I 
coald  not  say  they  were  all  A  merican  vessels.  There  might  be  three- 
fourths  American,  more  or  less.  At  this  tiuie  Nova  Scotia  vessels  began 
to  increase.  There  might  be  one-quarter  or  one-half  Nova  Scotia  ves- 
sels, I  could  not  say  positively. 

Q.  Could  you  not  tell  an  American  Ashing- vessel  by  her  rig? — A. 
Within  the  last  few  years  the  vessels  from  about  Lunenburg  and  Liver- 
pool have  resembled  American  fishing-vessels  very  much.  They  rig  the 
same,  and  they  cruise  so  much  together  that,  unless  you  talk  with  the 
captains  and  crews,  it  is  hard  to  distinguish  them  from  Americans. 

Q.  In  1867  you  say  there  were  a  great  number  of  vessels  in  the  bay, 
but  you  cannot  say  how  many  were  Americans  ? — A.  No ;  I  could  not 
say.  I  have  seen  250  vessels  lying  in  Port  Daniel  Harbor  alone,  and 
25  of  them  might  be  Nova  Scotia  vessels. 

Q.  And  a  large  number  more  lying  close  to  Paspebiac  ? — A.  A  num- 
ber more  at  Paspebiac  on  the  same  day,  because  I  came  from  Paspebiac 
on  the  same  day. 

Q.  During  that  year  did  they  all  fish  inshore  as  usual  ? — A.  Most  in- 
shore. 

Q.  Did  the  cutters  trouble  them  that  year  ? — A.  They  did. 

Q.  What  did  they  do  ? — A.  A  number  of  vessels  took  out  licenses 
that  year,  if  I  am  not  mistaken. 

Q.  In  1868  how  many  ? — A.  Quite  a  number  in  1868 ;  I  could  not  say 
the  exact  number.  Most  of  them  in  1868  kept  down  about  Gasp4 ; 
there  were  not  so  many  of  them  at  the  head  of  Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Have  yon  any  means  of  knowing  what  the  average  catch  was  in 
1867  and  1868  ? — A.  Only  by  information  received  from  others. 

Q.  What  did  they  say  the  vessels  took  ? — A.  About  250  barrels  as  an 
average ;  that  is  not  for  the  season,  it  is  for  a  trip. 

Q.  Did  they  go  more  than  one  trip  ? — A.  A  large  majority  make  two 
trips. 

Q.  Then  what  would  be  the  average  for  the  season  ? — A.  That  would 
be  oUO  barrels  for  the  season.  The  first  trip  would  be  shorter ;  for  the 
last  trip  they  would  occupy  longer  time  in  taking  a  fare. 

Q.  But  they  would  bo  better  fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  better  fish  and  more 
valuable. 

Q.  What  about  1869  ?— A.  Fishermen  were  beginning  to  fall  off  a 
trifle. 

Q.  Why;  from  the  scarcity  of  fish  or  the  fear  of  cutters  t — A.  In  our 
quarter. 

Q.  Was  it  from  the  fear  of  catters  or  because  the  fish  had  become 
scarce?— A.  Cutters  were  still  cruising,  but  most  of  the  vessels  had 
taken  out  licenses ;  at  least  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  Was  fish  as  plentiful  in  1869  ? — A.  Yes,  on  our  own  shore.  Our 
own  people  found  them  as  plentiful. 

Q.  They  made  good  catches  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  reason  why  the  American  vessels  did  not  fre- 
quent the  bay  in  as  large  numbers  as  previously  f — A.  They  stated  to 
me  that  they  found  fish  more  on  the  Nova  Scotia  and  Prince  Edward 
Island  shores. 
28  F 


434 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  It  was  not  necessary  then  to  come  so  far  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  about  1870 1 — A.  There  was  a  large  number  of  Americau 
vessels  on  our  shores.    The  catch  in  a  general  way  was  pretty  fair. 

Q.  What  would  you  say  was  the  average  ? — A.  I  can  only  say  from 
report.  When  I  saw  them  they  were  doing  pretty  well ;  they  had  their 
usual  fare. 

Q.  About  500  barrels  in  the  season  ? — A.  Yes ;  there  were  several 
seiners  that  season  in  that  quarter. 

Q.  Was  that  the  first  year  you  had  seen  seiners  there  ? — A.  I  bad 
seen  seiners  10  or  15  years  before. 

Q.  When  was  the  first  year  you  remember  seeing  seiners  f — A.  lu  1851 
and  1852  on  the  northern  coast. 

Q.  Were  the  seines  used  close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  In  1851 1  was  in  com- 
pany with  a  seiner  seining  inshore  at  Seven  Islands. 

Q.  Where  are  Seven  Islands  ? — A.  In  the  St.  Lawrence,  on  the  north 
side. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  on  the  Labrador  coast  ? — A.  Inside  of  the  Bay  of 
Seven  Islands. 

Q.  You  did  seine-fishing  there  ? — A.  Yes;  \vith  a  draught  seine;  not 
a  purse  seine. 

Q.  Did  you  take  much  fish  there  ? — A.  They  take  very  large  catches 
offish  with  it  when  they  can  approach  the  shore. 

Q.  Do  the>  take  the  seine  to  land  ? — A.  They  land  the  seine. 

Q.  What  was  the  effect  of  that  kind  of  seining — did  they  take  more 
fish  than  they  wanted  to  keep  ? — A.  In  a  general  way  it  is  not  the  case. 
At  that  season  of  the  year  the  fish  which  come  inshore  are  a  large  class 
of  fish.  One  seine  was  enough  to  load  two  or  three  vessels,  perhaps, 
in  a  couple  of  days.  They  loaded  them  as  fast  as  the  crew  could  cure 
them,  so  much  so  that  the  master  had  loaded  his  own  and  another  ves 
sel,  and  would  have  done  more  if  he  had  not  been  driven  off  by  a  gov- 
ernment cruiser. 

Q.  In  1871  was  the  number  of  vessels  fishing  in  Bay  Chaleurs  as  large 
as  usual  ? — A.  I  only  saw  one  vessel,  a  seiner. 

Q.  A  purse  seiner  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  she  take  many  ? — A.  I  saw  none. 

Q.  Was  that  a  bad  year  for  fish  ? — A.  Yes  ;  we  caught  no  mack*'rel ; 
not  even  for  bait. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  that ;  did  the  mackerel  alter  their  ways, 
or  were  they  frightened  off  ? — A.  They  alter  their  ways  and  migrate  to 
other  shores ;  but  the  real  cause  was  the  frequent  seining  on  the  shores. 
Frequent  seining  will  drive  them  off'  or  destroy  them. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  anything  about  the  fishing  in  1872? — A.  In  1872 
there  was  considerable  fishing,  but  I  was  not  connected  with  fishiug 
that  season.    I  know  considerable  fish  was  caught. 

Q.  How  was  it  in  1873  ? — A.  About  the  same. 

Q.  Eighteen  seventy-four  has  been  spoken  of  as  a  good  year  ?— A.  it 
was  generally  supposed  to  be  a  good  year  for  fish. 

Q.  How  many  Americau  vessels  would  be  engaged  in  it  in  the  bay 
that  year  ? — A.  I  could  not  say.  So  far  as  I  can  recollect  they  were  not  iis 
numerous  as  previously ;  not  on  our  shores ;  most  of  them  had  kept 
down. 

Q.  In  1875  and  1870  mackerel  were  not  so  numerous? — A.  In  1875 
and  1870  we  got  none. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  the  mackerel  not  being  there  in  1873  ami 
1870? — A.  For  the  same  reason  as  I  have  given  before — too  much  seiu- 
iug. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


435 


Q.  You  have  seen  purseseiniDg  going  on  ? — A.  Yes.    I  have  assisted 

tbem. 

Q.  Will  you  state  to  the  Commission  what  purse-seiners  do? — A. 
When  a  vessel  has  a  seine  and  can  fall  in  with  a  sufficient  body  of  fish  they 
lower  two  boats.  The  seine  is  generally  130  fathoms  long  by  11  fathoms 
deep,  and  is  intended  to  be  drawn  together  at  the  bottom  and  also  in 
the  center,  at  the  two  extreme  ends.  The  seine  is  furnished  with  lead 
siukers  and  sinks  itself.  Consequently,  if  the  fish  make  a  run  to  the 
circle,  Avhich  they  invariably  do,  they  cannot  get  out,  and  the  seine  is 
drawn  together,  and  the  fish  are  captured  in  that  way. 

Q.  How  many  fish  are  captured  at  one  time  in  a  seine? — A.  I  have  seen 
180  barrels  taken  from  a  seine. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  would  be  fish  which  would  not  be  used  ! — A. 
Perhaps  one-half  of  the  fish  would  not  be  marketable. 

Q.  A  good  number  of  the  mackerel  would  be  too  small  ? — A.  Yes ;  that 
is  what  I  mean  ;  they  are  not  marketable,  because  they  are  too  small. 
There  will  be  herring  taken  with  them  often. 

Q.  How  do  they  take  fish  out  of  the  seine  ? — A.  If  the  weather  per- 
mits, they  will  thrust  the  seine  along  side  the  vessel ;  if  not,  they  will 
take  the  fish  out  with  boats — the  seiners'  boats  are  adapted  for  that 
purpose. 

Q.  What  kind  of  boats  are  they  t— A.  Something  like  whale  boats^ 
but  larger  and  flatter,  and  made  very  buoyant. 

Q.  Are  they  flat-bottomed? — A.  Not  altogether  flat,  but  much  flatter 
than  boats  generally  are.  They  are  intended  to  carry  heavy  loads.  I 
should  say  each  boat  would  carry  25  barrels  of  fish. 

Q.  Would  they  take  the  fish  out  of  the  seine  with  a  dip-net  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  they  separate  them  in  the  dip  net  or  throw  them  all  into 
the  boat  ? — A.  They  separate  them  on  board  the  vessel. 

Q  Those  fish  which  are  not  marketable  they  throw  overboard,  I  pre- 
sume ? — A.  They  are  thrown  overboard  if  there  is  no  stranger  along- 
side to  get  them.  They  would  not  destroy  them  if  they  had  an  oppor- 
tunity to  give  them  to  people  who  would  take  them. 

Q.  That  is  a  regular  occurrence  ? — A.  Yes.  They  can  make  no  use 
of  them,  except  for  bait.  They  sometimes  grind  them  for  bait.  Fre- 
quently they  will  be  a  Jong  time  before  they  will  get  a  catch  with  a 
seine.  Most  of  the  seiners  are  also  prepared  to  take  the  fish  with  lines, 
and  tliey  have  also  another  mode  of  seining.  A  vessel  will  sometimes 
come  to  anchor  and  get  a  large  quantity  of  mackerel  about  her. 

Q.  They  throw  bait  out  to  get  the  mackerel  round  them  ? — A.  Yes. 
There  may  be  a  heavy  body  of  mackerel  round,  but  they  may  not  bite. 
They  will  sweep  a  seine  around  the  vessel,  if  tbv^  weather  admits  of  it, 
and  inclose  a  large  school  of  mackerel,  allowing  a  sufficient  extent  of 
the  seine  for  the  vessel  to  drift  out  of  it.  Then  they  will  close  up  tlie 
seine.    Tliey  will  not  lose  25  per  cent,  of  the  whole  fish. 

Q.  When  the  fish  are  taken,  those  not  marketable  are  thrown  over- 
board ? — A.  They  are  invariably  thrown  overboard. 

Q.  They  will  undoubtedly  be  dead  ? — A.  Yes ;  mackerel  die  quickly. 

Q.  Suppose  a  seine  took  500  barrels  atone  haul,  how  many  would  not 
be  marketable  ?— A.  It  is  possible  the  whole  might  be. 

Q.  It  would  be  exceptional  if  the  whole  were  marketable  ? — A.  It  is 
not  generally  the  case,  but  it  is  possible  they  might  be.  I  am  not  an 
experienced  seiner,  but  I  speak  from  what  I  have  seen. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  catch  would  be  thrown  away  as  useless  ?— 
A.  One- fourth  at  least. 

Q.  What  effect  has  that  on  the  fishing? — A   It  would  be  injurious  to 


436 


▲WARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


h-:-M 


all  kinds  of  fisb.    If  you  destroy  the  yonng  fish  it  is  like  cnttiog  down 
the  young  forest. 

Q.  Ill  1875  aiul  '76  were  pnrse-seiues  used  f — A.  Tes. 

Q.  What  would  hare  been  the  result  of  purse-seining  if  continued 
two  or  three  years  more  ? — A.  It  would  ruin  the  fishing-grounds  alto- 
gether for  a  number  of  years. 

Q.  By  the  Treaty  of  Washington  Canadian  fishermen  liave  the  right 
to  enter  American  waters  to  fish.  Do  yon  estimate  that  as  a  great 
boon  ? — A.  I  have  yet  to  hear  that  any  Canadian  vessel  ever  went  there 
to  fish.  I  don't  refer  to  Nova  Scotia  vessels.  I  never  knew  of  a  Cana- 
'dian  vessel  going  there. 

Q.  Do  you  attach  any  value  to  that  ? — A.  None  whatever  to  us. 

•Q.  You  have  fish  at  your  own  doors  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  right  of  transshipment,  have  you  heard  any 
American  captains  speak  of  the  value  of  that  right  ? — A.  I  have  heard 
American  captains  say  it  would  save  during  the  season  one  trip;  that 
they  would  be  enabled  to  make  three  trips  provided  they  had  the  right 
of  transshipment.  I  am  positive  of  that,  because  Captain  Watson,  be- 
fore the  Beciprocity  Treaty  was  in  force,  transshipped  at  Arichat,  other- 
wise he  would  have  been  obliged  to  have  gone  to  Gloucester,  and  he 
would  not  have  been  able  to  fit  up  again.  He  told  me  in  the  following 
spring  it  was  a  great  advantage  being  able  to  transship.  I  don't  know 
how  the  law  was  at  that  time. 

Q.  Does  not  the  right  of  transshipment,  besides  gaining  another  trip, 
enable  the  vessels  to  take  advantage  of  a  rising  market  ? — A.  Yes ;  par- 
t  icularly  since  the  telegraph  is  in  operation  and  the  Intercolonial  Rail- 
way. Some  few  years  ago  when  American  fishermen  came  to  our  place 
they  complained  that  they  could  not  get  news  from  home  for  two,  three, 
or  four  weeks.  Two  days  before  I  left  home  a  seiner  came  and  went  to 
the  telegraph  oflice,  telegraphed  to  the  )wner8,  and  received,  in  two 
hours,  his  instructions  from  Salem. 

Q.  The  fish  promise  to  be  plentiful  this  year  on  your  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

ii.  One  seiner,  you  say,  has  already  come  in  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  left  home  it  was  early  for  mackerel  fishers  to  make  their 
appearance  ? — A.  Not  earlier  than  in  some  previous  years.  They  used 
to  come  about  1st  July. 

Q.  You  left  home  about  the  commencement  of  the  season  ? — A.  He 
said  he  had  then  250  barrels  on  boat  d. 

Q.  How  large  was  the  schooner  !— A.  A  schooner  between  90  and  100 
tons. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  would  she  carry? — A.  He  said  she  would  carry 
400  barrels. 

Q.  He  commenced  fishing  in  Bay  Ohaleurs  then? — A.  He  did  not  say 
he  had  caught  them  in  Bay  Chaleu  s. 

Q.  Had  he  commenced  fishing  there? — A.  He  said  he  had  caught 
them  between  Miscou  and  Escnminac,  on  the  New  Brunswick  coast. 
fie  did  not  say  whether  inshore  or  outside. 

Q.  Suppose  the  American  schooners  were  kept  outside  the  three-mile 
limit,  do  you  think  they  would  prosecute  mackerel  fishing  at  all  ?— A. 
They  might  for  a  short  time ;  but  in  a  very  short  time  they  would  fail,  if 
obliged  to  keep  outside  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Where  would  they  get  their  fares?— A.  They  might,  for  a  few 
weeks;  it  is  po..3ible  the  mackerel  might  play  off  shore.  Butldou't 
think  they  would  get  fares.  I  believe  it  would  be  ruinous  for  any  par- 
ties to  go  into  the  business  if  not  allowed  to  come  inshore  to  flab.  I 
don't  think  it  could  be  carried  on. 


AWABD  OF  THE   FIISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


437 


caught 
coast. 

reemile 
ill!-A. 
d  fail,  if 

a  few 
;  I  dou't 
ny  par- 
fish.   I 


Q.  Even  if  the  right  to  go  inshore  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  was  given, 
but  the  American  vessels  were  excluded  from  our  other  inshore  fisheries, 
do  you  tbiuk  any  prudent  man  would  conduct  the  busiuess  at  all  f — A. 
Many  of  tlie  captains  state  it  is  diificult  enough  as  it  is,  and  be  allowed 
to  fish  inshore  along  the  whole  coast.  If  that  is  the  case,  I  don't  know 
what  they  would  be  able  to  do. 

Q.  VYhat  do  the  Americans  themselves  say  about  the  privilesre  of  hsh- 
ing  inshore? — A.  They  say  it  is  oue  of  the  most  essential  privileges  they 
can  obtain. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  a  single  man  say  it  was  not  so! — A.  Not  of  the 
fishermen  ;  not  of  the  masters  of  vessels  or  of  any  of  the  crews. 

Q.  They  all  say  it  is  absolutely  essential  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Suppose  they  were  excluded  altogether,  and  the  inshore  fisheries 
were  reserved  entirely  for  Canadians,  would  you  be  better  off  than  with 
a  free  market  in  the  United  States  ?  Suppose  the  Americans  were  kept 
out,  what  would  be  the  effect  on  Canadians  ? — A.  Our  fishing  ground 
would  be  protected  and  our  fish  would  increase.  In  a  short  time  our 
people  would  enter  into  the  business  themselves ;  and  as  for  the  market, 
the  consumers  must  have  them  aud  would  buy  them. 

Q.  Suppose  the  Americans  were  kept  altogether  out  of  the  inshore 
fisheries,  and  the  United  States  imposed  a  duty  of  |2  or  $3  per  barrel, 
would  you  be  better  or  worse  off? — A.  Better  oft",  for  the  camumers 
would  pay  the  duties,  if  levied. 

Q.  You  would  be  quite  ready  to  assent  to  that? — A.  I  would  be  quite 
satisQed  myself. 

Q.  Is  that  the  opinion  generally? — A.  That  is  the  opinion  generally. 
1  represent  the  opinion  of  my  neighbors;  all  those  engaged  in  fishing. 

Q.  You  are  a  magistrate  there? — A.  I  am  a  justice  of  the  peace. 

Q.  You  are  a  prominent  man  there,  and  you  say  you  represent  the 
geueral  opinion  ? — A.  I  represent  the  general  opinion.  I  would  not 
have  been  here,  except  that  it  was  the  wish  of  my  neighbors  that  I 
should  come. 

Q.  It  was  at  the  request  of  your  neighbors,  and  to  represent  their 
unauimous  opinion,  that  you  came  ? — A.  Decidedly  so. 

Q.  How  do  the  American  fishermen  behave  on  your  coast  ? — A.  In  a 
general  way,  as  far  as  the  Ame**icaus  themselves  are  concerned,  I  find 
them  sociable,  friendly,  and  courteous,  but  their  vessels  are  manned  by 
crews  of  all  nationalities.  The  American  colors  cover  many  characters, 
and  there  are  a  great  many  depredations,  aud  very  serious  ones,  com- 
mitted by  men  on  board  of  American  vessels ;  but  I  never  had  cause  to 
lay  a  charge  against  any  American. 

Q.  But  to  the  lawless  acts  of  the  crews  you  do  object  ? — A.  There 
are  many  instances  of  rascally  conduct  on  our  shores.  They  have  often 
toru  up  bridges  on  our  highways  and  barred  them.  They  have  also  ab- 
ducted young  women. 

Q.  Do  they  tear  up  the  bridges  to  prevent  pursuit? — A.  They  tear  up 
the  bridges  and  barricade  them  from  actual  mischief  and  no  other  pur- 
pose. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  cod  fishing  carried  on  by  Americans,  they  have 
to  come  to  our  shores  for  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  they  carry  on  the  business  of  cod-fishing  without  the  privi- 
lege of  coming  to  our  shores  for  bait  ? — A.  It  is  possible  they  might  do 
80,  but  they  would  be  at  a  very  great  expense.  It  would  be  a  great 
disadvantage  to  any  American  fisherman  to  carry  on  the  cod-fisbing 
OD  our  coasts  without  being  able  to  come  in  for  bait. 

Q.  The  bait  for  cod  must  be  fresh  ?— A.  Yes. 


438 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISfllON. 


,1  ■■-*•'■ 


'^.:<' 


\u 

-ym 

^hr 

1   ■' 

Q.  And  the  bait  for  mackerel  is  salt? — A.  Yes;  but  sometiiues  freHh 
bait  will  do. 

Q.  In  your  j 0(1  gtnent,  tbey  cannot  get  along  with  cod-fishing  without 
fresh  bait,  and  they  cannot  obtain  that  without  the  privilege  of  enter 
ing  Canadian  shores  for  it? — A.  Yes;  or  running  back  a  long  distuuce. 

Q.  That  would  be  a  loss  of  time  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  spoke  yesterday  of  the  proportion  of  the  catch  outside  ;  vvbat 
would  the  catch  outside  amount  to  as  compared  with  that  inside  the 
limits  ? — A.  As  far  as  my  experience  goes,  from  one-sixth  to  one  eightii 
might  be  caught  outside,  but  not  more.  As  I  before  stated,  the  heaviest 
catch  that  1  have  known  was  taken  outside;  that  was  in  one  of  our  bays, 
and  that  was  an  isolated  case. 

Q.  That  was  taken  in  a  bay ;  you  never  knew  such  a  catch  made  out- 
side in  the  gulf? — A.  No. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  At  the  early  part  of  the  season,  you  say,  you  catch  cod  suitable  for 
the  market  inshore,  but  as  the  season  advances  the  fish  begin  to  move 
out  into  deep  water  and  sometimes  run  lor  other  kinds  of  bait.  About 
what  time  is  it  that  the  codfish  move  out? — A.  At  different  times  dif- 
ferent baits  come  in.  It  might  be  that  the  first  fish  which  approach  our 
shore  might  remain  a  fortnight  or  three  weeks  and  then  move  offshore 
again  for  other  bait.  That  is,  the  fish  would  approach  perhaps  on  1st 
June,  and  they  might  remain  till  July ;  some  time  in  July,  iierhaps  on 
oth  or  6th,  then  that  bait  would  be  gone.  They  would  not  follow  that 
bait,  but  move  off  shore,  perhaps,  for  a  while,  and  then  approach  again 
and  take  other  bait. 

Q.  There  are  always  some  codfish  inside  ? — A.  At  the  latter  part  of 
July  aiid  August  the  fish  are  not  close  inshore.  They  are  perhaps  three 
or  four  miles  oft'  as  a  general  thing,  but  not  for  a  long  time,  only  per- 
haps a  few  days,  and  then  are  inshore  again. 

Q.  And  then  out  again  ? — A.  No ;  they  remain  then  for  a  length  of 
time  inshore.  That  is,  with  the  exception  of  the  fish  on  the  outer  banks ; 
they  don't  come  inshore,  but  remain  there. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  the  banks  oft'  the  coast  ? — A.  Banks  Bradley  and  Or- 
phant. 

Q.  These  fitsh  that  are  in  the  habit  of  coming  in,  they  come  in  ?— A. 
Tbey  never  remain  off  shore  more  than  two  or  three  days  at  a  tiaie. 

Q.  Some  stay  for  a  length  of  time  ? — A.  A  great  deal  longer  inshore 
than  offshore,  because  they  must  have  bait,  and  they  will  come  after 
the  bait.  Take  Bay  Ghaleurs.  There  there  are  seasons  when  the  tisli- 
ing  is  best  in  the  center  of  the  bay. 

Q.  What  seasons  are  those? — A.  Late  in  the  fall,  late  in  September, 
October,  and  November.    It  is  best  then. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  followed  mackerel  fishing  in  autumn  beyond  your 
own  coast? — A.  Not  beyond  our  own  coast,  except  in  one  instance  wbeu 
I  fished  on  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  You  never  followed  them  beyond  British  waters  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  could  say  nothing  as  to  the  condition,  quantity,  and  value  of 
mackerel  in  American  waters,  after  they  leave  here  ? — A.  I  have  seeu 
mackerel  brought  into  market  on  the  American  coast. 

Q.  Late  in  autumn? — A.  Late  in  the  fall. 

Q.  You  have  said  a  good  deal  about  ofi'al ;  do  you  refer  principally  to 
offal  thrown  overboard  by  cod  fishers  or  by  mackerel  fishers? — A.  Both. 

Q.  To  one  more  than  to  another  ?— A.  We  will  speak  of  the  mackerel 
fishing,  if  you  please.    If  mackerel  are  taken  in  large  quantities  close 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


439 


to  the  shore,  and  vessels  are  \yU\ff  at  auchor,  and  they  heave  large  qnan- 
titles  of  oflfal  overboard,  it  is  decidedly  injnrious  to  our  fisheries. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  could  smell  it  two  miles  at  sea  ? 
—A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  The  evidence  reads  one  or  two  miles. — A.  I  might  have  said  one 
or  two  miles.  I  recollect  something  of  that;  but  I  might  venture  to  say 
one  mile  at  least. 

Q.  Then  you  would  not  swear  that  you  could  smell  it  two  miles  dis- 
tant?—A.  Not  two  miles. 

Q.  Are  you  willing  to  let  it  stand  as  printed  in  the  record,  <'  for  one 
or  two  miles"! — A.  No;  one  mile. 

Q.  What  time  of  the  year  could  you  smell  that  one  mile  away  ? — A. 
July  and  August. 

Q.  In  the  following  spring  T — A.  It  would  not  continue  there  at  that 
time.    The  tide,  ice,  and  snow  would  have  carried  it  otf  before  that. 

Q.  You  said  that  the  ofifal  thrown  overboard  would  be  injurious  to 
mackerel  fry! — A.  I  say  still  it  will  injure  the  fry. 

Q.  But  you  would  not  say  you  could  smell  it  one  mile  off  after  a 
strong  tide! — A.  Not  after  a  heavy  tide. 

Q.  Not  after  it  had  been  frozen  up  for  seven  months  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Still  you  think  it  would  be  there! — A.  It  would  have  done  all  the 
injury  to  the  fry  before  that. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  ofi'al  would  have  passed  away? — A.  It  would 
have  passed  away  in  six  or  seven  months,  but  not  early  enough  to  have 
protected  the  young  fry.    The  fry  would  be  amongst  it  at  that  time. 

Q.  How  many  weeks  or  months  after  coming  to  life  are  they  called 
fry?— A.  They  are  fry  till  they  are  two  or  three  inches  long. 

Q.  How  long  will  they  take  to  attain  that  length  ? — A.  Half  of  the 
saintner  season. 

Q.  Ton  think  the  effect  of  the  offal  would  last  during  the  snmmer 
season? — A.  Half  the  summer  season,  because  it  would  wash  into  the 
sand,  and  it  is  washing  backwards  and  forwards  all  the  time.  It  would 
be  affected  by  the  salt  sea  sand,  but  not  sufficiently  in  a  short  time  to 
prevent  injury  being  done. 

Q.  You  have  investigated  the  subject  ? — A.  I  have  examined  the  sub- 
ject to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  How  do  you  know,  if  the  fish  do  not  grow  well,  strong,  and  fat, 
that  it  is  owing  to  the  offal  ? — A.  If  I  am  drawing  a  seine  in  shore,  where 
small  fish  are  abundant,  and  I  take  a  quantity  of  fish  which  are  half 
dead  and  not  able  to  exert  themselves,  I  consider  these  fish  are  sick. 

Q.  Now  you  want  a  diagnosis,  an  examination  of  the  fish,  to  ascer- 
tain what  is  the  cause  of  the  sickness ;  how  do  you  do  that ! — A.  I  am 
giving  toy  opinion  on  oath.  My  opinion  is  that  this  sickness  is  caused 
by  ofial  thrown  overboard  at  these  places. 

Q.  Some  of  the  fish  might  have  been  taken  in  seines,  and  not  quite 
killed,  but  left  in  an  imperfect  state  f — A.  I  assure  you  that  small  fish 
of  that  description  once  seined  will  never  be  seined  again. 

Q.  Y^ou  mean  they  cannot  live  ? — A.  They  will  not  be  found  alive. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  cause  for  sickness  among  fish  except  offal  ? — A. 
There  probably  may  be,  but  I  am  not  aware  of  any  on  our  shores. 

Q.  You  have  heard  no  other  cause  of  sickness  talked  about  except 
oftal  ?— A.  I  have  heard  other  causes  mentioned  in  regard  to  southern 
waters  up  rivers,  but  as  regards  the  ocean  such  is  not  the  case. 

Q.  When  you  come  into  shallow  water  and  find  all  sort«  uf  fish,  good, 
bad,  and  indifferent,  you  attribute  the  indifferent  fish  to  the  fact  that 
some  time  before  there  had  been  some  oft'al  thrown  overboard  ! — A.  If 


440 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


a  heavy  slide  takes  place  from  the  banks  of  one  of  our  large  rivers 
where  fish  are  abundant,  it  is  injurious  to  them.  ' 

Q.  To  their  health  ? — A.  Yes;  it  impregnates  the  water  and  makes  it 
unwholesome  for  the  fish,  and  they  will  die. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  fish  are  ever  mistaken  about  their  food  and  get 
food  of  a  kind  injurions  to  them  7 — A.  I  don't  think  fish  do.  Tbey  take 
different  baits ;  but  I  don't  know  that  they  ever  take  anything  foreign, 

Q.  May  they  not  take  a  certain  kind  of  bait  too  late  f  There  are  sea. 
sons  in  bait  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  not  boys  get  sick  from  eating  green  melons  ? — A.  The  cases 
are  not  the  same.  The  ox  eats  hay,  the  horse  eats  oats,  but  you  dou't 
see  an  animal  eat  fruit  that  is  not  wholesome.  You  dou't  find  that  with 
animals  or  fishes. 

Q.  Is  it  your  theory,  and  you  can  find  no  other  cause  for  the  sickDess 
of  flsh  except  the  fact  of  offal  having  been  thrown  overboard  ?— A.  I 
don't  mean  to  say  that  there  is  no  other  cause,  for  I  am  not  sufficiently 
posted  in  science  and  natural  history  on  the  matter.  I  think  offal  does 
the  injury.    I  have  sworn  to  that,  and  I  think  so  still. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  that  opinion  generally  expressed  by  the  flshenneii 
of  your  neighborhood  f — A.  I  have  heard  it  expressed  tor  many  years. 

Q.  Perhaps  stronger  during  the  last  two  or  three  years  ? — A.  We  on 
our  shore  are  prohibited,  and  the  penalty  is  a  heavy  fine,  from  throiving 
offal  into  our  rivers,  or  waters,  or  ocean. 

Q.  What  do  your  big  vessels  do  ? — A.  I  mean  the  fishermen  on  our 
shores. 

Q.  You  have  some  schooners? — A.  I  am  not  aware  of  any ;  there  are 
schooners  fishing  on  banks. 

Q.  Take  the  schooners  owned  in  Prince  Edward  Island — forty  ot 
them  ? — A.  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  them.  There  are  a  number  of 
lobster  establishments  round  the  coast  which  pay  $1  per  barrel  for  cod's 
heads  for  bait ;  and  they  may  take  them  there. 

Q.  Do  you  think  vessels  of  70  tons  would  bring  in  the  offal  daily  ?— 
A.  I  dou't  suppose  so.  I  say  lobster  establishments  pay  $L  per  barrel 
for  cod's  heads  for  bait  for  lobsters,  and  the  vessels  may  be  prepared 
to  take  them  there  and  get  that  amount,  wbich  would  buy  their  salt. 

Q.  We  have  been  told  there  are  40  schooners  of  60  tons  each  at  Priuce 
Kdward  Island  engaged  in  the  fishing  business? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  the  least  idea  that  they  go  to  shore  every  day  to  get  rid 
of  their  offal  ? — A.  They  might  flsh  30  or  50  miles  from  land  and  that 
would  alter  the  case.  We  are  not  sni)posing  that  mackerel  fry  or  cod 
fry  are  outside  40  or  50  miles.  I  never  knew  it.  I  know  that  maclie.el 
spawn  float;  at  the  same  time  they  go  into  the  sand  again. 

Q.  When  you  say  you  are  forbidden,  do  you  mean  beyond  three  miles 
of  the  shore  1 — A.  If  it  is  known  by  our  fishery  overseer  that  any  tish 
ingboats  along  our  shore  Leave  ofial  overboard,  they  would  be  fined. 

Q.  They  keep  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  They  sometimes 
go  beyond. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  rare  thing? — A.  Not  in  the  fall. 

Q.  What  do  they  go  to  fish  in  the  fall  ?— A.  They  go  four  or  five  miles 
out  late  in  the  fall. 

Q.  What  for  ?— A.  They  get  better  fish— codfish. 

Q.  Do  you  know  if  the  Prince  Edward  Island  men  ever  do  that  ?— A. 
I  don't  know  anything  about  the  island  fishing. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  during  the  excitement  of  this  pending  question 
that  you  stated  this  offal  matter  pretty  strongly  ?— A.  I  only  stated 
what  is  the  general  opinion  along  our  whole  coast. 


AWAKD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


441 


Q,  That  has  been  fostered  1 — A.  That  has  been  so  uuderstooil  for 
vearSj  because  I  state  to  you  that  the  government  has  prohibited  the 
iieaving  of  offal  overboard  near  the  shores.  1  have  not  stated  that  the 
AmericflDS  or  any  other  parties  have  heaved  offal  overboard  outside  at 
a  great  distance.  I  have  stated  that  they  have  heaved  it  within  our 
shores,  and  that  this  is  injurious  to  fishing. 

Q.  The  only  offal  you  speak  of  is  that  thrown  within  three  miles 
of  the  shore? — A.  On  the  Banks  I  have  heard  fishermen  say  it  was  in- 
jarious  to  the  fishing. 

Q.  How  deep  was  the  water  ? — A.  From  11  to  13  fathoms. 

Q.  Did  the  offail  sink  to  the  bottom  t — A.  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  Notwithstanding  the  set  of  the  sea  over  it  and  the  commotion 
below  the  surface,  the  offal  remains,  and  is  injurious,  there  ? — A.  I  do 
not  think  it  causes  an  effluvia,  but  I  think  that  fish  glut  themselves  on 
it  to  the  injury  of  the  fishermen. 

Q.  The  fish  eat  it! — A.  Undoubtedly  they  do — that  is,  codfish. 

Q.  How  does  that  agree  with  your  theory  that  fish  do  not  make  mis- 
takes about  their  food  f — A.  Cud  will  eat  a  piece  of  themselves  when  it 
is  fresh. 

Q.  It  is  kept  in  barrels  for  some  little  time.  I  think  you  said  yester- 
day that  codfish  eat  the  offal  ? — A.  I  say  so  now. 

Q.  Does  it  not  make  them  sick  ? — A.  1  don't  know  but  that  it  does. 
Anything  that  gluts  itself  will  become  sick. 

Q.  They  eat  the  offal? — A.  They  may  eat  the  offal,  but  not  any  other 
foreign  substance. 

Q.  You  don't  know  that  they  eat  the  offal  ?— A.  Yes.  I  have  caught 
fish  with  portions  of  offal  in  them. 

Q.  Were  they  sick  ? — A.  No,  I  could  not  say  they  were. 

Q.  What  was  the  first  general  bad  year  for  mackerel ?:— A.  1804-05, 
I  believe. 

Q.  It  was  a  very  bad  jear,  was  it  ? — A.  It  might  not  have  been  a  bad 
year  generally  for  the  mackerel  fleet  at  large ;  it  was  so  in  our  quarter. 

Q.  To  what  do  you  attribute  that?— A.  I  believe  in  1865- O'.i  the 
mackerel  were  scarcer  than  they  had  been  for  some  time;  at  the  same 
time  they  were  a  large  quality  and  splendid  fish. 

Q.  To  what  do  you  attribute  the  absence  of  fish  in  your  part  of  the 
Dominion  that  year? — A.  To  the  excessive  seining  that  had  taken  place 
oil  our  shores. 

Q.  Prior  to  1806.    Do  you  mean  purse  seining? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  on  your  coast  or  on  the  American  coast? — A.  On 
our  coast. 

Q.  You  don't,  mean  that  the  fish  were  intercepted? — A.  I  menu  that 
tbe  Americans  seined  them  there. 

Q.  In  your  waters? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  think  that  produced  a  short  catch  of  fish  on  your  coast  that 
year?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  many  American  vessels  there  that  year? — A.  Not  so  many 
as  usual,  but  more  seiners. 

Q.  Why  were  others  not  there?  Do  you  suppose  they  got  intelli- 
gence about  the  scarcity  of  fish,  and  so  few  vessels  went  up? — A.  They 
probably  found  the  fish  otherwise  and  took  them  with  lines.  You  will 
find  they  can  get  them  with  lines  sometimes  when  they  cannot  with 
seines. 

Q.  American  vessels  did  not  come  to  your  coasts? — A.  Some  few  did. 

Q.  So  the  absence  of  the  American  fishermen  as  a  main  thing  was 
contemporaneous  with  the  absence  of  the  fish ;  how  do  you  account  for 


442 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


that  T — A.  It  is  generally  supposed  that  \rben  the  fish  are  not  on  the 
ground  some  portion  of  the  fleet  is  aware  of  it,  so  that  tbo  fleet  will  uut 
rush  on  the  ground  where  the  fish  is  scarce. 

Q.  Do  your  people  go  mackerel-fishing  much  f  -A.  Not  to  any  extent. 

Q.  How  was  the  cod-catch  that  year? — A.  About  the  same  as  usual. 

Q.  In  cod-fishing  have  you  good  and  bad  years,  or  is  it  about  au 
average  every  year! — A.  This  year  is  an  exception.  We  have  the  best 
fishing  this  year  we  have  had  for  twenty-five  years. 

Q.  In  cod? — A.  Yes;  and  mackerel  are  mure  abundant  than  fur  the 
last  two  years. 

Q.  Did  you  see  many  American  mackerel-fishing  vessels  last  yearf— 
A.  I  saw  one  oulv. 

Q.  In  1875!— A.  Some  few. 

Q.  In  1874? — A.  They  were  pretty  well  on  the  coast  in  1874. 

Q.  Was  1874  a  good  year  for  fish  ? — A.  Probably,  but  I  could  not 
^'xautly  speak  of  1874  as  being  a  prolific  year  for  fish. 

Q.  What  do  you  say  of  1873-72?— A.  Pretty  fair. 

Q.  To  what  do  you  attribute  this  change  which  has  been  going  on! 
I  suppose  il  has  always  been  that  mackerel  will  be  abundant  on  year 
i.*oast  one  year  and  scarce  another  year,  and  there  are  a  good  many 
causes  to  which  to  attribute  it  ? — A.  If  you  will  allow  me  to  explain. 
My  early  experience  with  mackerel  on  our  coast  was  this :  they  were 
that  abundant  that  men  and  women  and  children,  as  young  as  5  and  0 
years,  were  out  catching  mackerel ;  and  these  young  people  would  take 
all  the  way  from  150  to  300  in  the  course  of  a  couple  of  hours.  That 
was  through  the  whole  season;  since  the  Americans  have  frequented 
ours  coasts  in  such  large  numbers  such  a  thing  as  going  out  to  catch 
mackerel  in  that  way  is  not  known.  We  have  no  doubt,  and  1  have  no 
doubt,  the  large  catches  of  such  a  number  of  foreign  vessels  and  the 
seining  are  the  cause,  and  only  cause,  of  the  deterioration  in  the  value  of 
our  fisheries. 

Q.  Now,  of  course,  if  the  fishermen  multiply  so  fast  that  you  have 
such  a  large  fleet,  all  doing  their  utmost  to  catch  fish,  that  that  must 
diminish  the  amount  of  the  fisheries  irrespective  of  the  seining?— A. 
Not  so  tnuch  as  the  seining.  The  seining  would  be  the  principal  cause 
of  the  diminution. 

Q.  Now  it  does  not  make  any  difference  what  nationality  the  people 
are  who  go  to  increase  the  fleet  five  hundred  or  six  hundred — that  is  the 
number  of  fishermen,  is  it  not?— A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  other  nation- 
ality except  our  own  and  the  Americans  that  go  there. 

Q.  Well,  it  does  not  make  any  difference  if  any  people  come  there 
having  the  right  to  fish  or  exercise  the  right  without  having  it,  the  same 
effect  would  be  produced,  provided  they  were  equally  skillful  and  well 
equipped? — A.  I  am  not  aware  that  any  other  nationality  has  a  right 
except  the  Americans. 

Q.  Well,  the  effect  would  be  the  same  if  any  other  people  came  in 
such  number,  as  well  equipped,  as  well  supplied  with  bait,  and  as  skill- 
ful ?  Now,  what  you  want  is  to  have  the  monopoly  for  your  boats f— 
A.  Yes,  very  naturally  we  would  require  to  do  so ;  that  is  my  wish. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  it  was  au  error  in  Her  Majesty's  Government  to 
allow  vessels  to  come  there  from  the  United  States  ? — A.  With  regard 
to  Her  Majesty's  Government  it  would  be  presumptuous  in  me  to  attempt 
to  criticise  what  Her  Majesty's  Government  would  do. 

Q.  That  is  not  half  so  difficult  as  to  find  out  the  cause  of  the  sickness 
of  the  fish  ? — A.  I  think  it  would  be  a  very  strange  idea  for  me  to  at- 
tempt to  criticise  Her  Majesty's  Government  with  regard  to  national 


AWAKl)   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


44a 


treaties.  Whatever  treaties  she  chooses  to  enter  into,  I  think  we,  ns 
loyal  subjects,  are  bound  to  abide  by  thera.  At  the  same  time  we  are 
bound  to  protect  our  own  rights  as  far  as  is  consistent  with  this  treaty. 

Q.  You  are  a  free  citizen  and  have  a  vote,  and  it  is  a  part  of  your 
(Inty  to  know  what  is  good  and  to  have  an  opinion  just  as  we  do  on  our 
side  of  the  border.  You  are  just  as  free  as  we  are.  You  have  a  right  to 
have  an  opinion.  There  is  no  reason  why  a  man  should  be  ashamed  or 
afraid  to  have  an  opinion.  1  mean  to  a»k  if  it  is  not  your  opinion,  if  it 
is  not  the  opinion  generally  of  your  people,  that  it  was  a  mistake  and  au 
injustice  to  give  to  the  fishermen  of  the  United  States  the  right  to  come 
to  these  inshore  iisberies! — A.  Perhaps  Her  Majesty's  Government  weie 
under  the  impression  that  they  would  obtain  an  equivalent  for  that. 

Q.  Well,  that  was  to  be  in  free  trade,  was  it  not  ? — A.  In  free  trade. 

Q.  Was  not  that  what  you  wanted? — A.  I  am  not  aware  that  the 
Canadian  Government  is  very  anxious  to  have  free  trade. 

Q.  You  don't  think  your  people  are?  You  come  here  to  repiesent 
them  as  a  leadiug  man,  we  are  told.  Well,  the  equivalent  you  expect 
and  desire  is  freedom  oif  trade,  is  it  not? — A.  Well,  to  give  you  an  idea 
bov  anxious  we  are  for  free  trade,  we  had  a  sample  for  some  few  years, 
and  I  do  not  know  that  one  individual  in  our  portion  of  the  Dominion 
gained  one  cent  by  that ;  because  the  only  thing  that  I  saw  that  could 
be  purchased  cheaper  was  liquor  ]  consequently,  there  were  a  great  many 
more  drunken  people. 

Q.  Now,  with  reference  to  free  trade,  your  impression  is  that  it  would, 
considering  the  liquor  and  everything,  be  r;?lher  injurious  to  your  peo- 
ple!—A.  Well,  you  mean  to  ask  me  it  free  traoe  would  be  au  indemnity  ? 

Q.  No,  I  am  not  asking  you  that  now.  I  want  you  to  keep  that  out  of 
your  mind,  as  that  might  give  you  a  bias.  But  do  you  think,  from  your 
experience,  that  free  trade  or  reciprocity  would  be,  on  the  whole,  injuri- 
ous ?— A.  No,  I  do  not  think  so.  I  say  that  free  trade  would  do  very 
well ;  but  not  a  one  sided  free  trade. 

Q.  Well,  take  the  free  trade  there  was  between  1854  and  18G6 ;  was 
that  injurious  to  your  people? — A.  It  benefited  us  nothing. 

Q.  And  it  did  you  a  good  deal  of  moral  injury? — A.  I  cannot  say  for 
the  moral  injury. 

Q.  Well,  the  rum? — A.  I  say  that  is  the  only  artilce  that  could  be 
obtained  cheaper. 

Q.  But  you  also  said  that  there  was  more  drunkenness? — A.  That  was 
the  case. 

Q.  Then  you  experienced  a  great  deal  of  injury  and  no  good.  In  what 
form  did  you  want  compensation  to  come — in  money? — A.  I  do  not 
think  ajiy  money  could  be  an  indemnity  for  the  right  to  these  fisheries. 

Q.  But  if  you  wanted  indemnity  at  all  for  it,  in  what  form  would  you 
have  it?  You  do  not  want  it  in  free  trade  ? — A.  I  would  rather  have  no 
indemnity,  but  let  them  leave  the  fish  alone. 

Q.  Therefore  you  are  opposed  to  the  treaty  ? — A.  I  am  personally 
opposed  to  the  treaty ;  understand,  myself  only. 

Q.  Well,  the  people  you  represent,  and  who  asked  you  to  come  here, 
do  tboy  feel  as  you  do  ?— A.  They  do ;  that  is  their  feeling,  and  they 
say  80. 

Q.  But  as  long  as  there  is  money  to  be  paid,  you  have  no  objection  to 
taking  it  ?— A.  O,  hand  over.  If  there  is  money  to  be  obtained,  let  us 
have  it. 

Q.  Has  that  subject  been  agitated  among  the  people  ? — A.  It  has  been 
talked  over  very  frequently. 

Q.  Have  there  been  political  meetings  ? — A.  No. 


444 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


!  I 


I 


Q.  Bat  from  private  conversation  yon  understand  that!— A.  Yes* 
tliat  is  wbat  oar  merchants  and  flsbermen  think.  ' 

Q.  And  they  have  requested  persons  to  come  here  and  represent  tbeir 
views  ? — A.  They  did  not  request  me  in  the  first  instance  to  come  here 
but  when  I  was  called  upon  by  the  proper  authorities  to  linow  if  I  would 
come  here,  they  requested  me  to  come. 

Q.  Whom  do  you  mean  when  you  say  "  they  "  requested  you  ?— a. 
My  neighbors. 

Q.  But  you  were  first  requested  by  the  proper  authorities  ?— A.  Yes; 
I  was  requested  by  the  proper  authorities  to  coute  here. 

Q.  Then  your  neighbors  assented  to  that  ? — A.  Yes.  Well,  there 
might  be  some  that  did  not.    I  do  not  say  all. 

Q.  O,  no;  there  is  rarely  unanimity. — A.  There  might  be  parties  there 
opposed  to  my  coming. 

Q.  There  might  be  parties  that  differed  from  you  iu  opiniou  ?— A. 
There  might  be  parties  that  differed  from  me,  politically  only. 

Q.  Well,  iu  the  provinces  that  is  everything,  is  it  not? — A.  ItU'.sa 
great  deal  to  do  sometimes. 

Q.  You  said  something  about  the  vessels  that  came  in  uuder  the 
American  flag.  What  nationality  are  these  people?  You  say  there  are 
not  many  Americans. — A.  No ;  I  said  there  were  a  great  many  vessels 
in  which  parts  of  the  crew  were  aliens — some  Swedes,  some  Portuguese, 
some  English,  Irish,  and  Scotch.    There  may  be  also  some  Nova  ScotiaDs. 

Q.  Many? — A.  I  have  seen  them  com maudiug  vessels  that  sailed 
under  the  American  flag. 

Q.  What,  poisoning  your  waters,  &c.  ? — A.  Well,  they  assist. 

Q.  Well,  many  of  these  that  commit  these  great  crimes  that  you 
have  spoken  of,  how  do  you  know  whether  they  are  Americans  or  not  ?— 
A.  I  do  not  say  whether  they  are  not ;  I  said  £  did  not  blame  the  Amer 
icans  for  that. 

Q.  That  is,  that  you  do  not  blame  the  Americans  as  a  people  ?— \. 
Well,  it  is  generally  supposed  that  the  flag  covers  the  goods. 

Q.  Well,  you  say  that  there  are  foreigners  in  those  vessels  who  do 
not  speak  the  English  tongue? — A.  Yes;  but  that  is  not  always  thu 
case. 

Q.  Them  are  are  some  from  the  provinces,  and  some  from  England, 
Ireland,  and  Scotland  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  there  are  some  from  Sweden,  and  also  Baltic  men  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  there  are  some  Portuguese  who  constitute  parts  of  these 
crews  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  have  no  vessels  of  anything  like  similar  size  from  your 
part  ? — A.  No ;  we  have  no  vessels  of  our  own  from  that  quarter ;  but 
I  myself  am  able,  if  I  associate  with  a  crew  of  men  of  distinct  uatiou 
alities,  to  tell  that  they  are  such. 

Q.  Well,  you  can  distinguish  the  Portuguese,  or  men  from  the  BdUic 
or  Germany,  from  Euglishmen  ? — A.  Well,  I  can  also  distinguish  an 
American  from  a  colonist. 

Q.  That  is  when  you  hear  him  talking,  but  at  a  distance ;  for  iustauce, 
if  a  man  is  running  away  from  a  magistrate,  you  canuot  tell  by  his  nm 
niiig? — A.  1  should  say  not. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  In  Gasp6  Bay  and  Bay  Chaleurs,  how  far  out  does  it  freeze  ?— A. 
In  Gasp^  Bay  it  freezes  solid  across. 

Q.  How  far  beyond  ?— A.  I  think  no  further;  I  think  it  is  drift  ice 
beyond  that. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


445 


Q.  Does  Bay  Chaleurs  freeze  across? — A.  No;  it  is  drift-ice.  I  sup- 
pose tbe  ice  might  enter  into  Bay  Chaleurs  from  the  north. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  come  to  that  country  ? — A.  In  1846. 

Q.  When  did  the  great  mackerel-fishing  begin  ? — A.  With  the  Ameri- 
cans, about  35  or  36  years  ago;  I  have  seen  American  vessels  and 
Americiin  fishermen,  more  or  less,  since  I  have  been  in  the  country. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  In  speaking  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  you  say  it  did  you  no  good 
iu  your  neighborhood  ;  that  is  all  you  speak  oft — A.  Yes;  that  is  all— 
my  neighborhood  alone. 

Q.  Now,  in  reference  to  this  offal,  you  say  you  could  smell  it  a  mile 
away!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  wish  to  ask  you  whether,  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  shore  near 
where  that  offal  has  been  thrown,  it  has  come  under  your  observation 
that  typhoid  fever  has  prevailed  among  the  inhabitants  f — A.  Wmll, 
there  have  been  fevers  along  the  shore  in  many  places ;  but,  unfortu- 
Dately,  we  are  not  well  supplied  with  physicians,  and  I  am  not  compe- 
tent to  state  what  is  the  cause. 

Q.  Well,  fevers,  at  all  events,  have  prevailed  ? — A.  Yes ;  last  year 
they  prevailed. 

Q.  In  the  neighborhood  of  where  this  offal  is  thrown  out* — A.  Yes; 
in  the  neighborhood  where  the  offal  has  been  thrown  out.  Last  year 
that  wn8  the  case,  and  two  years  ago. 

Q.  Would  you  smell  it  on  shore  as  well  as  seaward  ? — A.  Decidedly  so. 

Q.  I  think  that  you  stated  to  me  that  the  Americans  themselves 
iigreed  that  it  was  injurious? — A.  Y»>s. 

Q.  Have  you  spoken  to  them  about  it? — A.  Yes ;  frequently. 

Q.  What  do  they  say? — A.  They  say  it  is  not  their  affair;  that  they 
would  kill  the  goose  that  laid  the  golden  egg  for  the  sake  of  the  present 
profit. 

Q.  Do  they  say  that  with  reference  to  seining  as  well  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  remonstrated  with  reference  to  both  ? — A.  Yes.  In  one  in- 
stance, a  Captain  Smith,  a  man  from  Truro,  was  commanding  a  vessel 
from  Salem.  I  remonstrated  with  him  on  those  subjects.  He  said, 
"That  is  not  my  affair  at  all ;  my  business  is  fishing;  I  would  kill  the 
goose  that  laid  the  golden  egg  for  present  profit."  That  was  his  very 
expression. 

Q.  That  is,  in  your  judgment,  what  they  are  doing? — A.  Yes.  Cap- 
tain Henry  Smith,  that  was  the  man's  name. 

Q  Is  there  not  another  evil  effect  from  this  offal  when  it  goes  down  ? 
Does  it  not  kill  those  small  shellfish  upon  which  the  cod-fish  and  mack- 
erel feed  ?— A.  What  kind  of  fish  do  you  allude  to  ? 

Q.  Well,  the  brit  and  the  shrimp — both.  A.  The  brit  is  not  a  shell- 
fish. I  talie  it  to  be  a  marine  insect.  It  is  sometimes  iu  great  bunches, 
and  when  the  sea  becomes  very  high  it  will  rise  from  the  bottom. 

Q.  That  is  injured  by  the  offal,  is  it  not?— A.  Undoubtedly  so. 

Q.  You  say,  that  probably  Her  Majesty's  Government  expected  to  get 
an  indemnity  when  they  allowed  such  a  valuable  privilege  to  be  given 
over,  and  iu  your  opinion  no  money-indemnity  could  compensate  for  the 
concession  ?— A.  Yes ;  in  my  opinion  it  is  too  valuable. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  When  you  speak  of  free  trade  do  you  refer  to  the  Reciprocity  Treaty 
or  to  the  time  when  the  port  of  Gasp^  was  a  free  port?— A.  The  port  of 
wasp^,  if  I  understand  aright,  was  a  free  port  a  very  short  time.    It  was 


446 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISUERY   COMMISSION. 


jb+.:^'2t 


merely  for  a  short  time  to  enable  the  government  to  arrange  their  affulrH 
for  general  free  trade  into  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  But  did  you  refer  in  your  reply  to  the  absolute  free  trade  which 
exists  in  Gasp^  ? — A.  I  refer  to  the  free  trade  that  existed  in  the  dis- 
trict of  Gasp4;  in  the  whole  extent  of  the  district  of  Gaspe. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  Do  you  refer  to  the  period  from  '54  to  '67  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  How  long  was  there  a  free  port  at  Gasp^  ? — A.  It  existed,  I  be- 
lieve,  throughout  the  whole  time  of  free  trade.    But  it  was  the  free  port 
of  the  whole  district  in  the  first  instance,  and  then  there  was  a  moditica- 
tion. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  when  it  was  declared  a  free  port  ?— A.  Yes ;  I 
recollect. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  during  the  period  of  time  that  you 
had  free  trade  it  was  no  advantage  to  you  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  That  was  about  from  the  year  1854  to  the  termination  of  the  Eeci 
procity  Treaty? — A.  Well,  you  know  I  have  nothing  to  say  with  regard 
to  the  intention  of  the  government.    The  part  our  government  took  was 
right  enough,  but  circumstances  made  it  difficult  for  us  to  obtain  advaut- 
ages. 

Q.  The  time  that  you  say  you  got  no  advantage  was  during  the  period 
of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  f — A.  I  have  already  stated  that  we  received 
no  benefit  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  In  point  of  fact  you  have  nothing  to  export  except  fish  from  the 
district  ot  Gasp^  If — A.  Just  so. 

Q.  Well,  if  the  Americans  c?  me  in  and  destroyed  your  fish  you  might 
well  say  it  was  no  good  ? — A. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Where  is  the  Truro  to  which  ^ou  ref«  r  when  you  speak  of  it  in 
connection  with  a  Captain  Smith  ? — A.  Truro,  Nova  Scotia.  He  told 
me  that  was  his  native  place.  The  man  is  a  very  worthy  man  so  far  as 
I  know  anything  about  him.  I  merely  state  facts.  I  have  been  very 
nicely  used  by  the  gentleman.  I  am  not  speaking  anything  deroj^atorv 
to  him.  I  am  not  going  to  exonerate  myself,  should  I  be  placed  in  tha 
same  position,  I  might  do  tlie  same  as  he  did  myself  if  I  had  to  make 
a  living  for  my  family  in  that  way. 

No.  12. 

Philip  Vibert,  of  Perce,  in  the  county  of  Gasp6,  general  eouimis- 
sion  agent  and  agent  for  Lloyds,  in  the  county  of  Gaspe,  was  called  on 
behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  exam- 
ined. 

By  Mr.  Doutre : 
Question.  Where  do  you  live  I — Answer.  At  Perce,  close  to  Mai  Bay, 
Q.  Your  age  1— A.  72. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  living  in  the  county  of  Gasp6  f— A.  lu 
the  district  of  Gaspe  I  have  been  living  upwards  of  32  years. 
Q.  The  most  of  the  time  have  you  been  at  Perce  ? — A.  No ;  the 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


447 


greater  part  of  tbe  time,  more  than  half,  I  was  residing  at  New  Car- 
lisle, in  the  township  of  Bonaventure. 

Q.  Is  it  on  the  sea-shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  Perce  also? — A.  Yes.  Perce  is  one  of  the  leading  fish ing- 
statious  on  the  coast.    In  fact,  it  is  the  head  fishing-station. 

Q.  I  think  the  Secretary  has  entered  your  occupation,  but  it  has  not 
been  heard  by  the  Commission  ? — A.  It  is  that  of  general  com  mission 
ageut  and  insurance  agent.  I  am  also  agent  for  Lloyds,  the  great  in- 
sarance  company  of  London. 

Q.  I  think  you  have  filled  some  public  office  at  Perce  ? — A.  I  have 
held  flie  office  of  high  sheriil'  of  the  county. 

Q.  When  did  you  begin  to  pay  any  attention  to  the  fisheries  of  your 
neighborhood  ? — A.  I  came  out  for  the  express  purpose,  in  1845,  of 
looking  after  the  fisheries.  I  came  out  as  chief  superintendent  of  the 
Gaspe  Fishery  and  CoalMining  Company.  Consequently,  from  that 
period  to  the  present  time,  if  not  actually  concerned  in  them,  I  have  at 
least  been  always  watching  over  and  attending  to  the  fisheries,  because, 
1  believe,  I  can  say  that  no  man  has  paid  more  attention  to  them  than 
I  have. 

Q.  Was  that  an  English  company  ? — A.  It  was  a  company  formed  iii 
London  with  a  capital  of  £150,000  sterling. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  had  occasion  not  only  to  observe  but  to  write  your 
observation  of  the  fisheries? — A.  I  have.  I  have  written  for  a  long 
time,  and  what  I  have  written  has  appeared  in  the  English  and  Scotch 
papers,  more  particularly  at  the  time  previously  to  the  time  of  the 
treaty,  wht'i  the  menof  war  were  on  the  station. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  engaged  yourself  or  as  agent  of  that  English 
company  in  the  fisheries? — A.  As  agent  I  have,  but  not  myself  person- 
ally.   As  agent  I  have  been  always  more  or  less  engaged. 

Q.  In  what  kind  of  fisheries  have  you  been  engaged? — A.  In  all  kinds, 
but  more  particularly  in  cod-fishing. 

Q.  Well,  is  the  cod-fishing  carried  on  to  any  extent  in  that  part  of  the 
gulf  ?— A.  Undoubtedly.  Charles  Kobin  &  Co.  have  their  head  station 
at  Perce.  They  are  the  largest  fishing  concern,  perhaps,  I  may  say,  al- 
most in  British  North  America. 

Q.  Do  any  other  people  trade  in  fish  extensively  in  your  district  ? — A. 
A  great  many. 

Q.  Who  are  they  ? — A.  "Well,  besides  Charles  Robin  &  Co.,  there  are 
tbe  LeBoutillier  Brothers,  also  John  LeBoutillier  &  Co.,  Messrs.  J.  & 
E.  Collas,  Hyman,  and  others.  I  have  a  memorandum.  I  will  read 
them.  (Reads  from  memorandum  as  follows:)  Charles  Robin  &  Co., 
LeBoutillier  Bros.,  J.  &  E.  Collas,  John  LeBoutillier  &  Co.,  Uoratio  Le 
Boutillier,  Thos.  Savage,  John  FauveljJas.  Alexander,  John  LeGresley, 
Wm.  Fruing  &  Co.,  Wm.  Hyman,  Michel  LeEsperance,  T.  J.  LaMonta- 
gue,  Blowin  Bros.,  H.  &  S.  Veit,  Robert  Lindsay,  C.  ilamiltou  &  Co. 
There  are  a  great  many  others  beside  these,  but  those  I  have  mentioned 
are  houses  that  ship  fish;  that  send  fish  to  foreign  markets.  There 
are  a  great  many  others  besides  these  engaged  on  a  pretty  large  scale, 
but  tlie.v  do  not  ship  themselves. 

Q.  They  sell  to  those  parties  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  are  the  markets  with  which  these  parties  are  connected? 
Is  it  the  United  States  or  some  other  ? — A.  Spain,  Portugal,  and  partic- 
ularly Brazil. 

Q.  !><>  tliey  ship  much  to  the  United  States?— A.  Nothing.  The 
only  ash  1  have  known  shipped  to  the  United  States  during  the  thirty- 


448 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


two  years  I  have  been  on  the  coast  has  been  herring — salt  herriug.   i 
am  not  aware  of  any  other  being  sent  there. 

Q.  Well,  where  are  these  parties  located ;  they  are  not  all  at  Perce!— 
No ;  all  along  the  coast. 

Q.  To  what  extent  of  the  coastf — A.  You  might  indicate  on  the  map 
behind  you  the  extent  of  the  shore  on  which  these  establish iiieuts  are 
founded  or  exist  ? — A.  (Pointing  to  the  map.)  The  whole  of  Bay  Cha- 
leurs,  along  the  shore,  and  up  the  Saint  Lawrence  as  far  as  the  tishery 
extends. 

Q.  How  far  is  that ! — A.  I  should  say  up  to  the  Saguenay.  1  don't 
think  there  is  any  farther  point. 

Q.  That  is  on  tho  north  shore ;  what  point  on  the  south  shore !— A. 
Up  to  Kiviere  de  Loup.  I  believe  that  is  about  the  extent,  to  the  best 
of  my  knowledge,  of  the  operations  of  those  houses  up  that  way. 

Q.  Are  some  of  those  houses  located  on  the  north  shore,  or  are  they 
all  on  the  south  shore? — A.  They  have  establishments  on  the  north 
shore  all  the  way  up  to  the  Strait  of  Belle  Isle,  but  the  principals  gen 
erally  reside  on  the  south  shore. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  the  names  of  the  places  on  the  north  shde  where 
these  houses  you  have  mentioned  have  establishments  I — A.  They  are 
as  follows : 

Fraser  &  Halliday,  John  and  Elias  Collis,  Moisic ;  Thomas  Vibert, 
Shallop  River;  John  LeGros,  Le  Gros  Cove;  Joseph  Ferguson, Mabes 
Cove ;  John  and  Elias  Collas,  Philip  Tonsel,  James  Alexauder,  — 
Ferguson,  Sheldrake  River ;  P.  Couture,  Duck  Creek ;  Joseph  Couture, 
Couture's  Cove ;  LeBoutillier  Bros.,  Thunder  River ;  J.  &  D.  Beck, 
Judge  Benouf,  Jupitagen  Ridge  Point :  LeBoutillier  Bros.,  C.  Robin  & 
Co.,  Charles  Jean,  Rambler's  Cove  or  Magpie ;  C.  Robin  &  Co.,  J.  &  E. 
Collas,  Clarence  Hamilton  &  Co.,  Simeon  Mabe  &  Co.,  James  Beck,  Sir- 
vis  &  Boulanger,  St.  John's  River ;  C.  Hamilton  &  Co.,  John  Fauvel, 
John  Vibert,  Peter  Douguay  &  Son,  Long  Point  or  Sand  Point;  Le 
Boutillier  Bros.,  Esquimaux  Point;  C.Robin  &  Co.,  iNatashquau ;  C. 
Robin  &  Co.,  Le  Doeque.  That  makes  thirty  establishments  on  the 
north  shore.    All  of  them,  with  two  exceptions,  are  Jerseymen. 

Q.  Are  you  not  yourself  a  Jersey  man? — A.  I  am. 

Q.  Were  you  connected  in  any  shape  with  the  fisheries  before  coming 
to  this  country  ? — A.  1  was. 

Q.  So  you  began  early  in  life  to  be  connected  with  the  fisheries  ?— A. 
I  began  immediately  after  leaving  the  sea.  My  first  entry  into  life  was 
as  a  sailor.  I  have  been  at  sea  five  and  a  half  years.  After  that  I 
went  into  business. 

Q.  What  business  ! — A.  Commission  business,  first  of  all,  in  Jersey. 
On  my  brother  going  out  to  Rio  de  Janeiro  to  establish  business  there, 
I  then  entered  into  the  fishing  business,  buying  fish,  so  as  to  ship  it  to 
him  at  Rio  de  Janeiro. 

Q.  You  told  us,  I  think,  that  all  those  houses  engaged  in  the  fisheries 
along  the  south  and  north  shores  were  dealing  with  all  kinds  offish!— 
A.  Yes ;  but  particularly  codfish. 

Q.  They  are  at  a  considerable  distance  from  Newfoundland  ? — A.  We 
have  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  Newfoundland,  nothing  whatever. 
We  are  distinct  as  regards  fisheries  as  if  we  did  not  belong  to  England 
at  all  j  as  distinct  as  they  were  part  of  a  foreign  nation,  comparatively 
speaking. 

Q.  Of  all  these  bouses  is  there  none  dealing  with  Newfoundland  !- 
A.  Not  one. 


kiM^ 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


449 


Q.  Tlie.i  all  the  codQsh  are  taken  within  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence! 
_A.  Undoubtedly. 

Q.  Kow,  have  you  any  knowledge,  from  your  personal  observation  or 
from  conversation  (not  recently,  but  during  the  whole  course  of  your 
experience),  where  the  codfish  is  generally  taken  in  the  gulf? — A.  By 
far  the  greater  portion  of  the  codfish  is  taken  along  the  shore.  A  very 
considerable  portion  is  likewise  taken  on  the  banks. 

Q,  Which  banks  ? — A.  For  instance,  Miscou  Banks  and  others  out- 
fijde— distant  from  the  shore.    The  great  bulk  is  within  the  three-mile 

limit. 

Q.  Well,  if  you  were  called  upon  to  give  an  appropriate  statement  of 
the  proportion  taken  inshore,  within  three  miles  and  outside,  what  pro- 
portion would  you  put  in  either  division  ? — A.  That  is,  what  proportion 
is  cau^lit  outside  and  inside  ? 

Q.  Yes;  of  the  whole  quantity  that  is  dealt  with  by  these  houses. — 
A.  Two-thirds  are  caught  inside  and  one-third  outside.  I  will  say  that 
is  about  it.    It  is  impossible  to  say  exactly. 

Q.  In  regard  to  mackerel,  where  is  the  mackerel  generally  caught  f — 
A.  As  far  as  I  am  aware  of,  it  is  in  the  gulf;  but  priucipally  close  to 
tbe  shore. 

Q.  If  tlie  same  question  were  put  to  you  what  proportion  is  taken  in 
any  part  of  the  bays  and  what  the  proportion  would  be  of  those  caught 
outside,  what  would  you  say  ? — A.  As  far  as  my  knowledge  of  the  fish- 
ery goes,  from  close  observation  (for  I  have  always  paid  great  attention 
to  the  fisheries),  I  should  say  decidedly  two-thirds  of  the  mackerel  are 
caught  within  the  three-mile  limit.  Because  there  is  also  another  thing 
that  must  be  taken  into  consideration,  which  is  this:  The  great  mack- 
erel fishers  are  the  Americans,  and  when  the  three-mile  limit  existed 
they  used  to  come  within  the  three-mile  litnit  and  feed  the  fish  and  take 
tbem  outside  and  then  catch  them.  When  our  people  had  been  for  a 
few  days  or  a  week  catching  fish  for  bait  and  doing  a  little — having, 
perhaps,  a  few  barrels — an  American  schooner  would  come  along  and 
pass  ill  between  Bonaveuture  Island  and  the  mainland  and  strew  the 
bait  there  and  away  they  would  go  off,  and  you  would  never  see  a  mack- 
erel there  again  that  season. 

Q.  That  is  for  some  time  ? — A.  I  have  known  when  it  was  late  in  the 
season  that  you  would  never  see  a  mackerel  there  again.  They  take 
thera  all  out.    Every  fish  went  out. 

Q.  Well,  have  the  Americans,  during  the  period  of  your  experience, 
been  in  the  habit  of  frequeuting  the  parts  of  the  gulf  where  you  live  ? — 
A.  Decidedly  so. 

Q.  Could  you  give  an  estimate  of  the  number  of  American  vessels 
tbatcauie  in,  either  from  your  own  observation  or  from  conversation  ? — 
A.  Of  late  years  very  few  have  come,  but  I  have  seen  as  many  as  200 
or  300  in  sight  at  one  time.  I  have,  not  more  than  four  or  five  years 
ago,  I  think,  counted  1G7  from  my  house  in  the  ofllug,  which  I  took  to 
be  Americans,  for  this  reason  :  that,  generally  speaking,  they  are  more 
tidy,  if  I  may  so  express  myself;  they  are  better  looking  vessels,  and 
tbeir  sails  are  so  white,  compared  with  the  British  fishermen,  that  they 
can  be  distinguished  from  them. 

Q.  You  counted  107  from  your  house  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Over  what  area! — A.  It  might  be  within  a  distance  of  perhaps 
five  or  six  miles,  because  when  they  are  fishing  mackerel  they  always 
are  close  together.    They  do  not  spread  out  and  remain  at  a  distance, 
out  all  keep  together. 
29  F 


450 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  When  you  say  five  or  six  miles,  is  that  five  or  six  miles  from  tbe 
coast  or  along  the  coast  ? — A.  Along  the  coast. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  coast  do  they  keep  I — A.  At  the  time 
when  they  were  watched  by  the  crnisers  they  kept  away,  but  when  there 
were  any  mackerel  one  of  them  would  run  in,  as  I  was  observing  a  little 
while  ago,  and  take  them  out;  then  they  would  fish  away,  but  taking 
care  to  be  outside  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  You  remember  in  1867,  that  is  the  year  after  the  abrogation  of  tlie 
treaty ;  have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  number  of  vessels  that  fre- 
quented ?— A.  After  the  establishment  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  J 

Q.  After  the  abrogation. — A.  Well,  there  was  still  a  great  mmiber; 
but  at  that  time  tl'.ere  certainly  was  not  quite  so  many,  although  very 
nearly  as  many  as  before  for  some  time.  In  fact,  they  continued  to  be 
very  plentiful  until  the  civil  war;  then  they  went  oft" as  if  by  magic. 

Q.  The  civil  war  was  ended  I — A.  But  I  say  they  were  plentiful  up  to 
that  time. 

Q.  I  think  you  told  us  that  vessels  were  counted  by  you  to  the  num- 
ber of  1G7,  and  you  said  they  were  along  the  coast ;  now  I  ask  at  what 
distance  from  the  coast? — A.  They  might  have  been  four  or  five  miles 
at  the  outside,  not  more. 

Q.  Some  of  them  ? — A.  Some  of  them ;  yes. 

Q.  Were  there  several  cutters  looking  after  the  fisheries,  either  Cana- 
dian or  Imperial  ? — A.  They  were,  particularly  previous  to  the  Reci 
procity  Treaty.  I  have  seen  as  many  as  seven  British  men-of-war  iu 
Paspei)iac  roadstead  at  one  time. 

Q.  And  after  1876  ? — A.  After  that  there  were  only  Canadians  there. 

Q.  In  that  part  of  the  gulf? — A.  That  is,  in  our  part  of  the  gulf;  I 
do  not  know  what  there  were  elsewhere.  We  would  see  a  frigate  occa- 
sionally, but  not  to  say  continually  on  the  coast.  But,  during  tbe  period 
first  alluded  to,  some  of  them  would  come  and  remain  in  the  roadsteail, 
particularly  the  captain  of  the  Devastation.  lie  was  called  "  the  devil 
on  the  station." 

Q.  From  the  information  you  got  have  you  an  idea  of  the  number  of 
the  American  vessels  that  frequented  the  gulf — from  the  Gut  of  Canso 
up  to  your  locality  and  above  I — A.  As  far  as  I  have  heard  1  should  es- 
timate them  at  500  or  600  or  more,  not  less,  but  they  never  were  in  the 
one  place  at  the  same  time,  they  were  all  spread  about.  For  instance, 
I  have  left  Paspebiac  on  board  the  Lady  Head  on  the  way  to  Quebec. 
When  leaving  Paspebiac  I  have  seen  from  200  to  300  Americans  in  the 
Bay  Chaleurs.  As  a  matter  of  course  they  could  not  follow  us.  Tliev 
could  not  get  ahead  of  us,  because  under  any  circumstances  we  were  able 
to  beat  them,  as  we  were  in  a  steamer.  Well,  when  we  would  get  up  into 
the  river  St.  Lawrence  I  have  seen  nearly  as  many  more  ahead  of  us, 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  five,  six,  or  seven  hundred,  you  speak  of  tbe 
Quebec  waters? — A.  I  am  speaking  of  the  Quebec  waters. 

Q.  That  does  not  include  what  might  have  been  about  the  Island  of 
Cape  Breton?— A.  No;  I  am  speaking  of  the  Quebec  waters,  and  I  be- 
lieve I  am  not  very  far  wrong.  In  fact,  the  American  captains  biive 
admitted  that  to  me  themselves,  because  I  have  often  conversed  with 
them.    They  have  admitted  to  me  that  there  was  that  many. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  In  the  gulf  or  iu  their  whole  fleet?— A.  O,  no.    In  the  gulf. 
When  they  come  to  be  spread  out  all  over  the  vast  extent  of  water  they 
Soon  tell  up. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION, 


451 


By  Mr.  Doatre : 

Q.  Could  yon  speak  with  Rome  knowledge  of  the  tonnage?  Have-you 
any  personal  knowledge  of  the  average  tonnage  ? — A.  Yea.  I  have  been 
on  board  a  great  number  of  them,  and  also  Irom  my  nantical  knowl- 
edge I  know.  From  my  own  house,  as  I  have  a  first-rate  glass,  I  could 
always  tell  about  the  tonnage.  I  don't  think  I  have  seen  any  less  than 
50  tons.  From  that  I  have  seen  them  up  as  high  as  200  odd.  I  should 
say  the  average  was  from  70  to  75  tons.  That  is  what  E  would  suppose 
woiiltl  be  about  the  average.    I  have  seen  one  vessel  220  tons. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  of  men  on  those  vessels? — A..  The  crew,  as  a 
matter  of  course,  would  vary  according  to  the  size  of  the  vessel,  from 
10  to  15,  but  in  this  large  vessel  I  have  spoken  of  there  would  likely  be 
20o(l(l  hands.    I  don't  remember  exactly.    I  think  it  was  20  odd. 

Q.  Well,  now,  have  you  any  idea  of  the  catch  on  the  American  vessels 
when  they  felt  that  they  might  go — that  is,  when  they  had  about  what 
they  expected  to  have  ? — A.  As  a  matter  of  course  the  catch  would  de- 
pend upon  the  size  of  the  vessel.  A  small  vessel  would  not  require  as 
much  as  the  others,  but  I  have  always  understood  from  the  American 
ciiptains  that  they  made  very  good  catches  as  a  rule.  As  a  matter  of 
coarse,  according  to  the  size  of  the  vessel;  they  would  vary  frouk  250  to 
500  barrels. 

Q.  In  one  trip  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  to  your  knowledge  whether  they  make  more  than  one  trip  ! — 
A.  As  a  rule,  they  always  made  two,  but  they  have  made  three.  I  think 
it  is  as  many  as  two  invariably. 

Q.  Have  they  time  to  go  home  with  the  catch  and  come  back? — A. 
Well,  I  will  tell  yon  what  used  to  be  done;  I  will  not  say  what  tliey  do 
now.  Ill  McOulloch's  Dictionary  it  will  be  found  where  Mr.  McGregor 
gives  the  statement  that  seven  or  eight  farmers  and  their  sons  will  unite 
to  build  a  schooner.  They  tit  out  here  to  go  fishing  in  the  spring.  They 
manage  to  get  a  cargo  in  time  to  go  back  and  attend  to  their  harvest. 
They  get  their  crops  in,  and  as  soon  as  they  are  in  they  start  for  another 
voyage.  That  shows  that  I  am  correct  in  speaking  of  the  possibility  of 
their  making  three  trips. 

Q.  Especially  if  they  transship  ? — A.  Especially  if  they  transship.  But 
this  system  that  I  allude  to  I  know  to  be  correct  from  my  own  per- 
sonal knowledge  and  by  reference  to  McCuUoch's  Dictionary,  where  it 
will  be  found  fully  described. 

Q.  Is  it  to  your  knowledge,  either  personally  or  from  conversation 
with  skii)pers,  whether  transshipment  is  practiced? — A.  O, yes.  Many 
of  the  skippers  have  told  me  that  they  went  to  the  Gut  of  Canso  to 
transship.  Many  have  told  me  that ;  and  when  a  schooner  was  not  full 
and  would  come  across  another  that  was  not  full,  they  would  make  a 
bargain  to  transship  from  one  to  another,  and  then  one  would  go  home 
and  let  the  other  go  back  to  the  fishing  ground. 

Q.  Well,  it  is  an  advantage  to  the  Americans  to  have  the  right  to 
transship  ?— A.  Undoubtedly ;  for  if  they  do  that,  it  gives  the  vessel 
that  transships  into  the  other  an  opportunity  of  returning  to  the  fish- 
ing ground,  and  she  loses  no  time. 

Q.  Therefore  she  makes  double  or  treble  trips  ? — A.  Precisely.  That 
was  done  on  the  coast  of  Jersey  in  the  oyster  fishery.  Oysters  never 
went  to  market  by  the  vessels  in  which  they  were  taken,  but  in  larger 
vessels.  They  were  transshipped  invariably.  That  is  precisely  the 
system  we  are  now  speaking  of. 

Q.  Even  if  they  had  no  steamer  to  transship  their  cargoes  to  Boston 
or  elsewhere,  one  party  having  two  schooners  might  keep  one  coming 


452 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


:^^< 


to  tlie  Gat  of  Canso,  taking  the  cargoes  of  the  fishing  schooner  awav 
and  leaving  her  on  the  ground  ? — A.  Yes. 

Qi  In  fact,  there  is  a  multiplicity  of  operation  that  may  result  from 
this  liberty  of  transshipment  ? — A.  Undoubtedly. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  worth  while  for  the  Americans  to  come 
in  our  waters  if  they  were  strictly  or  rigidly  excluded  from  tbe  ba.vs 
aud  three  miles  from  the  shore? — A.  I  don't  believe  it  would  be  worth 
while,  and  I  have  never  thought  it  would  be  worth  while. 

Q.  Suppose  they  were  restricted  to  Magdaleij  Islands,  the  coast  of 
Cape  Breton,  and  part  of  Newfoundland,  do  you  think  it  would  be 
worth  while  ? — A.  I  believe  that  for  a  few  it  might  answer  the  purpose, 
but  not  to  come  in  the  immense  numbers  that  they  have  come  in. 

Q.  They  could  not  make  a  paying  voyage  if  they  did? — A.  It  would 
be  utterly  impossible. 

Q.  Is  that  only  your  own  opinion  ? — A.  Wo  have  always  understood 
it  to  be  the  opinion  of  the  Americans  themselves. 

Q.  Have  you  had  occasion  to  speak  often  with  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Both  before  and  after  reciprocity  ? — A.  I  remember  on  one  occa- 
sion, which  has  just  come  to  my  mind,  I  met  an  American  captain  and 
asked  him  what  he  was  doing.  He  said  he  was  fishing  codfish.  I  said, 
I  suppose  you  are  fishing  in  the  usual  mode  with  you  Americans.  He 
said,  precisely  so.  I  asked  him  if  it  did  not  ruin  the  fisheries.  IJe  Siiid 
he  thought  it  did.  I  asked  him  why  he  did  it,  and  he  said  that  if  be 
did  not  his  neighbors  would,  aud  that,  as  a  matter  of  course,  he  could 
get  a  great  many  more  fish  in  that  way.  He  added  that  it  was  tbe  fault 
of  our  people  that  they  did  not  prevent  it.  He  then  made  this  obser 
vation  :  *'Ah !  if  you  only  knew  it,  there  is  California  there.  You  need 
not  go  beyond  this  for  California." 

Q.  When  did  this  take  place? — A.  That  must  have  been  in  sometbing 
like  1855  or  1856. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  our  fisherman  resorting  to  the  American 
waters  to  fish  ? — A.  Never.  In  fact,  I  am  very  certain  they  would  not. 
What  benefit  would  they  derive?  If  they  found  it  worth  while  to  go 
to  the  American  waters,  why  would  the  Americans  come  here  to  fish  iu 
ours?  They  would  not  come  here  if  ours  were  not  superior  to  tbeirs. 
It  stands  to  reason  that  tbe^'  would  not  find  it  profitable  to  come  tbat 
distance  if  their  own  fisheries  were  as  good,  and  our  people  are  not  such 
fools  as  to  go  to  an  inferior  fishery. 

Q.  It  would  not  be  the  act  of  a  sane  man  ? — A.  No ;  the  man  would 
be  better  fitted  for  the  lunatic  asylum  than  anything  else. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  profit  realized  by  those  who  fish  either 
mackerel,  or  codfish,  or  halibut? — A.  I  cannot  give  you  an  exact  stateuient 
of  it,  but  I  could  give  an  approximate  estimate,  I  suppose. 

Q.  Have  you  any  note  about  it  ? — A.  I  have  a  note  hei  e  to  refer  to. 
But,  for  instance,  you  ask  me  with  respect  to  the  extent  of  tbe  mack- 
erel fishery.  I  have  always  understood  from  captains  that  from  100  to 
120  barrels  paid  for  the  outfit.  Consequentlj',  if  they  got  tbat,  aud 
enough  to  pay  the  crew,  whatever  was  divided  among  them  after  that 
was  all  clear  profit.  That  is  what  I  have  always  understood.  Then,  as 
a  matter  of  course,  that  depends  again  upon  the  tonnage  of  the  vessel, 
for  it  stands  to  reason  that  a  vessel  of  50  tons  will  not  require  as  much 
as  a  vessel  of  70,  80,  or  100  tons.    It  must  be  pro  rata. 

Q.  Did  you  tell  us  what  was  the  average  catch  to  a  vessel  ?— A.  I 
did;  I  said  from  250  to  300  or  400,  and  the  largest  ones  500.  It  just 
depends  upon  the  size  of  tbe  vessel. 

Q.  Take  the  average  tonnage  you  have  given,  namely,  70  or  75  tons, 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


453 


and  speaking  of  the  whole  season,  not  of  one  trip  only,  what  would  yoa 
think  would  be  an  average  statement  of  expenses  and  profits  f — A.  I  do 
not  know  about  that.  At  all  events  the  vessel  would  take,  admitting 
sbe  niiide  two  trips,  700  barrels.  If  she  took  700  barrels  she  would  not 
8ell  them  for  less  than  $12  a  barrel.  I  do  not  believe  it  has  ever  been 
below  tbat.    I  have  known  them  to  go  upwards  of  $20  a  barrel. 

Q.  But  taking  a  very  low  price ;  continue  your  calculations,  taking 
$12  as  a  very  generous  concession  as  to  price  ? — A.  That  would  be 
18,400. 

Q.  Then,  what  proportion  of  that  is  required  to  cover  expenses? — A. 
Half  of  that,  according  to  the  present  system  with  the  Americans,  is 
generally  adopted.  Because  I  ought  to  have  told  you  this. when  I  spoke 
about  the  farmers  and  their  sons  uniting.  The  other  system  is  that  the 
merchants  find  the  vessel  and  the  outfit;  originally,  when  they  first 
commenced  the  fishing,  the  merchants  found  the  ships  or  schooners  and 
the  nets.  The  crew  had  to  pay  for  provisions,  salt,  lines,  and  hooks, 
and  after  that  they  got  three-fourths;  I  think  it  was— no,  it  was  two- 
thirds — thac  was  it,  and  the  vessel  got  one-third.  But  now  the  system 
is  altered-,  from  what  they  have  told  me.  The  vessel  finds  everything, 
and  the  crew  and  fishermen  have  to  pay  simply  for  the  cook  and  the 
share  of  bait  whenever  they  have  to  buy  bait;  and  they  get  half  and 
the  vessel  gets  half.  That  I  believe  is  the  present  system,  so  far  as  the 
captains  have  told  me. 

Q.  Who  pays  for  the  barrels  ? — A.  The  vessel. 

Q.  The  owner? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Taking  that  system,  and  taking  the  average  catch  at  600  or  700 
barrels,  what  would  be  the  clear  profit  to  the  owner  ? — A.  I  should  say 
the  owner  would  get  from  $2,000  to  $3,(>00. 

Q.  But  in  the  mean  time  a  large  number  of  persons  have  found  their 
living  in  the  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  ever  done  that  some  person  charters  a  schooner  to  go  fish- 
iug?— A.  I  am  not  aware  that  it  is.  It  might  have  been  done;  I  am 
not  aware  of  it. 

Q.  Does  it  sometimes  happen  that  the  men  instead  of  being  engaged 
per  share  would  get  wages  ? — A.  Yes;  that  is  the  case,  because  I  have 
known  men  to  be  hired  in  that  way.  The  schooners  have  passed  along 
the  Gut  of  Canso  or  Arichat  and  those  places,  and  hired  men  at  so  much 
per  month  instead  of  shares. 

Q.  Well,  having  been  engaged  in  marine  insurance,  would  you  con- 
sider that  $250  or  $200  a  month  for  the  cliarter  of  a  vessel  of  70  or  75 
tons  would  be  a  fair  remuneration  for  one? — A.  $250  a  mouth  would 
be  decidedly  a  fair  remuneration ;  according  to  the  size. 

Q.  Well,  say  a  vessel  of  70  tons? — A.  I  should  say  the  owner  would 
be  very  well  paid. 

Q.  Now,  I  would  like  to  put  this  question  :  Taking  that  part  of  our 
population  which  is  engaged  in  fishing,  or  the  inhabitants  of  those  parts 
of  the  coast  we  have  mentioned  all  along  the  gulf,  independently  of  the 
remainder  of  the  population  of  the  country — speaking  in  view  of  the 
interest  of  that  part  of  the  population,  do  you  think  that  reciprocity  or 
any  other  system  of  trade  with  the  United  States  would  compensate  for 
the  loss  they  sustain? — A.  None  whatever ;  nothing  can  compensate. 
The  remainder  may  be  benefited  by  reciprocity,  but  not  the  fishermen 
or  the  merchants.  You  can  give  them  nothing  that  will  compensate 
them,  because  the  moment  yoa  take  away  the  three-mile  reservation 
yon  destroy  the  fisheries,  and  the  moment  the  fisheries  are  destroyed 
your  flshermen,  in  the  first  place,  will  not  be  able  to  obtain  a  livelihood, 


454 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


J  -•!? 


and  tbe  merchants  by  degrees  will  have  to  leave  the  coasts.  The  lar^re 
establishmeots  dwindle  away  to  nothing.  It  is  as  plain  us  A  B  C.  it' 
the  trade  goes  away  these  establishments  must  go  with  it ;  they  cauuot 
bold  on  to  nothing.         . 

Q.  From  your  knowledge  of  the  shipping  interest  do  yoo  think  that 
the  proprietor  of  a  schooner  of  seventy  tons  could  put  her  to  any  moie 
profitable  business  than  to  charter  her  to  fishermen  who  would  pay  $200 
or  $250  a  month  ? — A.  That  all  depends  upon  the  state  of  business  at 
the  time.  Because  take  such  a  time  as  this  when  business  is  very  bad. 
There  is  many  a  man  who  would  jump  at  the  idea  as  long  as  he  jrot  his 
money,  however  small,  for  the  em])loymeut  of  his  vessel.  It  depends 
upon  whether  business  is  good  or  dull. 

Q.  Iteferrihg  to  another  statement  you  have  given,  that  a  vessel  sent 
out  to  fish  with  a  crew  engaged  on  shares  would  make  a  profit  of  between 
$2,000  and  $3,000  a  season,  do  you  think  that  many  other  kinds  ut  busi- 
ness pay  better  than  that? — A.  No;  I  do  not.  I  believe  that  no  larger 
profits  have  been  made  than  those  secured  by  the  American  fishenaeu, 
when  fishing  was  good,  and  when  they  caught  a  sutUcietit  quantity  of 
mackerel.  I  believe  that  they  then  nmde,  what  you  may  term,  "  golden 
voyages."    They  admit  that  themselves.    They  have  never  denied  it. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  opinion  about  the  scarcity  of  the  mackerel 
during  the  last  two  years  in  our  waters  and  their  return  this  year?— A. 
My  opinion  is  that  the  Americans  not  having  frequented  our  waters 
during  this  period,  as  a  matter  of  course  the  mackerel  have  increased  in 
number.  This  must  necessarily  bo  the  case  in  every  similar  instauce 
where,  as  I  may  say,  you  have  persecuted  any  fish  and  completely  anni- 
hilated them.  You  must  then  give  them  time  to  recuperate  in  order  to 
have  them  return  ayain.  An  excellent  inatanee  of  this  is  now  aflbrded 
with  respect  to  the  river  at  Dalhousie.  This  was  a  river  from  which,  at 
one  time,  there  used  to  be  sent  to  Halifax  from  three  to  four  schooner 
loads  of  pickled  salmon,  and  I  have  seen  the  time  when  that  same  river 
could  not  produce  filty  barrels  of  it.  Well,  now,  since  that  river  bas 
been  protected,  and  since  this  protection  has  been  followed  out,  and 
strictly  followed  out,  the  salmon  have  there  again  become  plentitul;  and 
so  it  is  with  every  kind  of  fish  ;  this  stands  to  reason. 

Q.  So  you  would  attribute  the  abundance  of  the  mackerel  found  during 
the  last  two  or  three  years  in  American  waters  to  the  fact  that  their 
vessels  had  been  swarming  in  our  waters,  thus  giving  the  fish  in  their 
own  waters  a  rest  ? — A.  No.  These  fish  always  belong  to  our  own 
waters. 

Q.  But  what  has  been  the  case  during  the  last  two  years?— A.  Tbe 
fact  is  that  there  were  none  in  any  waters,  comparatively  speaking, 
compared  with  what  there  had  been  in  former  years.  None  were  caught, 
comparatively  speaking,  anywhere ;  that  is  to  any  extent.  They  bad 
not  been  caught  in  the  large  quantities  which  had  been  customary. 

Q.  I  thought  that  these  fish  were  to  be  found  in  their  own  waters!— 
A.  What  do  you  call  their  own  waters  ? 

Q.  The  waters  on  the  American  coast. — A.  You  don't  mean  tb  say 
that  mackerel  breed  on  the  American  coast  ? 

Q.  I  know  nothing  about  that. — A.  I  doubt  it  very  much.  It  appears 
to  me  that  wherever  mackerel  or  any  other  fish  are  found  to  be  full  of 
spawn,  inshore  or  on  a  coast,  that  must  be  the  place  where  it  is  going 
to  breed.    That  appears  to  me  to  be  as  plain  as  possibly  can  be. 

Q.  Then  you  are  of  opinion,  and  you  are  sure,  that  the  mackerel  breed 
in  our  waters  ?— A.  That  is  my  opinion.  I  may  be  wrong.  I  don't  say 
that  I  am  right. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


455 


Q.  Tbat  would  not  prevent  the  mackerel  breeding  iu  Americaa 
^.Qter8? — A.  I  do  not  dispute  tlint. 

Q.  You  are  sure  of  the  tact  tbat  the  mackerel  breed  iu  our  waters  ? — 
A.  I  am  sure  of  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  the  opinion  of  the  Americans  is  on  that  point  ? — 
A.  No;  I  do  not.  I  have  never  spoken  to  an  American  captain  on  that 
subject. 

Q.  What  evidence  have  you  to  support  the  statement  that  the  mack< 
erel  breed  in  our  waters? — A.  The  very  fact  that  when  you  catch 
mackerel  in  our  waters  you  Oud  them  full  of  spawn.  This  is  the  most 
simple  fact  in  the  world.  Wheu  you  go  up  a  river  and  catch  salmon  in 
a  pool,  just  ready  to  spawn,  it  is  evident  that  this  is  the  most  simple 
proof  that  they  are  going  to  spawn.  You  find  ihem  iu  the  pool  and 
tbey  will  not  turn  back  and  go  down  the  river  again  to  spawn.  So  it 
appears  to  me  is  the  case  with  all  fish,  without  exception.  1  do  not 
moan  to  say  tbat  this  is  true  with  regard  to  mackerel  more  than  with 
auy  otbt^r  Ash.  I  believe  that  all  kinds  of  fish  are  alike  iu  this  respect ; 
wlierever  you  catch  them  full  of  spawn,  there  tbey  are  going  to  Mpawu. 

Q.  When  the  American  vessels  frequented  our  waters  in  great  num- 
bers, was  this  the  occasion  of  some  trouble,  not  only  at  sea,  but  also  on 
sbore  ? — A.  I  am  not  aware  that  any  trouble  occurred  at  sea  beyond 
tbis— on  several  occasions  they  have  dropped  in  among  a  lot  of  our 
boats  engaged  in  fishing.  Perhaps  the  American  vessels  would  come 
up  to  tbe  number,  say,  of  from  thirty  to  fifty,  and  all  close  to  each  other. 
I  bave  on  more  than  one  occasion  seen  an  American  schooner  drop  iu 
aud  come  to  anchor  among  these  boats,  which  thereupon  would  be 
obliged  to  ieave. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  Because  they  could  not  then  catch  anymore  fish.  The 
rule  followed  by  the  American  vessels  is  to  throw  the  offal  everboard, 
aud  tbe  moment  they  do  so  tbe  mackerel  go  to  them,  and  our  people 
have  to  move  off. 

Q.  Owing  to  their  throwing  overboard  offal  and  bait? — A.  BotQ; 
tbey  tbrow  offal  over,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  on  more  than  one  occa- 
siou — for  so  I  have  l>een  told  by  the  fishermen — the  Americans  have 
driven  tbem  off'  the  fishing  grounds,  and  told  them,  '•^  Y'ou  must  get  out 
of  tbis ;  we  won't  have  you  near  us."  As  to  this  1  speak  merely  from 
hearsay. 

Q.  Tbe  fishermen  who  live  on  that  part  of  the  shore  fish  iu  open 
boats? — A.  Yes,  they  all  do  so. 

Q.  Aud  no  one  of  them  is  able  to  resist  the  crew  of  a  schooner  ? — A. 
No;  tbey  never  think  of  it. 

Q.  Now,  will  you  tell  us  whether  any  trouble  has  tiikeu  place  on 
shore  ? — A.  Trouble  has  occurred  on  sbore  ou  several  occasions,  though 
uot  iu  a  great  number  of  instances.  On  several  occasions,  where  a  num- 
ber of  crews  have  landed,  they  have  considered  themselves,  I  suppose, 
the  masters  of  the  field,  and  that  they  could  do  as  they  pleased  ;  and, 
uufortunately,  where  they  have  obtained  liquor — this  is  the  cause  of 
all  tbe  mischief — they  have  committed  a  great  many  excesses. 

Q.  Do  tbe  Americans  throw  offal  overboard  from  their  vessels  when 
near  tbe  sbore? — A.  Invariably;  what  else  can  they  do  with  the  offal  ? 
It  stands  to  reason  that  they  would  not  bnug  it  to  the  shore.  The  dif- 
ference between  them  and  our  people  is  this:  the  latter  bring  in  their  fish 
round,  as  they  call  it,  that  is,  without  being  split  or  having  had  any- 
thing done  to  them,  and  on  the  beach  the  fish  are  split  and  attended  to. 
Consequently  they  do  not  throw  the  offal  into  the  sea;  in  fact  a  law 
which  is  intended  to  prevent  it  exists,  and  they  dare  uot  do  so,  while 


456 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1  /^i 


the  Anaerican»,  who  do  not  oorae  on  shore,  and  who  are  alwaya  afloat 
will  not  take  the  trouble  to  briiiff  the  offiil  ashore,  but  pitch  it  overboard 
wherever  they  split  the  flsh.  This  is  the  case  with  those  similarly  ttita- 
ated,  whether  on  an  American  or  on  any  other  schooner.  It  does  not 
matter  whether  the  vessel  bo  American,  Nova  Scotian,  a  New  Biuiib- 
wicker,  or  Canadian. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  that  practice  T — A.  The  effect,  first  of  all,  is 
that  the  offal  attracts  the  flsh  from  all  around  to  the  spot  where  it  is 
thrown.  Another  opinion  has  also  been  expressed  in  this  relatio.r  and 
I  think  it  is  likely  to  be  correct.  It  is  this :  that  this  offal,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  must  very  soon  become  putrid,  and  when  it  becomes  putrid 
it  must  become  poisonous,  precisely  in  the  same  way  with  regard  toHsli 
as  it  is  for  us  to  eat  putrid  fish.  At  least  that  is  what  I  fancy  to  be  tlie 
case.  I  do  not  know  whether  I  am  right  or  wrong,  but  that  is  my  im 
pression ;  and  therefore  this  practice  destroys  the  flsh — the  young  tisli 
particularly. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  when  they  have  thrown  offul  overboard  so  near 
the  shore  you  would  smell  it  while  the  tide  was  low  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  It  would  be  farther  off  than  that  ? — A.  It  would  be  thrown  out- 
bide. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  any  of  this  offal  brought  ashore  by  the  tide?— A. 
O,  well,  this  might  have  been  the  case.  There  is  such  a  quantity  cast 
along  the  shore  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  tell,  but  I  should  say  that, 
as  a  rule,  when  thrown  overboard  this  would  not  follow,  unless  a  very 
heavy  storm  should  set  in  immediately  afterward.  Otherwise  I  should 
say  it  would  remain  where  thrown.  It  is  generally  cast  overboard  iu 
deep  water,  and  conse({uently  it  would  be  likely  to  remain  there. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  motive  which  has  induced  our  legislators  to 
prevent  our  people  throwing  offal  into  the  seal — A.  It  is  precisely  what 
I  just  now  ex|)lained  to  you.  This  practice  is  considered  to  be  injurious 
to  the  flsh ;  also,  when  they  are  glutted — so  the  flslierraen  all  tell  me— 
with  the  oli'al  which  has  been  thus  thrown  overboard,  flsh  will  not  bite. 
That  stands  to  reason ;  they  are  so  full  of  it  that  they  will  not  then 
touch  anything  else. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  anything  of  the  mode  of  flshing  followed  by  the 
Americans? — A.  The  mackerel  are  all  caught  by  them  with  seines  and 
hand  lines;  bobbing,  as  they  call  it.  This  latter  method  is  principally 
pursued  by  them. 

Q.  Is  seining  a  system  which  is  not  calculated  to  do  any  harm  ?— A. 
On  the  contrary,  all  seines  must,  more  or  less,  do  harm.  Seines  of 
every  description  have  such  an  effect. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  Because  they  destroy  the  small  Jsh ;  that  is  the  reason 
why.  If  you  could  seine  where  there  was  no  small  fish,  and  no  young 
fry  growing  up,  then  it  would  do  no  harm,  I  admit;  but  I  believe  that 
along  cur  shore  yon  cannot  seine  anywhere  without  catching  a  good 
many  small  fish,  and  when  this  is  done,  as  a  matter  of  course,  these  are 
all  very  much  knocked  about.  A  few  of  them  may  live,  but  the  num- 
ber that  does  must  be  very  small.  The  seiners  do  not  trouble  themselves 
to  take  the  small  fish  up,  but  throw  them  away. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  catch  of  the  seine  would  be  thrown  away 
as  useless — one-tenth  or  one-sixth  ? — A.  That  varies  according  to  the 
place  and  the  fish  that  the  seiners  are  trying  to  catch.  Sometimes  it 
may  be  more  and  sometimes  it  may  be  less. 

Q.  Suppose  that  we  could  not  agree  with  the  Americans  when  these 
twelve  years  have  expired,  as  to  au  arrangement  concerning  these  fish- 
ing privileges  similar  to  that  which  at  present  exists,  what  would  yea 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


457 


prefer,  the  present  system,  with  Oanadirtn  fish  admitted  free  of  duty 
iuto  tlie  American  marltet,  or  the  imposition  of  a  duty  of  $2  a  barrel  on 
mackerel  and  $1  on  herring  by  the  Au.erioau  Ooverunient  f— A.  I  wonld 
lirefer  tlie  present  system  with  the  restoration  to  ns  of  the  three-mile 
limit.  Tliat  is  what  has  heretofore  been  the  system,  att'ording  us  the 
8ole  privilef^e  of  flsliing  within  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  And  the  payment  of  a  duty  f — A.  Most  decidedly. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  what  regulates  the  price  of  fish — in  Gasp<^,  for 
justaiice;  what  regulates  the  market-price f — A.  The  foreign  maricets. 

Q.  I8  there  a  ])eriod  of  tlic  year  when  this  is  done  ? — A.  The  time 
wlieii  this  is  done,  is,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  an  unjust  one.  The  great  house 
of  Robins  has  supreme  sway,  and  they  do  as  they  pleas*^ ;  they  only  state 
tiie  price  which  they  will  give,  either  for  green  or  dry  tish,  generally 
s[)eaking  at  the  end  of  July,  and  sometimes  in  August. 

Q.  You  now  speak  of  cod  fishing  only  ? — A.  Yt  i ;  because  they  do 
not  deal,  speaking  particularly,  in  anything  else. 

Q.  The  i»rice  of  mackerel  is  not  thus  fixed  f — A.  They  do  not  trouble 
themselves  about  mackerel  at  all,  they  cat(!h  so  few  of  them  save  for 
bait.  It  is  the  American  markets  which  altogether  regulates  the  price 
of  mackerel. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  had  occasion  to  compare  the  cod-fish  taken  on  the 
Newfoundland  shores  with  those  taken  in  off  the  gulf  by  the  different 
houses  you  have  mentioned  ? — A.  There  is  one  thing  that  is  well  known, 
and  which  cannot  be  contradicted,  and  this  is,  that  the  Gasp^  fish 
always  fetch  a  higher  price  in  the  Portuguese,  Spanish,  Italiau,  and 
Brazilian  markets  than  any  other  fish,  wherever  they  may  be  caught. 
It  matters  not  where  other  fish  may  come  from,  this  has  always  been 
the  case  within  my  recollection. 

Q.  That  is  due  to  the  fact  that  these  fish  are  better,  or  better  pre- 
pared?— A.  It  is  because  they  are  better  prepared.  I  am  not  aware 
whether  the  fish  are  better,  but  they  are  better  and  more  carefully  pre- 
jiared.  I  believe  that  other  fish  might  be  cured  as  well  if  the  fishermen 
took  the  same  trouble  with  them ;  but  they  do  not. 

Q.  These  fish,  1  suppose,  are  cured  at  leisure,  on  the  shore  in  Gasp6, 
while  in  Newfoundland  it  is  not  always  so  convenient  to  do  so? — A. 
There  is  another  disadvantage  under  which  the  fishermen  labor  in  New- 
foundland and  on  a  great  portion  of  the  Nova  Scotian  coast.  Their 
shores  are  more  foggy  than  ours.  We  have  more  clear  weather,  and 
tiiere  is  nothing  worse,  with  respect  to  the  curing  of  fish,  than  fogs. 
This  is  about  the  worst  weather  that  you  can  have  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  What  reason  could  you  give  in  support  of  the  opinion  that  the 
continued  frequenting  of  our  waters  by  American  fishermen  would  be 
iiijarious  to  our  fisheries  t — A.  Well,  this  is  due  to  the  very  fact,  you 
may  say,  that  they  sweep  the  sea  of  every  fish  that  swims  in  it.  Wher- 
ever they  may  pass  they  clear  all  the  fish  out ;  with  regard  to  mackerel, 
for  instance,  they  leave  none  at  all. 

Q.  Tbey  come  in  such  numbers  and  are  supplied  with  snch  appli- 
ances?—A.  They  take  such  an  immense  quantity  of  fish,  and  they  so 
completely  sweep  them  out  of  these  waters,  as  it  were,  that  there  is 
nothing  left  at  all.  They  are  so  accustomed  to  it  that  they  will  follow 
the  fish  from  cove  to  cove  and  all  around  the  coast,  and,  by  means  of 
their  system  of  fishing,  they  will  catch  the  whole  of  them.  This  system 
18  not  practiced  by  our  people  at  all.    They  do  not  understand  it. 

Q.  This  is  especially  owing  to  the  great  number  of  their  vessels  that 
come  to  our  waters  ? — A.  Exactly ;  as  a  matter  of  course,  the  more  ves- 
sels that  come  the  more  fish  are  caught. 


458 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  I  suppose  that  a  large  portion  of  our  population  would  be  reduced 
to  poverty  if  these  fisheries  were  ever  destroyed  ? — A.  Uudoubtedly. 
I  suppose  that  the  liouse  of  Bobins  alone  employs  about  2,000  uieu! 
This  is  no  exaggeration. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  fish  more  largely  for  mackerel  than  for  cod  !^ 
A.  They  also  fish  largely  for  cod. 

Q.  On  our  shores  ? — A.  I  mean  in  the  gulf. 

Q.  In  the  Province  of  Quebec  f — A.  Yes.  For  instance,  take  halibut. 
An  immense  quantity  of  halibut  go  to  the  Ameiicau  market — to  Xew 
York  and  other  places.  You  will  see  them  quoted  there  coutiiiiuilly. 
In  the  fjrest  and  Stream,  which  I  take  regularly,  the  price  of  tbis  tisli 
is  steadily  quoted ;  and  almost  all  of  them  are  caught  on  our  coast,  aud 
not  only  is  this  the  case,  but  they  are  caught  witiiiu  the  three-mile  limit, 
because  you  cannot  catch  them  outside  of  this  limit;  so  this  is  proof  po:j. 
itive  of  the  fact  that  they  are  caught  within  the  limits. 

Q.  Are  many  halibut  taken,  or  has  there  been  many  caught,  if  the 
catch  has  decreased  ? — A.  iSuch  immense  quantities  have  been  caur;lit 
that  the  vessels  used  to  take  as  much  as  from  30,001)  to  40,000  j)ouiids 
of  this  fish  to  the  New  York  markets  at  one  time.  I  have  seen  numbers 
of  vessels  reported  jis  having  taken  such  a  cargo. 

Q.  You  say  that  tlie  mo^t  of  these  fish  are  caught  either  in  the  bay  or 
within  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  They  are  all  caught  within  the  three- 
mile  limit — without  any  exception.  I  believe  this  is  what  I  have  under- 
stood from  our  fishermen.  They  have  told  me  positively  that  halibut 
cannot  be  caught  in  deep  water.  You  will  of  course  catch  an  odd  tish 
occasionally  there  ;  I  would  not  say  you  would  not  catch  any  in  deep 
water;  I  would  be  very  sorry  to  say  that  halibut  cannot  be  caught  iu 
deep  water,  but  as  a  rule  they  are  taken  along  the  shore. 

Q.  You  say  you  have  heard  that ;  did  you  only  hear  it  from  our  flsii- 
ermen,  or  have  you  also  been  told  so  by  the  American  flsbermeu !— A. 
I  have  never  spoken  to  any  American  fishermen  about  halibut  lishiiij;. 
Our  own  fishermen  have  told  me  so;  they  have  informed  me  that  all 
the  halibut  are  caught  within  shore.  I  was  lately  speaking  to  a  gentle- 
man who  has  been  for  fifteen  years  on  the  north  shore,  and  ho  told  mo 
it  was  impossible  for  them  to  catch  halibut  except  withiu  the  threo-oiile 
limit. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  You  came  here  from  Jersey  in  181:5  to  be  superintendent  of  the 
business  of  the  company  you  have  mentioned  ? — A.  Not  from  Jersey, 
but  from  London. 

Q.  But  you  are  a  native  of  Jersey  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  came  here  to  be  superintendent  of  this  Gaspe  Fishiug 
and  Coal  Mining  Company  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  their  chief  business  connected  with  coal  mining  ?— A.  No ; 
but  with  fishing;  this  was  the  principal  part  of  their  business. 

Q.  How  long  did  that  company  continue  iu  existence  ?— A.  But  a  very 
short  time,  I  am  sorry  to  say. 

Q.  The  business  was  not  profitable,  I  suppose  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  And  then  from  that  you  weni  into  the  various  branches  of  business 
in  which  you  told  us  you  had  been  engaged ;  but  your  personal  observii- 
tioii  has  been  principally  confined  to  the  cod  fishery  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  goes  back  to  1845  ? — A.  Yes,  and  even  previous  to  that, 
because  I  previously  shipped  cargoes  of  codfish  from  Jersey. 

Q.  But  you  were  not  here  then  ? — A.  No ;  I  was  never  on  this  coast 
nntil  1845. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


459 


Q.  Now,  you  say  that  great  numbers  of  Americans  came  liere  until 
the  civil  wiir  broke  out,  and  that  they  then  vauitihed  as  if  by  magic  ? — 
A.  Yes,  for  a  time. 

Q.  That  was  in  1861  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  they  begin  to  come  back  ? — A.  After  the  war  was  over; 
some  two  or  three  years  afterwards,  and  then  a  few  more  came. 

Q.  [low  long  did  the  war  last,  to  your  recollection  I — A.  If  I  remem- 
ber aright,  three  years,  or  thereabouts. 

Q.  It  was  rather  longer,  was  it  not  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  would  carry  you  along  from  1861  to  1865  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  many  Americans  here  in  1865? — A.  Not  so  many  as  there 
were  i)reviou8  to  the  war. 

Q.  How  nearly  as  many  were  there  ? — A.  I  should  say  there  were  not 
otiebaU"  of  the  previous  umiber. 

Q.  How  was:  it  in  1866?— ii.  There  were  not  even  half  that  number 
here  then, 

Q.  How  was  it  in  the  following  years,  1867,  '68,  and  '69  ?— A.  Within 
tlie  last  few  years  there  were  scarcely  any  here ;  at  least,  this  was  the 
ease  ou  our  shore.  I  am  not  saying  that  this  was  so  elsewhere.  I  am 
speaking  of  the  vicinity  of  Perce. 

y.  T?at  still  you  have  a  general  knowledge  of  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Law- 
rence?—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Running  up  almost  to  Labrador  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  number  of  American  Qshermeu  coming  to  that  vicinity 
has  been  diminishing  right  along  for  the  last  ten  years.  Is  this  not 
so?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Until  now,  when  very  few,  indeed,  come? — A.  O,  Mr.  Savoie, 
captain  of  the  Lady  Head,  told  me  that  when  he  was  passing  through 
the  giilt,  the  other  day,  he  supposed  he  must  have  seen  nearly  two  hun- 
dred American  vessels. 

Q.  So  you  think  that  nearly  two  hundred  have  come  back  this  sea- 
son ?— A.  I  am  merely  telling  you  what  1  have  been  informed. 

Q.  Jiist  in  time  for  the  Commission? — A.  I  have  not  seen  them. 

Q.  But  hardly  any  American  vessels  have  visited  these  waters  during 
past  years  i — A.  I  have  seen  very  few  of  them. 

Q.  TIjis  would  be  going  back  to  1862  or  1863,  at  least  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  codfish  that  your  people  catch  they  catch  and  sell  to  these 
Jersey  houses  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q  And  they  are  so  much  in  the  i)ower  of  the  Jersey  houses  that  the 
latter  set  the  prices,  and  your  fishermen  have  to  submit  to  it  ? — A.  Pre- 
cisely. 

Q.  And  this  is  considerable  of  a  hardship  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  These  houses  do  nothing  with  regard  to  the  mackerel  fishing? — A. 
They  do  not  interfere  with  the  mackerel  at  all,  save  in  order  to  secure 
bait.  When  the  mackerel  are  at  all  abundant  a  small  quantity  is  caught 
and  sold.  I  have  known  as  many  as  twenty  or  tiiirty  barrels  caught, 
but  then  that  is  nothing  compared  with  the  other  quantities  that  are 
taken. 

Q.  They  do  nothing  in  mackerel  as  an  article  of  trade? — A.  No,  they 
do  not;  because  they  do  not  fit  out  for  this  tishing.  This  is  the  reason 
tliey  camiot  compete  with  the  American  schooners ;  it  is  impossible. 

Q.  Ill  their  boats  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  And  .so  your  men  that  want  to  pursue  the  mackerel  fishery  find  it 
necessary  to  go  into  Amaricau  vessels  ?-— A.  That  is  the  oidy  chance 
tbe^  have. 


■§ii 


460 


AWARD   OP  THE   I'lSHEBT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  thonsands  of  them  are  employed  on  American  vessels  ?— A. 
O,  not  thonsands. 

Q.  Not  thousands  ? — A.  I  should  say  not,  decidedly. 

Q.  How  many  are  so  employed? — A.  There  may  be  a  few  hundred 
bat  I  could  say  decidedly  not  thousands.  I  should  say,  as  tar  as  I 
know — I  am  not  very  positive,  as  I  am  merely  speaking  from  what  I 
have  heard — that  so  many  were  never  employed  during  all  the  time 
when  so  many  American  vessels  were  in  our  waters ;  and  this  is  goiu" 
back  to  the  time  before  the  civil  war. 

Q.  Do  you  really  think  that  their  catch  would  average  from  500  to 
700  barrels? — A.  No;  I  stated,  as  you  remember,  that  it  would  be  ac 
cording  to  the  size  of  the  vessel ;  and  a  vessel  of  50  tons  surely  could 
not  carry  700  l)arrels,  or  500  barrels  either. 

Q.  But  in  raaking  up  the  average  you  take  the  catch  of  the  small  in 
with  that  of  the  big  vessels  ? — A.  O,  well,  the  average  would  be  very 
much  below  what  yon  state. 

Q.  Take  all  the  American  vessels  you  used  to  see  there,  large  and 
small — those  whose  tonnage  ran  down  to  50  and  those  whose  tonnage 
went  up  to  200  tons — you  have  estimated  their  average  tonnage  at,  I 
think,  from  70  to  75  tons ;  now,  give  us  the  average  catch  ?— A.  1  should 
judge  that  the  average  catch  would  be  from  300  to  450  barrels. 

Q.  Is  that  for  one  trip  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  And  you  think  in  those  years,  when  there  was  so  many  of  them 
here,  and  when  the  fishing  was  good,  their  average  was  from  300  to  450 
barrels  a  trip  ? — A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  do. 

Q.  Then  they  used  frequently  to  go  to  the  Gut  of  Oanso  and  transship 
their  cargoes  ? — A.  So  they  have  told  me ;  I  don't  know  it  personally. 

Q.  And  how  did  you  understand  that  they  sent  these  cargoes  to  the 
United  States? — A.  Other  and  larger  vessels  would  take  them. 

Q.  They  found  these  larger  vessels  there? — A.  Yes;  a  large  vessel 
would  take  the  cargoes  of  two  and  three  schooners,  perhaps. 

Q.  Then  Mr.  Doutre  asked  you  the  question  whether  this  did  not 
double  and  triple  their  profits,  and  you  answered  "  precisely." — A.  This 
would  not  be  the  profits,  strictly  speaking,  but  the  voyages.  As  a  mat- 
ter of  coni'se,  if  they  can  make  three  voyages  instead  of  two,  tbeu  they 
increase  their  profits,  but  they  do  not  double  them. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  say  that  they  thus  double  or  triple  their  prof- 
its ? — A.  O,  no. 

Q.  Sometimes  a  vessel  will  make  three  instead  of  two  trips  in  the 
course  of  the  season  by  transshipping? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  gave  an  illustration  concerning  the  Jersey  coast,  with 
reference  to  oysters ;  what  was  it? — A.  I  said  that  this  mode  was  pre- 
cisely like  that  of  vessels  which  caught  oysters  there.  They  never  talje 
the  oysters  to  market.  This  was  the  invariable  rule,  without  any  ex- 
ception ;  all  the  vessels  there  are  cutters,  not  sloops  and  schooners,  and 
a  large  cutter  would  then  come  and  take  the  cargoes  of  perhaps  seven 
or  eight  fishing-vessels  to  market.    This  was  always  the  way. 

Q.  The  oysters  were  taken  to  London  ?— A.  To  London,  or  wherever 
might  be  the  destination. 

Q.  They  caught  the  oysters  within  British  jurisdiction? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  took  them  to  the  English  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  speaking  of  the  coasting  voyage,  you  said  you  had  understood 
that  it  required  from  100  to  125  barrels  to  pay  the  outfitting?— A.  The 
actual  outfitting. 

Q.  Was  this  before  anything  was  to  be  divided  among  the  crew !— A. 
O,  certainly.    It  would  take  that  before  anything  was  divided. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


461 


Q.  So  tliat  if  the  voyage  produced  only  100  or  125  barrels,  the  crew 
ffould  get  nothing  if  they  were  on  shares? — A.  The  crew  would,  never- 
tbeU'88,  have  one-half  of  the  quantity  caught,  yon  understand.  What- 
ever tlie  quantity  might  be,  the  crew  would  get  one-half  of  it. 

Q.  Then  this  would  result  in  being  the  loss  of  the  owner? — A.  Yes; 
when  I  spoke  of  the  120  barrels,  I  meant  that  it  would  cost  the  merchant 
so  DUicli  to  fit  his  vessel  out ;  but  that  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  divis- 
ion of  the  catch  between  him  and  the  crew.  This  is  a  different  thing 
altog«'ther. 

Q.  And  that  would  be  from  100  to  125  barrels? — A.  I  should  say  that 
this  would  be  about  the  average,  as  far  as  I  am  aware  of. 

Q.  This  is  founded  on  the  supposition,  I  suppose,  that  the  average 
size  of  the  vessels  would  be  from  70  to  75  tons? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  now,  these  opinions  that  you  have  expressed  as  to  the  disad- 
TantHgea  of  the  present  arrangement,  and  the  injury  to  you  fishermen 
sustained  by  allowing  the  Americans  to  come  in  within  three  miles  of 
the  shore,  are  your  opinions  as  to  what  would  have  been  the  case  if  they 
bad  kept  coming  in  as  they  did  in  former  years,  I  suppose.  You  have 
not  suffered  from  the  Americans  coming  in  for  the  last  four  years,  be- 
cause they  have  not  come? — A.  No;  and  consequently  the  fishing  has 
improved.  During  the  last  four  years  we  have  had  an  extraordinary 
catch  of  codfish. 

Q.  Do  you  really  mean  to  say  that  there  has  been  any  considerable 
number  of  American  vessels  catching  codfish  inshore  about  where  you 
are?— A.  Not  so  much  inshore  as  outside. 

Q.  Whereabouts? — A.  On  the  Banks. 

Q.  Then  you  have  not  near  your  own  shores  suffered  from  American 
fishiufi:,  have  you? — A.  Not  so  much. 

Q.  You  know  that  they  came  to  the  Banks? — A.  I  say  that  they  gen- 
erally kept  out  on  the  Banks  in  order  to  catch  codfish. 

Q.  All  the  world  knows  that  the  cod-fishery  is  deep-water  fishery  ? — 
A.  They  do  not  come  so  very  much  insliore. 

Q.  How  many  Americans  fish  for  halilmt? — A.  I  cannot  tell  you. 

Q.  How  many  do  you  think  do  so? — A  As  many  as  5, 0,  and  7  differ- 
ent American  vessels  have  been  seen  fishing  for  halibut  during  the 
summer. 

Q.  Aud  they  catch  the  halibut  within  3  miles  of  the  shore? — A.  They 
tell  me  that  the  halibut  are  caught  within  these  3  miles. 

Q.  Off  our  coast  they  are  generally  caught  from  10  to  15  and  20  miles 
out  to  sea? — A.  As  a  rule,  that  is  not  our  case. 

Q.  They  are  got  within  those  3  miles? — A.  They  are  caught  all  along 
the  shore;  and  I  will  tell  you  this  in  proof  that  such  is  the  case.  Our 
lisbernieu,  of  course,  if  they  can  catch  halibut,  are  very  glad  to  get  them, 
though  they  are  not  sought  for  by  Robins  and  Co.,  &c. ;  still  they  are 
glad  to  secure  these  fish  for  their  own  use,  but  it  is  a  very  rare  thing 
tor  them  to  catch  any  halibnt. 

Q.  The  Jersey  houses  have  oppressed  you  a  good  deal  ? — A.  Not  me, 
80  much. 

Q.  But  your  people? — A.  I  do  not  suppose  that  they  have  done  these 
people  any  good. 

Q.  1  understand  you  to  say  that  the  codfish  cured  in  your  vicinity 
commands  the  highest  price  in  the  markets  of  the  world  of  any  codfish 
found  in  them  ?— A.  As  far  as  I  am  aware,  this  is  the  case.  1  believe 
It  is. 

Q.  And  the  climate  of  Newfoundland  is  vastly  inferior  for  the  curing 
of  codfish  to  yours  ? — A.  That  is  the  general  impressiou.   This  is  because 


1 


Hi 


462 


AWABD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


they  have  a  damper  climate  than  we  have.    Ours  is  the  drier  of  the  two. 

Q.  It  is  a  moist  place  and  is  possessed  of  no  particlar  advantage  for 
the  cnriuij^  of  cod? — A.  The  fact  is,  that  wherever  the  weather  is  moist 
you  cannot  cure  codfish  so  as  to  make  it  perfectly  dry.  No  moist  cod- 
fish can  be  sent,  for  instance,  to  the  Brazils.  For  that  destination,  to 
use  a  vulgar  expression,  the  cod  must  be  as  dry  as  a  bone.  If  it  is  not 
so,  it  won't  get  there. 

Q.  Even  the  Icelanders  think  they  possess  the  best  land  the  sun 
shines  on,  and  you  would  be  a  little  surprised  to  hear  that  the  climate 
of  Newfoundland  was  possessed  of  superior  advantages  with  rospeiit  to 
the  curing  of  codfish? — A.  Yes,  I  would,  indeed,  and  very  much  so. 

No.  13. 

Friday,  August  10, 1877. 
The  Conference  met. 

John  James  Fox,  collector  of  customs,  registrar  of  shipping,  and 
overseer  of  fisheries,  at  Amherst  Harbor,  Magdalen  Islands,  called  ou 
behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britaunic  Majesty,  sworn  and  exam- 
ined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  How  long  have  you  been  living  at  Amherst? — Answer.  For 
26  years ;  I  have  been  a  customs  officer  for  25  years. 

Q.  Have  you  held  the  offices  of  which  you  are  at  present  in  charge 
all  that  time  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  your  business  to  keep  a  record  of  the  shipping  that  enters 
your  port  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  got  such  a  record  from  1854  up  to  the  present  time 
with  you  now? — A.  I  have  a  statement  of  the  herring  caught  in  Am- 
herst Harbor. 

Q.  Have  you  any  statement  of  the  number  of  vessels  that  enter  the 
harlior? — A.  No.    They  vary  so  much. 

Q.  Have  you  not  got  with  you  the  entries  for  each  year  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Do  all  the  American  vessels,  when  they  come  into  the  harbor, 
enter? — A.  They  report,  like  our  own  coasting  vessels. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  me,  either  from  your  recollection  or  from  the  official  rec- 
ords, how  many  American  vessels  entered  Amherst  Harbor  during  1854! 
— A.  There  were  over  100. 

Q.  All  fishing-vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  practice  of  these  vessels  when  they  come  into  the 
harbor  and  frecjient  the  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  They  fish  with  seines 
near  the  shore. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  On  the  shore ;  all  the  fish  are  neiir 
the  shore. 

Q.  Have  they  landed  during  and  since  1854? — They  have  always  pur- 
sued the  same  manner  of  fishing. 

Q.  And  landed  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  they  take  the  fish  in  seines  near  the  shore  without  land- 
ing ? — A.  Not  about  our  way. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  do  they  ever  seine  except  from  the  shore  ?— A. 
They  fish  with  purse  seines  outside. 

Q.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  do  they  seine  within  the  three-mile  limit 
except  from  the  shore? — A.  No. 

Q.  They  seine  from  the  shore  altogether  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Before  the  ratification  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  whenever  they 
took  fish  inshore,  what  did  they  do  with  them  ?— A.  The  seines  were 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


463 


lianled  near  the  shore ;  the  boats  were  loaded  from  the  seine,  and  the 
fish  were  taken  on  board  the  vessel,  where  they  were  salted. 

Q.  They  did  not  take  the  fish  from  the  shore  themselves  ? — A.  The 
seine  is  hauled  to  the  shore. 

Q.  And  the  boats  are  brought  alongside  and  the  fish  ar-^  dipped  out 
pf  it  y_A.  Yes,  they  are  then  put  on  board,  salted  on  deck,  and  put 
down  in  bulk. 

Q.  You  are  now  speaking  of  herring? — A.  Yes.  A  few  vessels  came 
to  Pleasant  Bay  for  inackere|  in  1852  and  1854,  and  fished  with  nets  ; 
but  this  practice  was  then  discontinued  until  within  the  last  few  years. 

Q.  Has  there  not  been  mackerel  fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  shore 
around  tlie  islands  from  1854  up  to  the  present  time? — A.  O,  yes,  they 
came  quite  inshore  occasionally  ;  and  when  this  is  the  case,  the  vessels 
come  and  generally  anchor  with  our  boats. 

Q.  Is  there  good  boat  fishing  about  the  islands  ? — A.  Yes,  it  is  very 
good ;  and  mackerel  have  been  abun<lant  during  the  last  few  years. 

Q.  Do  the  inhabitants  of  the  islands  pursue  tbe  boat-fishing  largely  ? — 
A.  Yes,  a  great  deal.    It  is  their  chief  support  now. 

Q.  Has  this  fishing  increased  or  decreased  of  late  years  ? — A.  It  has 
increased. 

Q.  From  year  to  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  reason  for  it  ? — A.  We  have  not  seen  as  many  vessels 
there  of  late  years  as  formerly.    The  fish  are  decoyed  oft'  shore. 

Q.  What  sort  of  fish  do  these  vessels  decoy  off  shore  T — A.  The  large 
and  tlie  best  fish  are  generally  found  inshore;  and  to  get  at  them  the 
vessels  must  come  in  very  close.    Of  course,  it  is  dangerous  for  vessels 
10  come  very  near,  and  eo  they  throw  out  bait  and  thus  take  the  fish  off 
into  deeper  water  where  the  vessels  are  safe,  and  there  catch  the  tisli. 

Q.  And  when  they  commence  to  do  so,  this  ends  the  bait-fishing? — 
A.  Yes;  the  boats  do  not  then  take  many  fish. 

Q.  Do  the  schools  of  mackerel  come  back  after  the  vessels  leave? — 
A.  Not  the  same  day,  but  afl;erwards  they  may.  The  mackerel  are  what 
we  call  a  windward  fish.  They  always  endeavor  to  keep  in  smooth 
water  and  to  the  windward. 

Q.  Wiien  you  call  them  a  windward  fish  do  you  mean  to  imply  that 
they  come  in  with  the  wind  ? — A.  They  come  inshore  against  the  wind, 
until  they  find  smooth  water.  Whenever  the  water  is  rough  they  go  to 
the  bottom. 

Q.  W^hen  the  wind  is  blowing  off  shore  where  do  they  go? — A.  They 
come  in  near  the  shore  and  so  near  it  that  at  tiujes  it  is  dangerous  for 
vessels  to  approach  as  close.  In  fact,  sometimes  during  former  years 
and  the  last  three  au<l  four  years  vessels  have  come  with  boats,  which 
they  use  to  catch  the  fish  near  the  shore. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  when  the  wind  is  blowing  off 
shore  the  mackerel  come  in? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  Will  you  state  to  the  Commission  the  mode  by  which  the  Ameri- 
cans cure  their  herring  when  they  take  them  ?  What  do  they  do  with 
them  f— A.  They  are  salted  and  cured  in  bulk,  and  afterward  taken  to 
the  United  States  and  smoked. 

Q.  They  are  salted  on  board  the  vessel? — A.  Yes;  In  the  harbor. 

Q.  And  thrown  in  bulk  in  the  hold  ? — A.  The  fish  are  salted  on  deck, 
aud  thrown  below ;  and  when  taken  to  the  United  States  they  are  taken 
out,  washed,  aud  smoked,  and  packed  in  boxes. 

Q.  in  what  other  way  are  they  cured  ? — A.  During  the  last  few  years 
they  have  been  prepared  for  the  Swedish  market,  and  packed  in  bar- 
rels.   Most  of  them  are  taken  to  the  United  States  and  smoked ;  but 


I 


464 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


lit  i    »•'!  " 


HMi> 


during  the  last  year  or  two  a  market  has  been  opeued  for  them  in 
Sweden,  and  it  is  necessary  to  pack  the  fish  in  a  particular  maimer  iu 
this  relation.  Greater  care  must  be  taken  with  them.  Large  profits 
are  realized  out  of  this  trade. 

Q.  I  always  understood  that  there  were  large  bodies  of  flab  off  the 
coast  of  Sweden ;  how  happens  it  then  that  herrings  are  exported  to 
that  country? — A.  This  is  a  new  market  opened  within  the  last  year 
or  two.  Last  year  only  one  vessel  went  directly  to  Sweden,  taking  900 
barrels ;  but  this  year  five  have  gone. 

Q.  American  vessels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Has  the  herring  fishery  on  the  Swedish  coast  failed  ?— A.  I  pre- 
sume 80. 

Q.  How  has  this  market  been  opened ;  by  treaty,  or  owing  to  the 
failr^e  of  the  Swedish  fisheries? — A.  I  understood  the  latter  was  the 
cause.    The  Norway  fisheries  have  failed. 

Q.  And  this  year  five  vessels  have  been  fitted  out  for  thatconntrv  ?— 
A.  Yes ;  five,  of  800  or  900  tons  burden,  and  requiring  some  8,UU0  or 
9,000  barrels  of  herring. 

Q   Of  course  all  these  fish  are  packed  in  barrels  ? — A.  Yes. 

'»     "^.h  10  do  these  barrels  come  from  ? — A.  The  United  States. 
).  .  ?88el8  V  ring  the  barrels  with  them? — A.  Tlie  majority  of 

them  .1  •  ;ew  may  be  purchased  here,  but  they  are  brought  chiefly 
frora  i/Ue  L<  ui;ed  States  in  consequence  of  a  superior  make  being  required. 
A  ba'^.el  larger  than  the  ordinary  size  is  needed.  These  hold  from  220 
to  24    1  .  "mIs  or  S' :'i,  while  the  ordinary  barrel  only  contains  200  pounds. 

Q.  ^\»iei  are  t.  '-^o  'tarring  packed — on  shipboard  or  on  land?— A. 
Some  are  packed  ou  lu.td  in  the  harbor;  they  land  the  barrels,  having 
asked  permission  to  do  so,  pack  the  fish  at  tiieir  leisure,  and  then  take 
them  off  to  the  vessel. 

Q.  Did  they  ask  permission  of  you  as  collector  of  customs  to  laud  the 
barrels?    They  pay  no  duty  on  them? — A.  No. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact  you  let  them  laud  the  barrels  there,  and  some 
of  them  pack  the  fish  there ;  at  all  events  they  take  the  barrels  off  to 
their  vessels  as  they  want  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  advantage  do  they  say  they  derive  frora  the  privilege  of  land- 
ing those  barrels  ? — A.  It  gives  them  this  advantage :  unless  they  did  ao, 
they  would  have  to  bring  other  vessels  to  act  as  lighters.  For  in  stance, 
there  was  the  Hattie  H.  Grove,  of  Gloucester,  which  required  3,001)  har- 
rels ;  these  could  not  be  coopered  on  the  ordinary  deck  of  a  vessel  and 
packed,  so  they  land  some  300  or  400  of  the  barrels  on  shore,  and  the 
others  they  put  on  board  the  vessel. 

Q.  By  placing  the  barrels  on  shore  they  save  lighterage  ?— A.  Yes ; 
and  pack  them  at  their  leisure,  and  take  them  off. 

Q.  Saving  lighterage? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  a  vessel  catches  more  fish  than  if  she  had  to  carry  the  bar- 
rels?— A.  You  understand  that  these  herring  strike  into  the  shore  and 
they  must  be  caught  before  spawning,  when  they  are  full.  They  strike 
iu  schools,  as  it  is  termed,  and  remain  for  one  day,  or  perhaps  for  one  or 
two  days  at  intervals ;  there  will  perhaps  not  be  more  than  two  schools 
during  the  whole  season.  The  consequence  is  that  when  the  tish  strike 
in  the  fisherraen  have  to  catch  as  many  as  possible  to  fill  the  empty 
barrels  which  are  on  shore — from  100  to  150.  The  fish  are  first  salted, 
and  when  they  have  settled  iu  the  barrels,  more  fish  are  put  in,  ami 
they  are  taken  on  board  the  vessel.  If  they  were  not  packed  the  second 
tiuje,  when  the  vessels  arrived  in  Sweden,  the  barrels  would  be  one- 
third  empty.    Last  year  one  vessel  came  and  worked  that  way,  not  re- 


^ 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


465 


packing,  i»n<l  putting  the  fish  in  the  hohl  without  letting  them  settle, 
aud  thus  they  lost  a  considerable  amount  of  money. 

Q.  Could  that  fishery  now  be  carried  on  for  the  purpose  of  shipment 
to  Sweden  uidess  they  had  the  privilege  of  landing? — A.  It  could  be, 
if  they  had  other  vessels  to  assist  them  ;  if  they  had  lighters  chartered 
vi'ith  tliat  object  in  view. 

Q.  This  would  add  to  the  expense  ? — A.  Yes  ;  one  company  had  two 
vessels  to  carry  the  barrels  and  to  pack  the  fish  in,  taking  them  from 
one  vessel  to  the  other  ;  and  of  course  this  involved  great  expense. 

Q.  How  long  is  that  ago? — A.  It  happened  this  season.  One  of  the 
teuders  was  in  charge  of  Captain  Howe,  who  was  pilot  of  the  yacht 
which  went  out  oi  port  the  other  day. 

Q.  Could  they  not  have  avoided  that  exi»ense  by  landing  the  barrels? 
—A.  Certainly,  as  to  a  portion  of  it.  A  part  of  the  time  would  be  era- 
ployed  taking  fish.  The  crew  fish,  while  the  vessel  is  also  used  as  a 
lighter. 

Q.  What  do  the  American  captains  say  about  the  privilege  of  land- 
[]]«  barrels  ? — A.  Tlwy  have  not  said  a  great  deal  about  it.  Of  course 
this  is  new  trade,  but  if  it  was  not  an  advantage  they  would  not  ask 
permission  to  land. 

Q.  You  have  not  thought  of  charging  them  a  duty  on  the  barrels? — 
A.  No;  Ihave  never  done  so.  They  asked  pei mission  and  I  allowed 
them  to  do  so.  This  trade  is  only  in  its  infancy,  and  different  regula- 
tions respecting  it  may  hereafter  be  made.  I  have  reported  the  fact  to 
the  department,  but  1  have  not  received  any  instructions  this  year  with 
respect  to  it.  Of  course,  strictly  speaking,  they  should  be  subject  to 
warehouse  regulations. 

Q.  Strictly  speaking,  what  would  be  the  result  of  this  practice? — A. 
They  would  have  to  pay  a  duty  of  17i  per  cent,  on  the  cost  of  the  bar- 
rels, and  these  are  worth  about  81  each  in  the  Unite<l  States,  or  they 
would  have  to  pay  for  warehousing.  This  would,  j)erhaps,  cost  a  couple 
of  hundred  dollars.  Warehouse  rent  with  us  varies  from  .*50  to  $200. 
Under  this  system  the  fish  are  packed  at  a  very  low  rate.  1  am  informed 
by  the  Americans  themselves  that  they  can  sell  them  there  at  $2  a  barrel 
when  ready  for  market. 

(^  Will  you  tell  me  from  the  oflnjial  record  what  has  been  the  export 
iif  lu'ning  or  other  fish  by  Americans,  for  the  different  years  that  you 
have  been  at  the  port  of  Andierst,  from  ISol  up  to  the  present  time? — 
A.  About  000,000  barrels  have  been  entered  outwards,  and  about  one. 
half  of  tlie  vessels  that  fish  there  won't  report.  I  have  uo  account  of 
Iheui.    Tliey  fish  outside. 

Q.  Six  hundred  thousand  barrels  have  been  entered  outward  since 
1854?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  oidy  about  one-half  of  the  vessels  that  went  out  have  re- 
ported ? — A.  Yes;  at  least  one-half,  I  might  safely  say,  during  that 
Ijeriod  did  not  report.  They  lay  outside  in  the  shore — over  half  a  mile 
tVoiii  tilt' shore. 

'}.  That  would  make  over  a  million  of  barrels  caught  there  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  You  would  l>e  safe  in  so  calculating  the  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  they  be  worth  in  the  American  market ! — A.  We 
value  tlicin  on  board  at  $1  a  barrel. 

Q.  As  tlK'y  are  caught  ? — A.  Y'^es.  They  would  be  worth  a  great  deal 
More  in  the  Cnited  States. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  come  very  largely  to  j'our  neighborhood  for 


I 


halt?— A.  Yi 

;jof 


es ;  a  great  number  come  for  it. 


466 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  do  tliey  get  the  bait? — A.  Forty  or  fifty  will  coiuo  fur  it. 

Q.  How  do  tliey  take  iti— A.  Tliey  catcli  it. 

Q.  Iijside  of  the  threeuiile  limit? — A.  The  chief  place  for  catching  it 
is  at  Grand  Entry  Harbor.  It  is  the  nearest  place  for  the  fl.shcnuoii  wlio 
come  from  Cape  North.  It  is  at  the  east  end  of  the  island.  They  come 
into  the  harbor,  anchor,  and  set  their  nets. 

Q,  Do  they  set  their  nets  on  shore  ?— A,  Yes.  It  does  not  take  more 
than  one  or  two  days  at  the  farthest  to  catch  all  the  bait  the.y  it'fjdiie. 
This  would  l)e  about  50  barrels. 

Q.  They  set  tiie  nets  on  shore  ? — A.  Yes  ;  in  the  lagoons. 

Q.  Are  the  nets  fastened  to  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes ;  to  stakes  i)lace(l  iu 
the  {ground. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  above  high-water  mark  ? — A.  Yes  j  in  the  lagoons, 

Q.  What  is  the  rise  and  fall  of  the  tide  there  ? — A.  About  tliieo  feet, 
The  lagoons  of  the  islands  have  a  strange  formation.  They  run  l)ot\veeii 
two  sand  beaciies,  and  a  small  channel  lies  between.  In  one  larf;e 
lagoon  there  is  a  distance  of  20  miles  between  the  beaches,  and  it  is 
there  where  the  bait  is  caught;  sometimes  also  in  Pleasant  Bay.  On 
first  seuiing,  bait  will  be  taken  from  the  seines. 

Q.  Do  they  want  this  bait  for  cod  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  they  carry  on  this  fishing  if  they  had  not  this  ])iivil('^'f  oi 
securing  bait? — A.  If  the  fishermen  have  no  bait  they  catch  no  fisii. 

Q.  If  they  had  not  this  i)rivilege  for  securing  bait,  they  could  not 
prosecute  the  codfishing? — A.  They  have  this  advantage:  the  place  is 
so  near,  and  they  obtain  ice  at  the  same  time.  A  portion  of  tiie  island 
is  of  the  red  sandstone  formation  ;  the  sea  has  made  large  holes  of  tbi- 
nature  of  coves  into  it.  and  snow  wliicli  has  drifted  and  ice  whicli  luis 
formed  iu  these  places  in  winter,  are  found  there  until  the  middle  ot 
summer. 

Q.  They  get  the  ice  there  in  these  coves  ? — A.  Yes  ;  and  they  also  take 
bait  in  the  vicinity. 

Q.  Do  they  consider  that  this  is  a  great  privilege  ? — A.  ()('  ('(lursf. 
If  they  did  not  have  it,  they  would  have  to  i)urchase  at  the  iStiait  d! 
Canso.    They  cannot  keep  tlie  bait  witiiout  ice. 

Q.  And  here  they  procure  it  for  nothing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  cannot  get  it  without  landing  ? — A.  No ;  they  nuist  laml 
for  it. 

Q.  To  what  extent  is  the  mackerel  fishery  prosecuted  around  tliosf 
islands  by  these  vessels  ? — A.  Sometimes  we  see  a  good  many  vessels 
around  the  islands,  but  they  stay  only  for  a  very  short  time.  Tin 
"weather  is  so  stormy  that  they  cannot  remain  long. 

Q.  How  long  does  the  mackerel  fishing  continue  there  ? — A.  Tlieso  fisli 
come  in  and  sjiawn  about  the  beginning  of  June.  At  that  time  tliey 
won't  take  the  hook.  They  are  blind  and  cannot  see.  They  then  leave 
and  in  about  a  month  after  spawning,  they  take  the  hook.  This  season 
they  did  so  about  the  Gth  of  July.  When  they  return,  the  scales aiv 
removed  from  their  eyes  and  they  then  bite. 

Q.  Do  they  first  strike  the  shore  iu  June  before  spawning  ?— A.  Yes; 
about  the  first  of  June. 

Q.  And  they  are  then  blind  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  do  they  remain  in  thatstate  ?— A.  Until  after  they  spawn, 
They  spawn  in  not  more  than  five,  six,  or  ten  days  at  the  farthest.  \\t' 
seldom  have  fishing  for  more  than  three  nights  afterwards,  wbeii  tbey 
disappear  again.    They  then  come  into  deep  water. 

Q.  Do  they  come  back  again  ?— A.  We  catch  them  with  the  hook 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISIIEKY    COMMISSION. 


467 


aijaiii  in  July,  from  the  5th  to  the  Gth,  8th,  or  10th.    This  year  I  think 
it  was  uutirthe  8th  of  July. 

Q,  Are  the  Americana  in  the  habit  of  fishing  for  them  during  the 
gpiiwiiiiifj  season '? — A.  No. 

Q.  Tbc  Americans  do  not  fish  for  thorn  in  the  montli  of  June? — A.  No  ; 
not  at  present.  Formerly  a  few  vessels  did,  but  this  has  not  been  the 
case  witiiin  the  last  few  years. 

(^>.  The  fish  are  not  in  good  condition  wlien  they  are  canght  before 
pnawiiiiig  time  ? — A.  Tliey  are  then  poor  mackerel,  and  only  worth  from 
$'{  to  84  a  barrel.  They  are  what  are  called  spring  mackerel,  and  are 
intruded  tor  the  West  India  market. 

Q.  And  in  July  ? — A.  They  commence  to  got  fatter  in  July  and  Au- 
gust. 

{}.  Yon  say  that  they  come  on  the  1st  of  June  and  spawn,  and  are 
l)liii(l  at  that  time;  where  is  their  si)av\ning  jiround  ? — A.  They  sjtawu 
ill  the  gulf,  around  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  on  the  Banks.  I  think 
tlicy  spawn  all  over  the  gulf  where  there  are  shoal  spots. 

Q.  Do  they,  to  your  certain  knowledge,  spawn  on  the  Magdalen 
Islands.' — A.  Yes;  certainly. 

Q.  Have  you  obsi-rvcd  them  spawning  yourself? — A.  Y'es. 

{}.  They  si>awn  on  tlie  bottom,  do  they  not  ? — A.  \'cs. 

il  Have  yoti  ever  seen  the  spawn  afterwardslloating  ? — A.  The  spawn 
does  not  tloat,  but  the  milt  from  the  male  does,  and  ilic  water  becomes 
white. 

Q.  Of  course  the  ova  are  at  the  bottom  ? — A.  Yos. 

Q.  It  (Iocs  not  tloat  '. — A.  No. 

Q.  You  are  (piite  sure  that  you  have  seen  the  milk  floating  .' — A.  Cer- 
tainly. 

{}.  Do  they  spawn  in  large  numbers  around  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — 
A.  It  varies  with  tlie  winds.  These  fish  are  entirely  governed  by  the 
wind  iiiid  weather.  \Vlien  a  southwest  or  westerly  wind  prevails  they 
yo  into  rieasaiit  Bay,  in  smooth  water,  and  when  the  wind  is  opposite 
tiiey  j^o  outside  to  spawn.  The  same  rule  holds  good  with  the  herring. 
Tiiise  tisli  are  at  times  so  thick  in  the  water  at  this  season  that  you 
cannot  cross  the  water  where  tliey  are  in  a  boat. 

<^  Wiiat  is  the  depth  of  the  lagoons  ? — A.  From  two  feet  to  three  or 
tinir  fot't.  Narrow  ciuunads  lie  between  their  shores;  at  high  water, 
tlK'(h'ptli  is  al)()ut  five  teet.  You  cannot  catch  herring  in  quantities  in 
the  lMj;tM»ns,  where  the  bottnm  is  not  good.  One  of  the  lagoons  extends 
tiiicij^ht  iiiiks;  and  some  of  the  land  on  the  island  is  six  hundred  feet 
bi;:h. 

l'>y  ITon.  Mr.  K<'llogg: 

Q.  I)i)  1  understand  you  to  say  that  the  fish  spawn  all  around  these 
ishiiids  .'—A.  Yes. 

V>y  Mr.  Thomson  : 

Q.  Do  the  mackerel  ever  come  iuto  the  lagoons  of  which  you  speak  ? — 
A.  Not  often  ;  but  sometimes  they  get  a  few  of  them  there. 

Q.  Since  the  "NYashington  Treaty  has  been  in  operation  have  the 
Auiericiins  put  uji  any  establishments  on  shore? — A.  Yes. 

(,).  Where?— A.  oii  Amherst  Island. 

<i>.  Where  is  that  ? — A.  It  is  the  point  nearest  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  What  kind  ot  establishments  have  been  put  up? — A.  Small  fish- 
ins  houses,  and  also  a  dwelling-house. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  ? — A.  To  cure  fish  on  shore. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fish  ?— A.  Mackerel  and  fat  herring  and  cod. 


468 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEEY   COMMISSION. 


:I.jis4ii  «. 


i.»<!\-iftj-f- 


Ivi^ia. 


Q.  Do  they  ttake  many  nuKJkerel  inside  of  tbe  three  mile  limit  .'—A. 
Yes ;  the  best  tisli  are  always  inshore. 

Q.  How  have  the  Americans  for  years  prosecnte<l  this  tishery  ?— A. 
They  stand  in  as  near  as  possible  to  the  beach  and  fisli. 

Q.  Do  they  then  come  to  anchor  ? — A.  They  usually  drift  iu  the  ordi- 
nary mode.  Sometimes  they  anchor  when  they  find  the  tish  abiiiidiint : 
they  freciuently  anchor  with  our  boats  on  the  tishing  grounds.  Of 
cource,  when  they  see  our  boats  fishing,  they  run  in,  and  if  tliey  timi 
good  fishing,  they  anchor,  or  else  they  would  be  driven  otl  shore  again, 

Q.  They  do  as  it  is  proven  they  have  doue  elsewhere — when  they  see 
our  boats  catching  mackerel,  they  stand  in  and  entice  the  fish  out— do 
they  not  ? — A.  They  did  tio,  after  the  ratification  of  the  Treaty  ot  Wash- 
ington and  alter  the  Treaty  of  1854  was  made,  xit  all  times  they  liave 
fished  so  close  to  the  shore  that  it  is  dangerous  for  the  vessels  to  leiiiaiu 
there. 

Q.  Then  do  they  send  boats  in  '? — A.  They  generally  have  only  one 
boat;  but  1  have  known  them  to  hire  boats  at  the  island,  ami  tish 
inshore. 

Q.  At  what  time — during  the  lleciprocity  Treaty,  or  since?— A.  Dnr 
ing  the  treaty. 

Q.  Have  they  done  so  since  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  they  iu  the  habit  of  doing  so  since  the  lleciprocity  Treaty 
expired  in  1806  ? — A.  We  have  not  seen  many  American  vessels  there 
since  that  treaty  expired — not  as  many  as  was  the  case  formerly. 

Q.  Have  they  continued  the  same  mode  of  fishing  since  the  Iteciproc- 
ity  Treaty  expired  iu  18GG  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  any  mackerel  fishing  at  all  outside  the  three-mile  limit?— 
A.  There  is  occasionally;  but  it  is  uot  so  good  there  as  it  is  inside  this 
limit. 

Q.  From  your  knowledge  of  the  mackerel  fishery  there,  would  it  he 
possible  in  your  opinion  lor  the  Americans  to  prosecute  this  fishery 
unless  they  could  get  inshore,  witliiu  the  three-mile  limit  ? — X.  I  sup- 
pose that  they  could,  but  uot  with  the  saiue  advantage  as  they  could 
otherwise,  by  a  great  deal. 

Q.  But  they  could  uot  make  successful  voyages  unless  they  could 
come  within  this  limit? — A.  They  could  not  then  fish  successfully.  I 
do  not  think  it  would  be  worth  their  while  to  come  here  if  they  were 
deprived  of  that  advantage. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  the  Americans,  under  the  Convention  of  1818, 
had  the  right  to  fish  ou  the  shores  of  the  Magdalen  Islands,  although 
they  could  uot  laud  there? — A.  Yes,  I  always  understood  so. 

Q.  Suppose  that  thev  only  exercised  this  right  and  did  not  land— if 
they  were  not  permitted  to  laud  and  flsh  inshore,  and  if  they  conUl  not 
also  flsh  inshore  on  the  coasts  of  Nova  Scotia,  Cape  Breton,  Triuce 
Edward  Island,  and  New  Brunswick-,  could  they  then,  in  your  Judsment, 
successfully  prosecute  this  fishery? — A.  You  mean  ou  the  outshore 
grounds? 

Q.  Yes. — A.  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  Americans  were  confined  entirely  to  the  body  of 
the  gulf,  with  the  privilege  besides  of  fishing  iuside  at  the  iMagdalea 
Islands,  do  you  think  that  they  could  then  successfully  prosecute  the 
mickerel  fishery? — A.  No,  I  do  not;  because  the  gulf  is  generally  so 
rough  that  they  require  the  inshore  fisheries  to  anchor  their  vessels  in; 
they  might  catch  fish  outside  the  three-mile  limit,  but  they  could  uot 
secure  a  great  quantity.    They  require  the  shore  to  come  in,  anchor, 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


469 


and  dress  their  fish.  I  have  known  them  catch  flah  about  the  Magdalen 
Islands  and  ha\:e  to  go  to  Causo  to  dress  them,  the  water  was  so  rough. 

Q.  It  is  your  opinion  that  uuless  they  had  the  privilege  of  coming 
ffitliiu  the  three-mile  limit  to  fish,  or,  in  other  words,  that  if  they  were 
confliieil  to  the  body  of  the  gulf,  and  only  had  the  privilege  of  fishing 
around  the  Magdalen  Islands,  they  could  not  successfully  prosecute  this 
y,ery? — A.  I  do  not  think  that  they  could  under  those  circumstances. 

Q,  And  during  the  twenty-flve  years  that  you  have  been  there  you 
liiive  conversed,  1  suppose,  with  a  great  nuxny  American  captains  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Wliat  is  their  opinion  in  this  regard  ? — A.  It  is  that  it  would  be 
of  no  nse  lor  them  to  come  into  our  v/aters  if  tliey  had  not  the  privilege 
ot  coming  inshore.  I  remember  a  conversation  which  I  had  the  year 
after  the  discontinuation  of  the  issue  of  licenses  with  an  American 
ta|)ti)iii. 

Q.  Tills  was  in  1808  or  1800  ?— A.  It  was  during  the  time  that  the 
cutters  were  on  the  station.  This  man  complained  that  he  had  no  flsh, 
save  very  small  ones.  I  asked  him  how  that  was,  and  he  answered  :  "I 
will  tell  you  how  it  is.  1  own  one-half  of  that  vessel,  and  this  is  all  I 
possess  in  the  world.  I  am  a  man  who  respects  the  law,  and  I  do  not 
come  inside  to  tish,  for  fear  that  my  vessel  might  be  caught,  when  I 
vould  lose  all  that  I  have,  but  some  of  my  neighbors,  who  tire  hired  by 
Gloucester  firms,  fish  inside  the  limits,  because  all  tiiey  have  on  their 
coast  is  their  bags,  and  if  caught  they  would  lose  nothing.  But  I  respect 
the  law  and  keep  outside,  while  they  fish  inside,  get  full  fares,  and  go 
Imme  with  them." 

Q.  And  all  these  persons  who  were  hired  by  American  firms  were  will- 
in[;toruii  tiie  risk  of  being  caugiit,  becau»<e  they  were  not  the  owners 
of  the  vessels,  while  this  man  would  not  run  that  risk  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  And  he  could  catch  no  flsh  outside  at  all  ? — A.  No ;  the  fish  are 
all  inside. 

(J.  Where  did  he  tell  you  that  he  had  been  fishing  ? — A.  On  the  shore 
of  I'rince  Edward  Island,  where  tiie  cutters  were  stationed. 

Q.  At  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  Y"es,  and  other  parts  where  they 
lisli. 

Q.  x\l)out  tiie  main-land  ? — A.  Y«is,  on  the  coast  of  Cii|)e  Breton.  We 
never  asli  iheni  where  they  have  tt.shed,  because  we  all  know  where  they 
tish. 

Q.  It  Wiis  in  the  gulf? — A.  Of  course. 

<i>.  And  lie  comjdained  that  he  dared  not  risk  his  vessel  by  coming 
inside  the  limit  to  tish  f — A.  I  asked  iiim  how  it  was  that  lie  had  caught 
so  few  tisli,  and  that  was  his  explanation. 

Q.  I  ••tilieve  that  it  is  only  a  very  small  i)ro))ortion  of  the  catch  of 
mackerel  in  the  gulf  that  is  taken  around  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A. 
Ivhoiild  not  think  that  more  than  the  fifth  or  sixth  part  Is  caught  there. 
Owing  to  the  great  danger  incurred  t>y  remaining  about  these  islands 
the  vessels  generally  go  to  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Port  Hood,  and 
eiiter  the  harbor  at  night  and  anchor.  The  weather  about  the  islands 
is  very  nncertain.  Two  or  three  years  ago  nearly  ninety  vessels  put  in 
there  tor  shelter,  and  forty-five  of  them  were  wrecked  on  the  following 
(lay. 

Q.  They  put  into  Amherst  Harbor? — A.  Thev  pnt  into  Pleasant 
Bay.   This  was  in  the  gale  of  1872. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  out  of  ninety  some  forty  were  wrecked  ? — A. 
wine  forty  two  or  three  were  driven  from  their  anchors  and  wrecked. 


470 


AWAKD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


Q.  WtvH  there  loss  of  life  as  well  ? — A.  Only  two  or  three  lives  were 
lost,  on  one  vessel. 

Q.  It  is  a  very  unsafe  plaee  at  which  to  remiiin  ? — A.  Yes.  The 
water  is  very  shallow,  and  it  breaks  over  the  bottom,  and  the  sionns  in 
the  fall  of  the  year  lift  the  anchors  of  vessels;  but  dniiny;  .lul.v  and  tlit; 
summer  season  it  is  safe  enonjrh  f)  reniiiin  there. 

Q.  When  does  the  stormy  season  commence  ? — A.  It  is  always  stoiinv 
there. 

Q,  Which  is  the  danfierons  secisorj  ? — A.  After  the  Hrst  of  Hepteiiilicr 
we  never  see  any  vessels  on  the  coast. 

Q.  It  is  safe,  however,  early  in  June? — A.  The  tishennei  ,ially 
make  a  circuit  of  the  gulf,  going  wherever  they  find  lish.  W  hen  tiny 
flud  them  once  they  generally  know  where  to  follow  then;.  The  lisii 
shilc  about  to  ditt'erent  localities. 

Q.  Is  it  safe  for  vessels  about  tlie  islands  in  .June  ? — A.  (),  _ves. 

Q.  Which  is  the  earliest  date  when  it  is  safe  ? — A.  In  .lane.  It  Isnlso 
safe  in  July  and  August.  It  is  always  blowy  there,  m(>re  or  loss.  Thw 
formation  of  the  islands  is  such,  being  sandy — they  are  formed  on  the 
same  principle  as  the  West  Indies — that  early  in  the  3 ear  tliiie  is 
always  a  rush  of  wind  across  them. 

Q.  1  understand  that  the  coast  of  the  Magdalen  Islands  is  always 
dangerous,  and  that  in  June,  July,  and  August  navigation  is  ahvins 
less  dangeious  there  than  at  other  seasons  of  the  year  '! — A.  Yes;  tlierc 
is  no  good  harbor  about  them  with  the  exception  of  Amherst. 

Q.  Vessels  do  not  stay  on  this  coast  longer  than  they  can  help  .'—A, 
No ;  and  for  two  reasons.  One  is  that  the  tish  are  generally  on  the  otlitr 
shore,  and  fatter  and  better  there ;  and  the  other  is  that  the  we  -i  lieie 
is  very  uncertain. 

Q.  How  long  »lo  the  mackerel  remain  after  s|)awiiing  ?-  iiisis 

very  uncertain.  They  may  be  in  during  the  morning  and  disappear  in 
the  afternoon.  The  vessels  follow  the  tish,  which  are  always  moviii;;. 
and  when  they  lose  them  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  the  vessels  run  acroM 
to  Prince  Edward  Island  and  learn  of  their  whereabouts.  The  liabits 
of  this  lish  are  very  strange.  They  sink  to  the  bottom  whenever  the 
weather  is  inclined  to  be  stormy.  It  is  Just  before  storms  that  they  are 
generally  caught,  and  they  then  disappear. 

Q.  You  have  seen  the  American  mode  of  catching  them  of  late  years 
with  seines? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  yon  seen  the  Americans  use  purse-seines  ? — A.  I  have. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  the  Commission  your  opinion  of  that  system  ?— A.  It 
is  a  very  destructive  system. 

Q.  Just  describe  to  the  Commission  how  it  is  done,  and  state  its  re- 
sults.— A.  When  the  Osh  come  inshore  and  strike  off,  as  it  is  termed,  they 
may  be  found,  perhaps,  within  a  mile  of  the  shore,  in  four  or  five  fathoms 
of  water.  The  seiners  then  surround  the  fish  with  seines,  which  are  very 
long,  some  of  them  200  fathoms  in  length ;  having  surrounded  theui, 
they  haul  in  lines  which  are  placed  on  the  bottom,  and  the  seine  is  then 
like  a  bag  or  purse,  the  fish  being  all  secured.  There  they  have  to  re- 
main until  taken  out  at  the  leisure  of  the  fishermen  ;  and,  if  the  weather 
be  flue,  this  may  continue  for  a  day  or  a  couple  of  days.  The  fish  are 
taken  from  the  seine  and  put  into  boats.  The  greater  part  is  taken  out, 
and  a  great  many  fish  are  smothered.  If  the  weather  becomes  stormy, 
as  is  so  frequently  the  case  in  the  spring  of  the  year,  the  fish  are  lost; 
they  afterward  drift  on  shore ;  I  have  seen  such  fish  heaped  along  the 
shore  to  the  depth  of  two  feet,  for  a  quarter  of  a  mile;  these  had  been 
destroyed  by  the  use  of  these  seines. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


471 


I).  For  one  quarter  of  a  mile  they  would  be  .s(!attere<l  along  the  shore 
to  tliiMit'pfli  of  two  feet? — A.  Yes;  tiiis  would  be  tlie  case  if  the  wind 
wiis  on  shore,  but  if  off  slutre  it  would  not  be  so. 

Q.  I  understand  that,  if  the  weather  is  nfterwanl  r<»n},'h,  the  dead 
tisb  will  he  thrown  up  by  the  surf  on  shore  *. — A.  Yes;  they  will  roll  iu 
with  the  surf. 

{^  Would  there  be  all  kinds  of  ttsh  amonpfst  thern  ? — A.  There  woidd 
be  a  good  many  flat  tish,  such  as  flounders.  There  would  also  be  lob- 
sters and  small  Qsh  ;  these  seines  go  right  to  the  bottom,  and  there  is 
no  clianee  for  any  of  the  fish  inclosHd  to  es(!a|>e. 

Q.  Would  there  be  nmckerel  among  them  ? — A.  I  have  not  seen  the 
Americans  seining  for  mackerel.  It  is  to  bo  hoped  that  they  will  not  do 
so,  or  else  they  will  destroy  this  fishery. 

i).  You  then  refer  to  the  seining  of  herring? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  And  mixed  with  them  would  be  found  tlat  tish,  flounders,  and  lob- 
sters?— A.  Yes,  and  all  kinds  of  fish  of  that  description. 

Q.  And  codfish? — A.  Sometimes  there  would  be  a  few  of  them. 

Q.  The  effect  of  this  seining  is  most  destructive? — A.  I  have  seen  five 
or  six  different  kinds  of  fish  seined  occasionally  ;  all  that  are  iu  the  water 
iu  the  neighborhood  are  caught,  of  course. 

Q.  This  is  very  destructive  to  the  fishery,  is  it  not  ? — A.  Of  course. 
The  breeding  of  the  fish  would  be  destroyed  in  the  same  way.  1  have 
ln'ard  Atneri(!an8  themselves  say  that  they  hope«l  these  seines  would 
never  be  brought  into  the  gulf,  or  else  these  fisheries  would  be  very 
.soon  destroyed. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  talked  with  Americans  or  ivmonstrated  with  them 
regarding  this  style  of  fishing? — A.  Yes;  they  themselves  have  oftea 
spoken  to  me  about  it.  They  said  they  hoped  that  their  people  would 
not  bring  their  seines  into  the  gulf  for  mackerel,  as  the  practice  would 
mill  our  fisheries  in  the  same  way  as  had  been  the  result  of  this  mode 
of  fishing  on  their  coast.  This  was  two  or  three  years  ago,  when  they 
were  first  introduced  into  the  gulf.  They  thought  fishermen  should  con- 
tine  themselves  to  the  hook  and  Jigging,  and  give  one  another  a  chauce. 
They  were  not  favorable  to  this  method. 

Q.  Do  they  all  atlmit  that  it  was  destructive  to  the  fishery  ? — A.  Yes; 
this  is  generally  admitted. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  any  one  man  defend  it? — A.  No.  Of  course,  I 
suppose  that  those  who  use  them  would  do  so. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  any  one  defend  it  on  the  ground  that  it  was  not 
destructive,  nor  uselessly  destructive  ? — A.  Certainly  not.  They  often 
seine  in  parts  of  the  gulf  which  are  frequented  by  fat  herring ;  a  great 
many  such  herring  are  caught,  but  not  being  required,  they  are  thrown 
out.    Small  fish  are  not  required  by  these  fishermen. 

Q.  Do  these  American  captains  adiv-t  that  this  is  a  destructive  pro- 
cess?— A.  Yes;  but  they  say,  "We  are  fitted  out  to  come  here,  and  we 
must  catch  fish,  never  mind  whether  it  is  destructive  or  not.  It  is  our 
time  to  tish,  and  let  those  who  come  after  us  suffer." 

Q.  They  are  willing,  for  present  gain,  to  allow  future  loss  to  be  sns- 
tained?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  these  American  fishermen  do  with  the  off.tl  of  their  fish  ? — 
A.  They  throw  it  overboard. 

Q.  On  the  fishing  grounds? — A.  Yes;  wherever  they  may  be  fishing. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  this  practice,  in  your  jmlgment  ? — A.  I  do 
not  think  that  the  throwing  over  of  mackerel  oftUl  is  often  very  destruc- 
tive, because  it  contains  a  good  deal  of  bait,  but  the  throwing  over  of 


472 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   OOMMISSION. 


v> 

'i; 

\V,. 

1^  ;' 

i  '  •     !■  • 

H^ 

•^>^v 

>H.i  J,^ 


:'ii4^i«!l 


cod  offal  is  very  destructive ;  besides,  so  mauy  small  flsb  are  destroyed 
it  poisoDS  the  fishing  grouuds. 

Q.  Why  should  not  mackerel  offal  have  the  same  effect  ?— A.  Because 
so  much  of  it  is  bait. 

Q.  Bait  for  what  ? — A.  It  is  in  considerable  measure  composed  of 
bait  which  has  been  thrown  to  the  fish.  The  tiah  follow  the  bait  as  it  is 
thrown  over,  and  when  they  are  caught  they  are  more  or  less  full  of  it, 
and  of  course  this  is  thrown  overboard. 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  the  offal  of  mackerel  is  eaten  by  the  mackerel  ,'— 
A.  I  do  not  think  so.  This  goes  to  the  bottom,  but  it  is  not  so  destnic- 
tive  as  cod  offal.    They  require  bait  to  be  v^ry  fine. 

Q.  The  offal  of  the  mackerel  is  still  there,  whether  there  is  bait  in  the 
mackerel  or  not  t — A.  It  is  destructive,  but  not  so  much  so  as  eoil  ott'al. 

Q.  I  do  not  understand  why,  unless  it  is  less  in  quantity. — A.  It  is 
less  in  quantity. 

Q.  Is  that  the  only  reason  ? — A.  Y^s. 

Q.  Then  the  throwing  overboard  even  of  mackerel  offal  is  as  destruc- 
tive, as  far  as  it  goes,  as  cod  offal  ? — A.  It  is  not  so. 

Q.  Why  If — A.  Because  there  is  not  such  a  quantity  of  it.  It  is,  bow 
ever,  destructive  in  a  measure  undoubtedly,  and  is  injurious  to  the  tish, 
for  the  water  would  be  polluted  by  blood  and  other  matters.  If  it  was 
thrown  overboard  while  the  vessels  were  at  anchor,  it  would  be  iiioie 
injurious  than  when  they  are  drifting,  because  when  drifting  tlie  vessels 
pass  over  a  very  much  larger  surface. 

Q.  Do  they  throw  it  overboard  when  at  anchor  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  thus  pollute  the  water  ? — A.  Yes ;  because  mackerel  contain 
a  great  quantity  of  blood. 

Q.  Are  jou  aware  Vvhether  or  not  this  drives  the  mackerel  off  .'—A. 
It  would  do  so  from  where  they  are  fishing  into  good,  clear  water. 

Q.  Can  you  smell  this  offal  at  any  time  ? — A.  No ;  not  when  the  mack 
erel-ftshing  vessels  are  drifting,  but  you  can  smell  it  very  often  when 
they  fish  near  the  shore. 

Q.  Where  'i — A.  When  the  vessels  are  drifting  outside ;  a  mile  from 
the  shore,  for  instance. 

Q.  After  this  offal  is  thrown  into  the  water,  can  you  afterward  smell 
it  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Not  wiien  the  vessels  are  outside,  but  when  the 
vessels  have  be«^n  inside  the  limit  we  have  of  course.  This  would  be 
inside  of  the  bay. 

Q.  That  is  where  they  throw  it  over  in  shallow  water  I — A.  Yes.  1 
should  imagine  that  on  otiier  shores,  where  there  are  such  large  (|uanti- 
ties  caught,  and  where  the  vessels  anchor  at  night,  this  practice,  cuii 
nected  with  the  dressing  of  fish,  would  be  very  destructive;  but  I  am 
speaking  of  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  the  water  about  the  Magdalen  Islands  is  a  jjood 
deal  troubled  by  storms  i? —A.  Yes;  it  is  very  seldom  or  ever  smooth 
there.  But  this  is  not  the  case  around  the  shores  of  Prince  Edward 
Island  and  Cai)e  Breton. 

Q.  Tliis  practice  would  be  mu(5h  more  injurious  on  the  coasts  of 
Prince  Edward  Lsland,  Cape  Breton,  and  New  Brunswick,  than  around 
your  island  ? — A.  Yes;  it  would  be  much  more  destructive  there. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  conversed  with  Americans  on  the  subject  of  the 
privilege  whicb  they  have  of  landing  on  your  island  at  all  to  procure 
snow,  ice,  &c.  if — A.  No  ;  I  have  never  heard  it  mentioned.  They  tbiuk 
that  this  is  a  right  which  they  enjoy,  and  never  raise  the  cpiestion. 

Q.  They  do  it  as  a  matter  of  course  ? — A.  Yes.  The  only  diliiculty  I 
bad  was  when  Mr.  Lavender,  of  Provincetovvn,  first  came  there,  three 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


473 


years  ago.  Then  my  people  told  me  he  was  not  fishing  the  same  as  the 
rest,  but  with  trawls.  I  went  to  him  and  spoke  to  him  about  it,  but  he 
told  me  that,  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  he  had  a  right  to  fish  where 
aud  how  he  liked  ;  that  it  did  not  confine  him  as  to  the  mode  of  catch- 
jug  fish,  aud  that  he  could  fish  iu  any  mauuer  he  liked,  and  had  a  right 
to  do  wiiat  he  chose. 

Q.  IIow  was  he  fishing? — A.  With  trawls. 

Q.  That  is  trawling  in  inland  waters,  within  three  miles  of  the 
shore?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  eft'ect  of  that  mode  of  fishing,  in  your  judgment? — 
A.  It  destroys  the  mother  fish,  the  large  fish  that  come  in  to  spawn. 
Tbese  fish  come  into  these  waters  in  the  spring  and  deposit  their  eggs. 
The  tishermen  want  the  large  fish  but  not  the  small  ones,  aud  a  great 
many  of  the  latter  are  consequently  thrown  oil'  the  trawls. 

Q.  Vou  refer  now  to  codfish  ? — A.  Yes. 

(J.  Does  this  practice  injure  the  coil-fishing  to  any  extent? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Seriously  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  take  much  codfish  around  these  shores? — A. 
Their  tisliiug  is  generally  carrie<l  on  outside. 

Q.  Tbey  chiefly  come  in  t\>r  bait  ? — A.  Y'ou  can  easily  see  the  vessels 
with  a  glass. 

Q.  How  far  are  they  out  ? — A.  Eight  or  ten  miles.  They  are  some- 
times closer.  About  three  or  four  years  ago  the  islands  were  surrounded 
with  these  trawlers,  who  kept  the  fish  from  coining  in  there,  and  those 
who  fished  with  hand  lines  complained  a  great  deal  of  the  number  of 
vessels  that  came  iu  to  fish  ;  they  were  so  close,  antl  such  a  quautity  of 
bait  \V!is  thrown  outside,  that  the  fish  wonhl  not  come  insiiore. 

(J,  Do  they  often  come  and  surround  the  islands  with  trawls  ? — A. 
Yes;  (luring  the  cod-fishing  season. 

Q.  What  is  the  period  for  cod-fishing  there  ? — A.  There  are  two  fish- 
eiies;  one  is  called  the  Cape  North  fishery,  and  this  generally  begins  iu 
April. 

Q.  That  is  north  of  Cape  Breton  ?— A.  It  is  ofT  the  Magdalen  Islands. 
The  best  fishery  is  about  the  light-house  on  Bryon  Island,  inside,  and 
to  the  southeast  and  eastward  of  it.  Here  are  fine  fishing  grounds,  but 
it  is  a  very  dangerous  spot.  I  liave  known  a  vessel  go  there,  and  in 
three  weeks  leave  for  home  with  1,000  (juintals,  all  of  large  fish.  The 
otlier  fishery  comes  in  about  in  .Tune,  aiul  then  the  vessels  remain  until 
tlie  end  of  the  season,  during  Juiu?,  July,  aud  the  early  part  of  August, 
until  they  fill  up.  This  depends  entirely  upon  the  character  of  the 
lishiiij;'. 

Q.  How  long  is  it  since  they  commenced  the  system  of  trawling? — A. 
Tliey  liiivo  traw  led  for  some  years  in  the  gulf.  1  could  scarcely  tell  you 
how  jniin-. 

(J.  Hilt  around  the  island  ?— A.  They  have  trawled  there  for  t.  ;  last 
ten  or  twelve  years. 

^).  And  you  think  that  the  fishing  has  thus  been  injured  ? — A.  Cer- 
tainly ;  so  many  of  the  large  fish  are  taken.  The  large  fish,  as  they  are 
toniifd,  come  in  to  spawn  in  the  spring. 

Q.  What  ett'ect  has  this  on  the  boat  fishing  of  the  islands  i — A.  When 
these  fishermen  are  outside,  within  two  miles  aiul  half  a  mile  of  the 
shore,  the  boat  fishermen  cannot  catch  anything.  A  man  will  have 
l'>,00(>  or  12,000  hooks,  aiul  some  vessels  are  furnished  with  three  miles 
of  line. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  would  you  say  frequent  the  gulf  and 
fish  tor  mackerel  each  season,  speaking  from  your  own  knowledge  and 


iit!*" 


474 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


the  information  you  have  on  the  subject  f  Take  during  the  time  when 
the  reciprocity  was  in  force — from  1854  to  180G — what  would  the  aver 
age  number  in  the  gulf  then  have  been  ? — A.  There  were  a  great  inaiiy 
some  seasons,  and  afterward  this  was  not  the  case ;  some  seasons  tliev 
would  number  a  thousand  and  more. 

Q.  There  would  he  over  a  thousand  some  years  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  rpnioni- 
ber  being  on  board  the  United  States  ship  Winooskie  when  we  counted 
600  in  one  body  from  the  shii)'8  masthead. 

Q.  Near  the  INIagdalen  Islands? — A.  Yes;  around  these  islands  I 
should  sav  that  the  average  from  year  to  year  would  be  at  least  between 
400  and  500. 

Q.  The  average  would  be  450? — A.  \es;  during  the  last  year  or  two 
we  have  not  seen  so  many  of  them,  until  this  year,  when  more  ot  tliem 
have  come. 

Q.  Have  you  not  conversed  with  the  captains  themselves  and  obtained 
from  them  information  as  to  how  manycome  each  year  ? — A.  Yes;  I  liave 
asked  them  often,  and  some  would  say  1,'JOOor  1,500;  others,  1,000.  &c. 
Of  course,  the  whole  American  tieet  was  in  the  gulf  at  the  time. 

Q.  Would  not  the  average  be  more  than  450  each  year  ? — A.  I  sliould 
think  so. 

Q.  Would  it  not  be  nearer  GOO  or  700  ? — A.  I  would  be  safe  in  savinj.' 
from  450  to  500. 

Q.  Are  you  personally  acquainted  with  tlie  fisheries  on  the  coast  of 
!5few  Brunswick,  Nova  Scotia,  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  Cape  lire- 
ton? — A.  Before  I  was  in  the  customs  I  was  a  shipmaster,  and  I  sailed 
about  the  coast  some,  and  oft"  the  coast  I  have  seen  a  great  uuuiy  lisli- 
in  g- vessels. 

Q.  Where  is  the  best  mackerel  fishery,  inside  the  three  mile  liuiit  or 
outside  of  it  ? — A.  It  is  inshore.  The  large  fish  come  close  to  the  shore; 
for  some  reason  or  other,  I  don't  know  why,  the  small  fish  keep  oft'.  We 
call  them  tinkers  in  that  stage. 

Q.  And  tinkers  are  of  no  use  ? — A.  They  are  no  good.  Durinji  the 
two  years  past  myriads  of  them  have  been  found  in  the  bay  around  the 
Magdalen  Islands.    They  are  not  larger  than  smelts. 

Q.  In  two  or  three  years  they  become  large  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes;  and 
the  large  fish  come  inshore  to  feed. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  tinkers,  the  small  mackerel. 
keep  out  in  the  gulf,  while  the  large  fish  are  found  inshore? — A.  Yes: 
they  come  into  the  feeding  grounds. 

Q.  You  are  now  speaking  of  the  shores  in  the  gulf? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  southern  coast  of  Labrador  ?— 
A.  I  have  never  been  to  Labrador. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  catch  many  flsh  along  the  northern  coast  ot 
Labrador? — A.  There  have  not  been  very  many  there  during  the  last 
few  years ;  but  in  former  years  a  great  many  went  there  from  Cai)e  Cod 
p.nu  the  eastern  shore  about  Castine. 

Q.  IV''  cod  or  mackerel  ? — A.  For  cod. 

Q.  You  L  ave  of  course  seen  a  great  deal  of  the  American  vessels  that 
come  to  your  waters ;  will  you  tell  us  what  is  their  average  tonnage  ?— 
A.  Their  tonnage  averages  from  00  to  80  and  90  tons.  I  should  say 
that  the  average  one  with  another  of  the  American  vessels,  that  have 
been  here  during  the  last  few  years,  would  be  75  tons. 

Q.  What  would  be  a  fair  catch  for  a  75-ton  schooner,  on  the  average! 
—A.  About  3  0  or  400  barrels. 

Q.  For  each  trip? — A.  Yes;  they  would  catch,  I  should  think, dnring 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


475 


tlif!  season  between  700  and  800  barrels.    I  have  known  some  American 
vessels  make  three  trips  during  the  season. 

Q  Since  the  ratification  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington  have  they  not 
been  enabled  to  make  three  trips  a  season  by  means  of  transshipment  ? — 
A.  Yes;  vessels  transshipped  which  came  this  season. 

Q.  Have  they  not  transshipped  dnring  the  past  several  years  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  any  of  them  say  whether  that  is  a  great  priv- 
ilege or  not? — A.  Of  course  it  is  a  privilege,  because  it  saves  the  time 
that  would  be  consumed  in  going  home.  They  retit  and  return,  and 
wlieu  tliey  And  flsh,  if  the  weather  is  fine,  they  will  till  U|)  again  iu  a 
few  (lays.  They  generally  know  where  to  find  the  flsh,  and  sometimes 
tbey  have  come  back  on  the  same  body  of  flsh  which  tiiey  had  left. 

Q.  This  really  enables  them  to  make  a  third  trip  ? — A.  It  is  equal  to 
a  tliinl  where  they  take  advantage  of  it. 

Q.  Wlu^re  do  they  generally  transship  ? — A.  In  the  Strait  of  Canso 
and  on  Prince  Edward  Island.  The  S.  W.  Perry,  a  (iloucester  vessel, 
transshipped  at  Prince  Edward  Island  by  the  steamer  Commerce.  Form- 
erly, several  went  to  Charlottetowu  and  transshipped  by  the  Commerce, 
wliicli  was  then  running. 

Q.  You  liave  made  the  average  for  each  of  two  trips  350.  Would  it 
be  greater  if  the  vessel  made  a  third  trip  ? — A.  \'es. 

Q.  And,  for  two  trips,  that  would  make  700  barrels  in  the  course  i»f 
the  season.  You  are  acquainted  with  the  mode  iu  which  the  crews  aro 
hired  ? — A.  Y>s. 

Q.  What  is  the  practice  in  this  respect  ? — A.  They  go  on  shares  gfu- 
erally. 

Q.  How  many  men  would  a  75  ton  schooner  take  ? — A.  Fifteen  or 
sixteen. 

Q.  To  catch  700  br.rrcis?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  bushels  of  salt  would  this  require? — A.  One  and  a  half 
bushels  will  cure  a  barrel  of  flsh  ;  that  is  about  the  estimate. 

i}.  That  would  make  about  1,000  barrels  ? — A.  Y'^es.  The  flshermeu 
have  to  And  their  part  of  the  outfltting,  such  as  barrels  and  bait,  and 
pay  the  cook.  I  believe  that  the  cook  is  the  best  man  on  board :  he  gets 
wages  and  catciies  fish, 

(i>.  Wbat  would  700  empty  barrels  cost? — A.  They  are  worth  from  GO 
to  75  cents  a  barrel. 

Q.  Would  700  barrels  at  75  cents  each  make  $525  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  of  bait  would  they  take  ? — A.  About  SO  for  a 
vessel  of  that  description. 

Q.  What  do  they  pay  for  it  ?  I  suppose  there  would  be  a  lot  of  men- 
haden ? — A.  The  bait  would  consist  of  porgies  and  clams.  Tliey  would 
cost  from  $1  to  $5  a  barrel. 

Q.  At  about  $5,  that  would  make  $400  !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  what  would  the  salt  cost  a  bushel? — A.  From  20  to  2')  cents. 

(i.  At  25  cents,  1,000  bushels  would  cost  $250  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  about  the  provision  for  the  whole  season.  It  would  last 
about  four  months,  I  suppose? — A.  Yes;  the  provisions  1  should  think 
wonkl  cost  from  $10  to  $12  a  mouth. 

Q.  And  at  $12  a  month  for  these  16  men  would  make  how  much  ? — 
A.  $192. 

Q.  And  four  times  that  would  be  how  much  ? — A.  $708. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  cost  of  the  other  outfittings,  lines,  and  port- 
charges,  &c.  ? — A.  One  or  two  mills  to  grind  bait  would  be  required, 


476 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


and  they  would  cost  from  $12  to  $15  each.  The  lines,  hooks,  forks,  and 
such  like,  used  on  board  would  cost  about  $150. 

Q.  Do  the  mills  last  for  more  than  one  season  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  They  are  not  used  up  in  one  season  f — A.  Tbey  are  pretty  well 
used  up  then,  after  having  been  grinding  continuously.  The  kuives 
■would  be  pretty  well  destroyed. 

Q.  I  believe  that  the  crew  have  to  pay  for  a  part  of  the  packing  out  ?— 
A.  I  do  not  know  what  they  pay ;  it  is  about  three-quarters  I  tbiuU. 

Q.  What  does  the  packing  out  cost  ? — A.  About  60  or  75  cents. 

Q.  If  75  cents,  it  would  be,  for  700  barrels,  $525?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  how  much,  on  the  average,  would  these  700  barrels  cost  ?— A. 
I  could  not  say  exactlj'.  The  mackerel  is  sometimes  wortli  $20,  and 
sometimes  $15.  I  have  heard  that  it  has  been  sold  as  high  as  $28  aud 
$30. 

Q.  Would  yen  call  $12  a  barrel  a  low  average  ? — A.  It  would  be  a  fair 
one.    I  think  from  $12  to  $14  would  be  so. 

Q.  Aud  at  $12  a  barrel  how  much  would  700  barrels  be  worth  ?— A. 
$8,400. 

Q.  Will  you  add  up  the  expenses  you  have  mentioned  ?— A.  They 
amount  to  $2,618. 

Q.  Deduct  $2,618  from  $8,400  ?— A.  That  leaves  $5,782. 

Q.  And  that,  according  to  your  calculation,  is  wLat  such  a  vessel 
would  make  during  a  season  ? — A.  I  suppose  that  such  would  be  the 
result. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  vessel  was  chartered  from  the  owners,  what  do 
you  understand,  from  your  knowledge  of  the  business  and  the  conver- 
sation you  have  had  with  American  shipmasters,  would  be  a  fair  charter 
a  month  for  a  vessel  of  75  tons  ? — A.  I  should  say  from  $250  or  $300  a 
mouth. 

Q.  About  $300  would  be  the  outside  figure,  in  your  judgment?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  The  owners,  in  addition,  get  at  least  $1,200  for  the  charter,  and 
dmUicting  from  $5,782  the  amount  of  the  charter,  $1,200,  how  much 
would  be  left  ?— A.  $4,582. 

Q.  And  dividing  that  among  sixteen  men,  how  much  would  each 
get  ?— A.  About  $298. 

q.  About  $300  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  would  be  over  $71  a  month,  for  four  mouths,  for  each  uian  1- 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Making  it  $286  each,  what  would  it  be — $70  and  upward  J — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  pretty  good  wages  for  tliem  to  make  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  As  far  as  you  are  aware,  the  American  fishermen  who  come  to  our 
l)orts  do  not  confer  any  special  advantage  at  all  on  our  people  ? — A.  Not 
any  very  groat  advantage,  because  they  do  not  deal  with  us  to  any  great 
extent,  as  far  as  the  Mag(]alen  Islands  are  concerned.  They  do  not  lav- 
out  any  money  there  except  a  few  dollars  for  extra  labor  required  in  their 
fishing  operations. 

Q.  And  that  is  merely  an  individual  matter — it  is  of  no  general  beue- 
fit  at  all  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Is  the  right  of  fishing  in  the  American  waters  of  the  slightest 
benefit  whatever  to  any  Canadian  fishermen,  as  far  as  you  know  '?— A.  1 
never  knew  any  one  go  from  our  neighborhood  to  their  waters. 

Q.  What  do  the  Americans  themselves  say  about  their  own  waters  !— 
A.  That  they  were  overfished,  and  that  the  Atnerican  fishef  meu  have 
destroyed  them  by  their  mode  of  fishing. 

Q.  What  do  they  say  about  the  privilege  of  fishing  inshore  ou  the 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


477 


Canadian  coast? — A.  That  it  is  a  very  great  privilege,  because  they 
are  not  stopped  as  they  were  some  years  ago  by  the  Domiuiou  police, 
and  annoyed,  now  that  they  have  free  access  to  our  waters. 

Q.  In  your  opinion,  and  in  theirs  also,  without  that  privilege  they  could 
not  prosecute  the  fisheries  in  the  gulf  at  all  ? — A.  No ;  not  successfully. 

Q.  Then  they  would  not  come  at  all  j  they  would  not  do  so  from  year 
to  year  and  ruin  themselves,  not  being  successful  ? — A.  They  could  come 
here  in  a  manner,  but  their  time  would  be  lost.  It  would  not  be  worth 
their  while  to  come. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  Did  you  say  that  yon  were  a  native  of  the  Magdalen  Islands? — 
A.  No ;  1  am  an  Englishman  by  birth.  I  spent  my  early  days  in  the 
United  States,  and  latterly  I  have  lived  in  Canada. 

Q.  When  did  you  come  to  these  islands  to  live  ? — A.  My  appointment 
in  the  customs  dates  from  1852. 

Q.  Was  that  the  beginning  of  your  residence  there  ? — A.  I  had  been 
backwards  and  forwards  to  the  islands  for  several  years  previouslj% 

Q.  Was  that  the  beginning  of  your  residence  there  ? — A.  It  was  the 
beginning  of  my  permanent  residence.  I  have  only  been  absent  four  or 
five  times  since,  and  only  in  the  winter  season. 

Q.  Where  did  you  then  go  ? — A.  In  part  to  the  United  States  and  in 
part  to  Halifax,  in  Canada.    Two  years  ago  I  was  in  the  United  States. 

Q.  What  do  jou  understand  that  the  Americans  gain  in  the  way  of 
rights  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington  of  1H71  ? — 
A.  The  privilege  of  fishing  from  the  shore  ;  find  if  this  Swedish  market 
is  going  to  prove  profitable,  as  I  presume  will  be  the  case,  they  have  the 
great  advantage  of  doing  as  they  have  done  during  the  last  two  years, 
landing  with(,ut  being  subject  to  any  warehouse  or  customs  regulations, 
and  curing  fish  on  the  shore.    This  is  very  valuable. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  the  Americans  are  given  that  right  by 
the  Treaty  of  "Washington  ? — A.  I  understand  so. 

Q.  r.y  the  treaty  of  1871?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  gain  that  by  the  treaty  ? — A.  They  gain  the  privilege  of 
lauding  without  being  subject  to  customs  regulations;  and  1,000  barrels 
with  a  174  per  cent,  duty  would  make  one  item  of  expense.  The  next 
benefit  they  enjoy  is  the  privilege  of  putting  the  barrels  on  shore  with- 
out being  subject  to  warehousing,  &c.,  for  which  they  would  have  to 
Rv.    This  is  a  very  great  privilege. 

Q.  What  rights  do  you  understand  that  the  Americans  gain  by  the 
Treaty  of  Washington  in  your  island  "i — A.  I  understand  that  according 
to  this  treaty  they  have  the  privilege  in  common  with  ourselves  of  car- 
rying 01!  the  fisheries  on  land ;  previously  they  did  not  have  the  right 
to  land  tlieir  fish. 

Q.  You  think  that  they  thus  gained  the  right  to  fish  from  the  shore? 
—A.  Yes;  also  of  drying  an  I  curing  their  fish  on  shore. 

Q.  Do  they  gain  the  right  of  fishing  on  shore  if — A.  I  do  not  see  much 
of  a  rigiit  in  fishing;  but  the  privilege  of  packing  and  curing  their  fish 
on  shore  is  a  great  advantage. 

(^  They  do  not  land  to  catch  fish  from  your  rocks  or  beaches,  do 
lliey  ?— A.  They  haul  in  the  seines  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  the  Treaty  of  Washington  gives  the 
Aiiierieans  the  right  to  land  and  haul  their  seines  on  the  iMagdaleu  Isl- 
iiiuls  ?— A.  I  do. 

Q.  They  gained  that  right  by  this  treaty? — A.  Yes;  previously, 
although  they  did  so  for  many  years,  it  was  only  with  our  permission. 


'""4  J 

m 


m 


478 


AWARD    OF   TUE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


*;*>f  14  5 


if^.w^- 


Q.  Do  you  nnderstaiul  that  they  gained  any  other  rij>ht  by  this  treaty] 
— A.  They  could  land  their  outflttings  and  pack  and  cure  their  lisb,  ami 
also  erect  buildings. 

Q.  They  have  thus  obtained  the  right  to  erect  buildings  for  fishin<T 
puriwses? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  also  to  erect  buildings  to  lodge  in? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  also  obtained  the  right  to  laud  their  salt  barrels,  &c.  ?— A. 
All  fishing  outflttings. 

Q.  They  could  take  them  on  shore? — A.  Y'es,  and  ship  tbem  at  tbe 
end  of  the  season. 

Q.  And  you  understand  that  all  these  rights  were  gained  tbrougb  the 
Treaty  of  Washington  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  that  the  way  in  which  your  people  have  been  instructed  .'—A. 
Vaiious  instructions  have  been  issued  in  this  regard. 

Q.  In  your  conversations  is  that  the  general  opinion  on  the  islands  ?— 
A.  I  am  not  awave  that  I  have  had  any  conversation  respecting  it,  otbi-i 
than  when  this  man  came  from  Provincetown,  and  put  up  these  estah 
lisbnieuts  there,  they  themselves  assumed  that  they  had  authority  to  do 
so  under  this  treaty.  They  told  me  so  when  I  said  that  tbey  bad  no 
business  to  land.  They  alleged  that  under  this  treaty  they  bad  a  right 
to  land  where  they  liked,  and  erect  buildings  and  do  as  they  cbose.  1 
did  not  myself  so  understand  the  treaty.  I  told  them  that  tbey  bad  no 
right  to  land  without  permission.  I  did  not,  however,  interfere  with 
them,  and  always  allowed  them  to  do  so. 

Q.  1  asked  yon  how  you  uuderstood  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  and 
you  answered  diiferently  ?— A.  It  gave  them  the  privilege  to  land  and 
erect  buildings. 

Q.  Then  you  agreed  with  tbem  about  it? — A.  Yes. 

(}.  And  at  the  same  time  you  gave  them  permission  to  land  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  never  written  for  instructions  to  headquarters  to  know 
■whether  the  Americans  had  tbe  right  to  laud  and  erect  buildings  ?— A. 
I  have  written  to  the  inland  revenue  department,  but  I  was  led  to 
understand  last  year  that  1  was  not  to  take  any  proceedings  until  lurtbei 
instructions  arrived,  as  the  treaty  M'as  pending  and  nothing  was  settled. 
and  to  let  things  remain  as  they  were.  I  asked  what  should  be  done 
under  the  circumstances,  but  I  received  no  further  instructions  respect- 
ing it.  It  was  understood  that  the  arrangetneuts  to  be  made  under  the 
treaty  were  pending,  and  that  we  were  not  meauwhile  to  get  into  trouble 
■with  United  States  citizens. 

Q.  Did  you  tell  the  authorities  that  you  had  told  this  American  cap- 
tain he  had  no  right  under  this  treaty  to  land,  erect  buildings,  or  trans 
ship? — A.  lie  told  me  he  had  such  a  right. 

Q.  And  then  you  wrote  for  instructions? — A.  I  stated  in  my  annual 
report  in  autumn  what  I  had  done. 

Q.  And  the  answer  you  received  was  not  to  interfere  ? — A.  I  did  not 
obtain  an  oilicial  answer,  but  so  I  was  given  to  understand. 

Q.  How  were  you  so  giveu  to  understand  ? — A.  I  heard  indirectly 
that  1  was  not  to  interfere  with  United  States  fishermen  in  consequence 
of  this  treaty  being  pending. 

Q.  How  did  you  hear  that  indirectly? — A.  In  conversation  with  per 
sons  on  the  mainland,  during  the  winter  season.  I  reported  tbe  facts 
late  in  the  autumn.  This  occurred  last  year.  I  have  had  no  rei»ly  from 
the  department,  but  I  was  told,  as  I  have  mentioned,  by  several  parties. 

Q.  You  received  no  official  information  on  the  subject? — ^A.  ^'o. 

Q.  Either  by  letter  or  word  of  mouth  ? — A.  I  received  nothing  of  au 
official  character  in  this  respect. 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


479 


Q.  Dave  you  obtained  any  information  on  tbe  point  which  you  con- 
sidered to  have  come  directly  or  indirectly  from  an  otHcial  source  ? — A.. 
Notliiiig,  save  from  hearsay,  from  parties  outside.  Nothing  was  directly 
communicated  by  the  department.    I  have  had  no  reply. 

Q.  Then  what  you  did  rests  on  your  own  responsibility;  you  could 
not  lioitl  any  one  elsje  responsible  for  it  ? — A..  No. 

Q.  Towhatextent  havethe  Americans  erected  buildings  on  the  Magda- 
len Islaiiils? — A.  They  have  put  up  a  dwelling-house  and  fishing  stages. 
We  iiiive  four  eststblishraents  there  now.  I  have  with  me  a  manifest 
from  Trovincetown  of  the  articles  they  brought  with  them.  The  men 
lelt  on  the  island  are  connected  with  vessels  which  lish  outside;  these 
ve.ss«*ls  are  fitted  out  for  summer  fishing;  they  laiul  two  men  and  a 
luunUer  of  nets,  lines,  provisions,  barrels,  *ke.;  in  the  autumn  they  call 
tur  these  men  and  take  away  the  cat(;h,  which  they  ship  home  in  some 
otiier  vessel  from  the  Strait  of  Caiiso;  they  clear  at  the  custom  house 
what  rliey  take  away. 

Q.  Tliey  give  you  an  invoice  ? — A.  A  manifest. 

(^>.  Then  you  can  compare  the  manifesL  with  what  they  landed  ?— A, 
Yes. 

Q.  Tlien  you  are  satisfied  with  that  arrangement? — A.  In  this  way: 
I  considered  that  these  things  were  inteinled  for  fishing  [)urposes,  with 
the  exception  of  the  i)rovision.s.  I  had  no  instru(!tions  to  sul)iect  them 
to  warehouse  or  custom  regulations,  any  further  than  1  should  see  that 
they  had  no  goods  for  sale  with  them. 

Q.  You  saw  that  they  brought  no  merchandise  for  sale? — A.  Yes; 
but  they  brought  ashore  fishing  gear,  salt,  &c. 

(}.  ilow  many  such  cases  have  occurred  within  the  last  two  years? — 
A.  The  first  year  one  establishment  was  erected  and  last  year  four.  The 
former  used  135  nets  and  the  latter  1150  nets. 

Q.  What  do  they  catch  in  their  seines  ? — A.  Mackerel,  cod,  and  f,»t 
herrings. 

Q.  Do  they  buy  anything  on  shoie  to  .supply  their  wants? — A.  I  sup- 
po.se  tiiat  they  would  require  to  |(ur<!ha.se  something  while  on  shore. 
They  bring  juovisions  with  them,  such  as  tiour,  ^^cc;  they  might  buy 
small  stoies,  such  as  a  pound  of  tea,  j&c,  but  it  would  not  be  to  any 
fjreat  e.xtent. 

Q.  This  would  be  of  some  little  benefit  to  the  peo[)le  ? — A.  Yes;  but 
more  of  a  benefit  to  them.selves,  of  cour.se. 

(i>.  IStill  it  is  a  i)enefit? — A.  Yes;  the  men  mentioned  have  done  verj' 
well  since  they  came  there;  they  have  caught  a  good  many  fish. 

(}.  ilow  do  the  American  vessels  save  lighterage? — A.  For  the  Swe- 
dish market  the  fish  have  to  be  packed  in  a  peculiar  manner;  they  must 
he  tiiken  before  they  spawn,  when  the  roe  is  in  them,  and  when  they 
are  large  ami  full.  They  are  no  use  afterward,  and  tins  has  got  to  be 
(lone  during  the  short  time  that  these  fish  are  on  our  coast.  The  men, 
conse(|uently,  must  catch  a  great  many  and  attend  them  at  their  leisure. 

Q.  You  speak  of  Swedes? — A.  Y''es;  I  referto  the  American  vesselswhich 
take  tish  to  the  American  Swedish  market.  A  vessel  requiring  3,000 
barrels  would  be  a  large  vessel.  The  Hattie  H.  Grove,  of  Irioucester, 
ie(|uired  so  many  ;  and  these  could  not  be  caught  and  cared  for  in  a 
short  tin)e  ou  the  deck  of  a  vessel.  They  must  either,  for  such  a  pur- 
pose, bring  souie  other  vessel  as  a  tender  or  lighter  aiul  load  outside, 
discharging  and  packing  the  empty  barrels  afloat,  or  they  must  land  the 
barrels  on  shore.  Now  they  came  to  ask  permission  to  land  the  barrels 
as  they  could  not  find  room  for  them  on  the  deck  of  the  vessel,  and,  at 
tbe  same  time,  prosecute  the  fishery.    They  took  the  barrels  off  shore 


480 


AWARD  OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


at  their  leisure,  and  I  allowed  them  to  do  so.  Several  '  undred  of  them 
were  landed  on  the  beach.  Last  year  they  packed  the  flsh  on  tlie  shore 
to  which  place  the  fish  were  brought.  You  will  understand  that  when 
fish  are  thrown  into  a  barrel  they  will  sink,  and  a  barrel,  when  well 
packed,  will  contain  about  a  barrel  and  a  half  of  fish  in  the  ordinary 
state.    They  pay  from  6  to  7  and  8  cents  for  packing. 

Q.  Who  does  the  packing  ? — A.  Their  own  people  and  girls  and  women 
who  live  on  shore. 

Q.  They  employ  people  who  live  on  shore  to  help  them? — A.  Yes; 
and  they  pay  about  9  cents  a  barrel  for  it — from  8  to  10  cents  a 
barrel  for  taking  out  the  gills  and  packing.  These  persons  have  princi- 
pally come  from  Gloucester;  they  bring  their  barrels  and  load  tlieir 
vessels.  One  firm  from  Gloucester  brought  two  vessels  to  fish  and  loiul; 
one  vessel  was  loaded  and  sent  to  Sweden. 

Q.  If  they  do  not  bring  their  own  lighters,  they  use  boats  which  they 
obtain  from  the  shore? — A.  They  land  the  barrels  on  shore,  and  pack 
them  after  the  fish  are  once  taken. 

Q.  What  boats  do  they  use  for  landing? — A.  Their  own.  Each  ves- 
sel will  have  four  or  five  boats. 

Q.  They  will  do  what  business  is  required  ? — A.  Yes,  they  have  seines 
with  them;  the  fish  are  hauled  in  the  seines  and  brought  into  the  har- 
bor and  put  into  the  barrels  from  the  boats. 

Q.  The  fish  are  taken  on  shore  in  the  boats? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  does  not  apply  to  mackerel  ? — A.  I  am  speaking  of  herring. 
No  mackerel  are  caught,  to  any  extent,  except  by  these  Frovincetowu 
people.  This  busines  is  only  in  its  infancy  now,  but  next  year  1  presume 
that  a  much  larger  business  may  be  done. 

Q.  Are  their  boats  brought  all  the  way  from  the  States ;  do  they  not 
hire  boats  at  Canso  and  elsewhere  for  the  purpt)8e  ? — A.  Some  bring 
their  own  boats  and  others  hire  their  boats.  Some  bargain  with  the 
people  to  bring  the  fish  out  of  the  seines  on  shore ;  3  or  4  cents  a  barrel  is 
paid  for  this  work.  The  fish  have  to  be  caught  there  in  a  very  short 
time.    Once  barreled  they  are  saved  with  salt. 

Q.  They  want  to  land  the  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

<^.  And  that  must  be  done  quickly  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  sometimes  tliey  employ  people  on  shore  in  this  relation  ?— A. 
Yes ;  a  boat  will  carry  from  20  to  30  barrels  of  fish. 

Q.  It  depends  on  the  quantity  they  have  to  land  ? — A.  From  2,000  to 
3,000  and  4,000  barrels  will  be  landed  about  the  same  time. 

Q.  This  makes  things  pretty  lively  in  the  neighborhood  ? — A.  I  have 
counted  700  boats  in  operation  at  the  same  time. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  many  boats  on  the  island? — A.  Of  course;  the  fish- 
ermen there  own  several  hundre<l  boats. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  mackerel  spawn  about  the  Magdalen  Islands?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  spawn,  also,  on  the  numerous  banks  and  shoals  in  the 
Gulf!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  say  that  after  they  have  spawned  they  leave  the 
islands? — A.  Y'es;  and  go  into  deeper  water,  off'  shore,  until  they 
recruit,  I  presume,  because  they  are  sick,  or  are  supposed  to  be  so, 
after  spawning.  As  soon  as  they  come  in,  the  scales  fall  ofl:  their  eyes. 
Sometimes  they  are  caught  with  half  of  these  sea  es  on. 

Q.  When  <Io  they  come  back? — A.  In  about  three  weeks  or  a  month 
sometimes.  I  imagine  that  this  depends  a  great  deal  on  the  tempera- 
ture of  the  water.  When  it  is  very  raw  and  cold,  and  there  is  a  good 
deal  of  ice,  they  are  later.    The  latest  period  ever  known  is  about  the 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


481 


12tb  or  the  15th  of  Jiiae;  but  they  generally  come  about  the  Ist  of 

Jane. 

Q.  Yon  consider  it  dangerous  for  vessels  to  fish  off  the  Magdalen 
Islands  ? — A.  It  is  considered  to  be  a  very  dangerous  coast. 

Q.  The  safe  course  to  pursue  there  is  to  have  boats  to  go  oi^t  in  and 
to  come  right  back  in  ? — A..  Yes;  from  the  shore.  ^^ 

Q.  And  they  haul  the  boats  upon  the  shore,  where  there  is  no  luirbor  ? — 
A.  In  Amherst  Harbor  they  can  float,  but  in  many  places  they  have  to 
baal  tbem  upon  the  beach  every  time  they  come  in. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  hire  boats  for  fishing  ? — A.  When  the  fish  were 
found  to  be  close  inshore  I  have  known  them  to  come  to  our  place  and 
get  vessels. 

Q.  And  hire  boats  when  the  fish  were  close  inshore  ? — A.  Yes ;  and 
go  on  the  other  shore  and  fish. 

Q.  Do  they  hire  boats  to  fish  close  in  on  your  own  shore  ? — A.  No ; 
the.v  do  not  fish  on  our  shore  for  mackerel,  unless  the  wind  is  offshore. 
It  is  unsafe  for  vessels  to  do  otherwise.  A  boat  could  not  fish  for  mack- 
erel around  our  shore  outside,  except  at  the  mouth  of  the  harbor,  from 
whence  they  can  run  back  immediately.  For  three  weeks  previous  to 
luy  departure  no  boats  dare  go  out  of  the  harbor.  The  fishermen  there 
are  doing  nothing. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  experience  with  respect  to  the  offal  grievance 
at  your  island? — A.  O,  yes;  in  the  spring  of  the  year,  while  they  are 
dressing  the  fish,  when  the  offal  is  driven  inshore  you  can  scarcely  stand 
ou  the  beach  in  consequence  of  the  ott'ensive  odor  emanating  from  it. 
This  is  not  the  case  so  much  with  mackerel  offal,  because  mackerel  are 
not  taken  on  our  shores  in  sufficient  quantities  to  cause  such  an  effect; 
but  hundreds  of  thousands  of  barrels  of  herring  are  taken  along  our 
coast. 

Q.  What  do  your  people  do  with  the  offal  of  the  herring  which  they 
catcb  ? — A.  They  bring  it  on  shore. 

Q.  Who  do  not  do  so  ? — A.  The  men  on  the  vessels  which  come  into 
the  harbor. 

Q.  If  the  vessels  lie  in  smooth  water  in  the  harbor,  then  you  think 
that  the  offal  is  a  nuisance  ? — A.  Yes ;  or  when  they  are  near  the  shore. 

Q.  Suppose  that  they  are  a  little  distance  off,  a  mile  or  two,  where 
the  sea  is  disturbed  by  the  wind,  is  it  a  nuisance  then? — A.  The  Mag- 
dalen Islands  in  this  respect  would  be  an  exception  to  the  general  rule ; 
the  sea  being  very  seldom  smooth  there,  of  course  this  disturbs  the 
offal,  but  when  this  comes  on  shore  it  is  very  offensive.  The  water  in 
the  harbor  is  only  10  or  12  feet  deep. 

Q.  The  harbor  is  very  shallow  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  no  regulations  prohibiting  the  throwing  of  offal  into  the 
harbor  ? — A.  Yes ;  but  it  is  very  dii&cult  to  put  them  in  force.  I  do  all 
I  can  to  prevent  it,  but  one  man  can  scarcely  perform  this  duty  all  alone, 
80  far  from  the  reach  of  the  strong  arm  of  the  law. 

Q.  If  the  vessels  are  drifting  while  the  offal  is  thrown  overboard  this 
does  not  come  in  in  a  mass  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  speak  of  the  offal  of  cod  or  of  mackerel  or  of  herring  f — A. 
1  refer  to  herring  offal.  Cod  offal  is  "^  different  thing.  It  is  much  more 
destructive  and  Injurious  to  the  fish,  in  my  opinion,  than  the  other. 

Q.  Cod  offal  is  worse  than  mackerel  or  herring  offal  ? — A.  Yes;  much 
more  so. 

Q.  But  you  are  not  troubled  with  much  of  this  offal  ? — A.  Not  when 
they  fish  offshore.    They  generally  fish  for  cod  on  these  banks  and 
The  fish  become  poisoned  with  the  offal  that  is  thrown  over- 
31  F 


i 


'Mi 


482 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


board,  and  leave  the  groundH.  The  water  is  polluted,  and  besides  a 
quautity  of  other  fish  and  of  roe  is  thus  destroyed. 

Q.  Why  do  the  fishermen  act  in  this  manner  ? — A.  I  have  asked  the 
fishermen  that  question,  and  they  say  that  they  have  fitted  out  to  catcb 
fish,  and  are  bound  to  do  so ;  that  they  must  catch  the  fish  ;  and  that 
if  they  do  not  follow  this  method  their  neighbors  will.  The  grounds 
are,  in  fact,  at  times,  made  so  foul  apd  so  polluted  that  they  them.sclves 
have  to  leave  them. 

Q.  Are  they  not  thus  destroying  the  catch  all  the  time? — A.  Greater 
difiiculty  is  now  experienced  in  catching  cod  than  was  the  case  formerly. 
The  fishermen  consequently  complain  of  this.  I  may  say  that  thev 
admit  they  are  ruining  the  fisheries;  but  they  do  not  mind  that.  They 
say  these  will  last  their  time.  In  my  opinion  a  great  advantage  would 
be  gained  if  the  two  governments  could  unite  and  forbid  seining  and 
the  use  of  trawling-lines  for  a  number  of  years.  Some  mode  should  be 
contrived,  by  means  of  boxes  or  chests  placed  ou  board  vessels,  for  the 
deposit  of  this  offal,  then  the  vessels  could  run  inshore  every  week  and 
throw  it  overboard.  The  present  practice  does  a  great  deal  of  harm  to 
the  fisheries.    It  is  very  destructive. 

Q.  It  could  be  taken  out  into  the  ocean,  clear  of  the  banks,  shoals, 
&c.!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  tide  or  a  strong  wind  or  anything  of  that  kind  would  disperse 
it,  would  it  not? — A.  Around  the  Magdalen  Islands  the  water  la  not 
usually  deep,  but  shoaly.  It  has  a  depth  of  from  six  to  seven  fathoms, 
at  least,  within  two  or  three  miles  from  the  shore ;  while  at  the  same 
distance  from  the  shore  in  New  Brunswick  it  is  to  be  found  from  50  to 
60  and  70  fathoms  in  depth. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  men  employed  on  board  American  vessels 
during  the  last  25  jears  have  been,  in  your  opinion,  British  subjects '— 
A.  A  great  many  have  been  so.  I  think  that  two-thirds  of  them  have 
been  British  subjects. 

Q.  And  do  they  usually  work  ou  shares  ? — A.  A  few  work  on  wages. 

Q.  You  have  no  vessels  on  which  to  employ  the  people  of  the  islands  ?— 
A.  We  have  very  excellent  fishing-boats,  and  about  twelve  or  fourteen 
schooners. 

Q.  Where  have  the  large  proportion  of  fishermen  found  employment, 
on  board  American  vessels? — A.  Not  our  meu  ;  they  are  generally 
employed  by  the  Jersey  houses  aud  the  Labrador  fishermen. 

Q.  Take  British  America,  altogether.  United  States  vessels  furnish 
employment  to  two-thirds  of  the  entire  crews  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  are  not  many  vessels  in  British  America,  over  GO  tons, 
engaged  in  fishing,  are  there  ? — A.  I  think  within  the  last  few  years 
there  has  been  a  larger  class  of  vessels,  some  90  or  95  tons. 

Q.  Not  many  ? — A.  Not  many.  About  60  tons  would  be  a  fair  average 
for  our  vessels. 

Q.  You  have  none;  they  have  none  about  Gaspe  or  what  we  call  the 
West  Coast? — A.  They  all  pursue  boat-fishing  there. 

Q.  And  there  are  only  40  at  Prince  Edward  Island.  So  that  taking 
the  whole  together,  the  number  of  vessels  that  would  go  out  to  be  gone 
weeks,  and  cure  large  quantities  of  fish,  is  but  few  in  all  British 
America? — A.  But  these  people  don't  return  again  to  the  island.  Two- 
thirds  of  them  become  residents  of  the  United  States  and  become 
naturalized. 

Q.  You  don't  know  that?— A.  If  they  don't  become  naturalized  they 
pass  as  Yankees.    I  must  say  it  is  unfortunate  that  some  of  these 


ti.-M^.ri 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


483 


|)eople  give  us  the  most  trouble.  They  are  all  Yankees  and  they  claim 
tbe  protection  of  the  stars  and  stripes. 

Q.  You  were  asked  some  questions,  the  object  of  which  seemed  to  be 
to  ascertain  how  much  a  fisherman  made  on  an  American  vessel,  you 
giip|)OBiug  that  the  vessel  had  on  board  350  barrels.  Is  that  the 
miinber  ?— A.  Yes ;  about  that.  That  is  what  I  have  heard  them  say, 
and  that  is  my  experience ;  if  they  fit  out  for  400  barrels,  350  would  be 
the  average. 

Q.  That  would  be  350  barrels  put  on  board? — A.  Yes;  each  trip. 

Q.  Making,  if  they  have  two  trips,  700  barrels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  supposed  all  these  barrels  to  be  taken  home  full  ? — A. 
Yes;  they  generally  remain  there  until  they  can  fill  them,  if  possible. 

Q.  You  assume  that  every  barrel  went  home  full  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then,  when  you  made  up  your  account  and  took  the  product  of  all 
those  barrels  full,  and  ascertained  the  crew's  share,  did  you  deduct  what 
the  crew's  share  was  worth  from  the  whole  sum,  or  from  the  owner's 
half?— A.  We  deducted  the  expenses;  assuming  the  mackerel  to  bring 
812  per  barrel  in  the  United  States,  there  would  be  received  $8,400, 
from  which  deduct  $2,618. 

Q.  Do  you  deduct  from  that  the  crew's  share? — A.  The  crew  would 
have  half  the  fish ;  $5,782  would  remain  between  ship  and  crew. 

Q.  What  do  you  deduct  from  the  gross  sales  of  the  700  barrels  ? — A. 
I  deduct  outttt. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  outfit  ? — A.  Barrels,  salt,  bait,  provisions, 
lines,  and  packing. 

Q.  What  do  you  deduct  in  the  first  instance? — A.  I  deduct  the  whole 
cost  of  the  outfit. 

Q.  With  regard  to  outfit,  does  not  the  owner  furnish  the  salt  ? — A. 

Q.  I'^ou  take,  in  the  first  place,  700  barrels,  at  $12  per  barrel,  which 
gives  you  $8,400.  What  do  you  deduct  before  you  divide  between 
owners  and  crew? — A.  I  deduct  the  cost  of  the  barrels,  salt,  provisions, 
and  lines. 

Q.  How  much  do  you  allow  for  each  ?  What  is  the  first  item  to  be 
be  deducted  ? — A.  Barrels. 

Q.  How  much  is  that  ? — A.  700  barrels,  at  75  cents  each,  or  $525. 

Q.  What  is  the  next  item  ? — A.  Salt ;  1,000  bags,  at  25  cents  each,  or 
8250. 

Q.  What  next  ? — A.  Provisions,  $768,  taking  4  months,  10  men,  at  $12 
per  mouth  each.    For  packing  out,  $525. 

Q.  Do  yon  take  that  from  the  gross  sales  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  not  the  crew  bear  a  share  of  that  ? — A.  Yes,  but  we  calculate 
that  after.  The  crew  bear  half  of  that.  That  is  what  I  have  heard  it 
cost  for  packing  when  they  arrived  home. 

Q.  You  mean  packing  out  when  they  reach  home  at  Gloucester,  be- 
fore the  fish  are  put  in  the  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  next  do  you  deduct  from  the  gross  sales  ? — A.  There  is  the 
crew ;  they  would  have  half  of  the  fish. 

Q.  Have  you  deducted  all  you  wish  to  deduct  from  the  gross  sales  ? — 
A.  There  is  the  charter  of  the  vessel. 

Q.  Have  you  deducted  all  you  intend  to  deduct  from  the  gross 
sales!    What  would  you  put  the  provisions  at?— A.  At  $768. 

Q.  Xext  to  provisions,  what  do  you  deduct  from  the  gross  sales  ? — A. 
That  is  all. 

Q.  How  much  does  it  amount  to  ? — ^A.  $2,418.  No,  these  items  only 
amount  to  $1,218. 


01 


484 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


i:V\ 


l:'*'si:t" 


Q.  Is  there  anything  sise  which  sboald  be  dedncted  ? — A.  There  are 
barrels,  salt,  provisions,  lines,  packing  out,  and  charter. 

Q.  How  much  for  lines?— A.  $160. 

Q'  Packing  out  how  much  ? — A.  $525. 

Q.  Can  you  think  of  anything  else  to  be  taken  out  of  the  gross  pro- 
ceeds of  the  sales? — A.  Half  of  the  flsh  for  the  crew. 

Q.  Are  you  sure  these  items  come  to  $2,418  ? — A.  Tbey  amount  to 
$1,218. 

Q.  Do  you  now  divide  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  is  half  the  catch?— A.  $4,200  for  half  of  the  fish. 

Q.  From  $4,200  deduct  that  amount,  is  not  that  the  next  process? 
What  is  the  result  of  it?— A.  $2,982. 

Q.  You  leave  the  crew  how  much? — A.  The  crew  would  have  $4,200 
less  half  of  the  expenses  they  have  to  pay. 

Q.  You  have  $8,400  as  the  gross  receipts  of  the  sales;  how  much  was 
the  amount  you  found  you  had  deducted  from  the  $8,400? — A.  The 
amount  of  the  expenses  as  they  appear  is  $1,218. 

Q.  Will  you  state  what  items  compose  $1,218? — A.  $525  for  barrels, 
$250  for  salt,  $7G8  for  provisions,  $150  for  lines  and  so  forth,  aud  $525 
for  packing  out. 

Q.  You  have  made  a  mistake  in  your  addition ;  what  is  the  amount 
now  ?— A.  $2,218. 

Q.  The  result  is  $6,182 ;  is  that  what  you  make  it?— A.  Yes;  $0,182. 

Q.  Has  any  item  been  omitted  which  should  be  deducted  ?— A.  Thin 
would  be  the  sum  of  money  due  between  the  owners  and  the  ship. 

Q.  What  is  the  half  of  that?— A.  $3,091. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  to  be  deducted  from  that  half  before  you  divide 
it  among  the  men  ? — A.  It  is  to  be  divided  among  the  men. 

Q.  How  many  men  do  you  allow  for? — A.  There  are  sixteen  men. 
They  have  to  pay  the  cook  something. 

Q.  How  much  for  the  cook  ? — A.  I  cannot  remember  what  sum  I  gave, 

Q.  You  must  give  us  the  amount  according  to  your  knowledge  t—A. 
About  $30  per  month. 

Q.  That  would  be  $120  ?— A.  Yes ;  I  should  think  so. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  cook's  amount  should  come  out  of  the  whole 
sum  ? — A.  Out  of  the  crew's  half. 

Q.  Does  not  the  owner  pay  half? — A.  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  The  crew's  half  is  $3,091  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  1  want  you  to  find  out  how  much  each  man  gets,  supposing  there 
are  16  men. — A.  Each  man's  share  is  $222. 

Q.  $3,901  you  have  reckoned  is  the  crew's  share.  Now  deduct  $120 
for  the  cook,  and  how  much  does  it  leave  ? — A.  I  make  the  whole  amount 
$7,073  that  would  be  due. 

Q.  Xo,  $6,182  you  made  it  out  to  be.— A.  There  aro  oth  i  thin^  be 
reckoned.    Those  things  are  only  part. 

Q.  Did  you  not  have  $6,182  as  the  gross  resu  i-  you  had  ma' • 

deductions  ?— A.  Yes,  $6,182.    There  is  somethii       o  be  added  to 
again,  because  the  crew  pays  half  of  that.    The     ay  I  m;'ke  it  out  is 
this:  the  crew's  share  would  be  $4,200,  less  half  they  liav    to  pay. 

Q.  So  you  would  divide  the  gross  gains  into  two  parts  ?  A.  $8,400  is 
the  gross  sum,  half  of  which  the  crew  would  receive,  less  the  amount 
they  would  have  to  pay  to  the  outfitters. 

Q.  Supposing  $4,200  belonged  to  the  crew  in  the  first  instance,  what 
items  do  you  deduct  ?— A.  I  deduct  half  of  the  barrels,  half  of  the  pack- 
ing out,  and  the  cost  of  the  cook. 


4!?--.  r*:^:^..: 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


486 


Q.  What  is  half  of  the  barrels  f— A.  $202.50;  half  of  the  packing  out 
is  the  same  nuin,  $262 ;  for  the  cook,  $12U ;  inakiug  $U45. 

Q.  Is  there  auy  other  item  ? — A.  I  don't  see  any  other  item. 

Q.  Don't  you  allow  anything  for  inspection  ? — .\.  That  is  what  we 
call  packing  out.  I  have  not  been  in  the  business  myself,  but  that  is 
what  I  have  heard. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  crew  pay  for  the  inspection  or  afiy  share 
of  it  If— A.  75  cents  per  barrel  pays  for  packing  and  inspection. 

Q.  You  have  not  said  anything  about  bait? — A.  The  bait  is  to  be 
added,  $400,  half  of  which  is  $200.    I  omitted  the  item  of  bait. 

Q.  Can  you  make  anything  out  of  the  calculation  f — A.  I  make  the 
game  items  you  have  got  there,  but  I  scarcely  understand  what  you  wish 
me  to  (to. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  find  out  what  each  man  makes ! — A.  $209  each.  If 
the  crew  are  the  outfitters  of  the  vessel  and  charter  her,  the  share  of 
each  will  be  $284. 

Q.  nave  you,  since  you  gave  the  previous  result,  added  something  to 
the  crew  for  charter  ! — A.  I  have  done  so. 

Q.  How  much  do  you  charge  each  man  for  charter  ? — A.  The  charter 
is  out  of  the  whole. 

Q.  Have  you  deducted  the  charter  from  the  gross  sales  ?  Would  you 
do  that  f  It  is  not  in  any  of  your  items  ? — A.  The  crew  would  receive 
at  first  83,355,  but  there  would  be  the  charter,  $1,200. 

Q.  The  last  time  we  heard  from  you,  I  think  you  began  with  the  crew's 
half  at  $4,200  ?— A.  $4,200  less  $845  for  half  of  bait,  the  whole  pay  of 
the  cook,  half  of  packing,  and  half  of  barrels,  which  gives  $3,355.  That 
woaUl  be  their  share  of  the  fish. 

Q.  What  sum  is  half  of  the  barrels  f— A.  $262.50 ;  half  of  the  pack- 
ing, including  inspection,  is  the  same  amount,  cook  $120,  and  half  of 
the  b"it.  $200. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  all  the  bait  to  be  bought  at  Gloucester  ? — A.  Yes, 
for  the  whole  voyage. 

Q.  All  the  bait  purchased  and  shipped  at  Gloucester  i — A.  It  could 
not  be  purchased  anywhere  else — the  same  description  of  bait. 

Q.  What  is  the  next  item  ? — A.  That  is  all  I  deduct  from  the  crew, 
but  I  give  them  the  benefit  of  the  charter  of  the  vessel. 

Q.  Have  you  added  to  $845  anything  ? — A.  I  have  deducted  $845 
from  $4,200. 

Q.  Having  got  $845,  have  you  added  anything  to  that? — A.  No. 

Q.  Nor  deducted  anything  before  you  divide  the  amount  among  16 
men  ?— A.  No.  The  crew  are  entitled  to  $4,200,  less  $845,  which  leaves 
$3,355. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  that  ?  Do  you  divide  it  by  10  ?— A.  Yes ; 
with  the  addition  of  $1,200. 

Q.  When  did  you  add  $1,200— at  what  stage  ? — A.  It  is  assumed. 

Q.  It  is  assumed  that  they  pay  nothing  for  the  charter  I — A.  The 
owner  {jets  the  benefit  of  that. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  divide  $3,355  into  16  parts  at  once  ? — A.  That 
would  be  $209.    I  take  $209  as  the  share  of  their  fish. 

Q.  Have  you  deducted  anything  else  ?  You  spoke  about  charter ; 
havi  HI  deducted  anything  for  charter? — A.  The  men  got  that;  some- 
body must  have  the  $1,200. 

Q.  Where  did  yon  get  the  prices  at  which  you  have  calculated  the 
uifterent  articles? — A.  lassumethem  to  be  correct;  these  are  the  prices 
which  I  suppose  are  paid. 

<^  ^Vhea  you  put  down  so  much  for  salt,  bait,  and  barrels,  where  do 


r    .t., 

ni 


486 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


yoa  get  yoar  inforiuation  ? — A.  My  position  leads  me  to  know  the  prices 
of  these  articles,-  as  many  of  them  pass  through  the  custoni-hou.se. 

Q.  And  also  the  price  of  mackerel  ? — A.  I  know  they  have  varied  in 
the  United  States  market  from  $10  to  $25. 

Q.  You  never  knew  No.  3  mackerel  to  be  $25  ? — A.  Very  few  which 
they  catch  are  No.  3. 

Q.  You  count  them  all  No.  1?— A.  No.  1  and  2.  No.  2  from  the 
provinces  will,  in  many  cases,  prove  No.  1  on  inspection. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  a  good  deal  of  the  Swedish  trade ;  to  how  large 
3>n  extent  is  it  being  carried  on  from  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  It  is 
in  the  se'iond  year. 

Q.  How  many  fish  were  exported  to  Sweden  last  yef.r  ? — A.  900  bar 
rels,  one  vessel  only.    The  Herman  Badson,  of  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  much  did  the  herring  cost  per  barrel? — A.  The  captain  hioi 
self  told  me  that  they  jost  $2  per  barrel  on  board. 

Q.  That  was  the  extent  of  the  Swedish  trade  last  year? — A.  Yes,  last 
year. 

Q.  The  returns  are  not  made  up  for  this  year? — A.  About  9,000  bar- 
rels will  be  sent  this  year. 

Q.  You  know  that  between  January  1  and  December  31, 1870,  900 
barrels  were  sent  at  $2  per  barrel. — A.  Yes. 

Q.  No  accounts  have  been  made  up  for  this  year  ? — A.  There  are  one 
or  two  vessels  on  the  Newfoundland  shore 

Q.  It  is  an  experiment  altogether  this  year? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  know  how  it  will  turn  out? — A.  No.  They  are  going 
into  it  pretty  largely. 

Q.  Do  *he  returns  show  that  38,000  barrels,  valued  at  $76,000,  were 
exported  to  the  United  States? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  In  that  last  calculation  made  by  Mr.  Dana,  where  the  crew  take 
half  the  proceeds,  what  have  you  to  do  with  the  charter  ? — A.  Xotliiiig 
to  do  with  it.  The  men  receive  $284  each  out  of  the  whole  proceeds, 
or  about  $70  per  month. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  diflferent  items  you  gave  for  provisions,  salt,  bar- 
rels, and  so  forth,  did  you  get  the  information  from  captains? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  prices  were  fair  prices,  as  you  understood  from  the  captains  ?— 
A.  Yes,  from  my  conversation  with  them. 

Q.  In  the  calculation  you  made  in  answer  to  my  question,  the  ves.sel 
was  assumed  to  be  chartered  by  the  crew  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Therefore  the  charter  did  come  in? — A.  Yes;  we  spoke  of  bow 
much  the  charter  would  be.  We  had  $3,355,  and  throwing  in  the  char- 
ter of  the  vessel  would  make  the  sum  $4,550,  giving  each  man  $1281. 

Q.  The  calculation  you  made  to  me  was  hot  a  calculation  based  upon 
the  crew  dividing  at  all  t — A.  No. 

Q.  Mr.  Dana's  calculation  assumed  that  the  crew  were  not  the  char- 
terers, but  were  being  paid  by  taking  half  the  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  Could  yoi.  inform  me  whether  farming  is  pursued  to  any  extent 
on  your  islands  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  ii  an  agricultural  population? — A.  Yes;  and  we  have  au 
Agricnlturd'i  Society  there. 

Q.  Are  you  more  dependent  on  your  flsh  than  on  your  lands !— A. 
Tor  the  last  few  years  they  have  cultivated  a  great  deal.  There  are 
some  fishermen  who  can  live  entirely  on  their  farms. 

Q.  Y'^ou  have  farming  laud  on  your  islands? — A.  Yes,  a  great  deal. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


487 


By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Don't  you  bring  your  provisions  from  abroad  I — A.  We  get  flour 
from  abroad. 

Q.  In  1871,  when  some  of  your  vessels  latlen  with  provisions  were 
lost,  did  not  the  Province  of  Quebec  raise  a  subscription  to  prevent 
your  people  from  starving? — A.  They  raised  a  subscription. 

Q.  ATid  sent  a  vessel  loaded  with  provisions  ? — A.  They  sent  it  in 
this  way.  It  was  at  the  very  close  of  navigation,  and  the  report  was 
spread  that  the  whole  of  our  Ashing  fleet,  12  or  14  vessels,  had  been 
lost,  and  the  Federal  Government  sent  a  vessel  down  with  provisions 
to  supply  the  people's  wants.    Some  of  the  flour  Is  not  disposed  of  yet. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  people  raise  anything  like  provisions 
sntticieut  to  supply  themselves  ? — A.  Not  flour. 

Q.  General  provisions  ?  Do  they  raise  provisions  enough  of  any  kind 
to  support  themselves? — A.  Butter  and  meat,  with  the  exception  of 
pork.    Fishermen  use  a  great  deal  of  pork. 

Q.  If  you  did  not  have  provisions  imported  from  abroad,  would  your 
people  be  kept  from  starving  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  think  so. 

Q.  See  whether  this  was  true  in  1871: 

The  inhabitants  and  fishermen  of  the  Magdalen  Islands  were  an  nsnal  permitted  to 
catch  herring  for  their  own  use  when  foreign  fishermen  allowed  them  to  do  so  in  their 
seines  and  supplied  them  with  salt  to  cure  them.  It  is  a  matter  of  wonder  as  well  as 
regret  that  this  popnlatiou,  which,  iu  other  matters,  is  full  of  energy  to  encounter  the 
bardships  and  perils  of  the  sea,  and  marked  with  other  good  qualities,  should  be  so 
remiss  when  their  own  welfare  and  progress  are  concerned.  Herring  is  the  greatest 
«uurce  of  the  w.iters  surrounding  the  Magdalen  Islands ;  it  is  upon  this  product  the 
iuliabitants  mostly  rely  for  their  winter  supplies.  Still,  strange  to  say,  for  the  last 
M.\ty  years  they  have  not  yet  succeeded  iu  tishing  for  themselves,  being  entirely  de- 
|)emleiit  on  the  kindness  of  mere  strangers  for  the  principal  article  of  food.  In  vain 
ilotbey  witness  the  abundance  of  food  which  a  kind  Providence  brings  to  their  very 
iloorg;  in  vain,  too,  they,  every  season,  see  strangers  come  from  distances  of  500  miles, 
or  more,  to  reap  this  rich  harvest  and  pocket  large  profits ;  nothing  moves  them. 
Should  you  try  to  give  them  encouragement  and  advise  them  to  form  partnerships  by 
dubbing  thirty  or  forty  together,  and  thus  procure  seines  and  salt,  and  catch  the  fish, 
.iml  after  taking  their  own  supply  sell  all  the  balance  to  foreign  traders  who  would  only 
be  too  happy  to  buy  tiieai,  your  kind  intentions  are  met  with  the  most  tlimsy  objec- 
tions. It  is,  therefore,  no  wonder  that  they  have  remained  what  they  were  si.Kty  years 
ago.  Tliey  give  you  their  own  reasons  to  account  for  their  poverty  ;  but  the  more  I 
eeeufthem  the  morel  am  convinced  that  this  poverty  must  be  traced  to  other  causes. 

Is  that  a  just  account  of  the  people  of  your  island  I — A.  Of  some  of 
them. 

Q.  Is  that  a  just  account  of  the  state  of  your  people? — A.  If  you 
look  further  on  you  will  see  the  exports,  even  oats  and  grain. 

Q.  Is  it  aju.st  account  of  the  state  of  the  people  in  1871  ? — A.  I  say 
it  is  not,  because  although  the  people  are  indolout — a  great  many  of  the 
French  people — nevertheless,  I  think  if  we  were  thrown,  of  necessity, 
oil  our  own  resources,  we  could  grow  sufficient  to  keep  the  whole.  There 
are  78,(100  acres  of  land  to  support  4,000  people. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  that  is  an  unjust  account  ? — A.  It  is  an  account 
from  superflclal  observation  ;  from  an  idea  the  writer  has  had. 

Q.  Try  1871. — A.  Government  report  says : 

Itookoi^casion,  in  my  last  report,  to  allude  to  the  little  foretho\ight  evinced  by  t!ie 
islamlBi's  in  providing  means  for  successfully  prosecuting  the  herring  lishery,  up'n 
^liich  they  mostly  depend  for  the  support  of  themselves  and  their  families  when  the 
other  fisheries  or  the  harvests  fail;  but  never  was  that  improvidence  of  the  future 
Kiore  dourly  seen  than  during  the  past  year,  and  never  was  it  followed  by  such  ilisas- 
troiis  results  up  to  this  year.  Only  a  few  of  the  most  prudent  and  enterprising  of  the 
|)HherniHu  bad  suflicient  forethought  to  secure  previously  the  salt  required  for  tlie  cur- 
Hnf  their  lish,  the  remainder  depended  upon  the  local  merchants  and  strangers  for 
twir  supply  of  this  article.    But  when  salt  arrived  too  late  at  the  stores,  or  the  foreign 


'it 

i 

i 


488 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


fishermen  had  no  need  of  the  services  of  the  islanders,  their  position  became  rather 

Erecarious.  It  happened  thas  this  year.  For  several  years  past  the  owners  of  foreign 
shing  vessels  used  to  repair  to  the  island  with  about  half  the  number  of  men  required 
to  secure  a  prompt  cargo,  engaging  fishermen  from  the  island  to  help  them.  The  latter 
secured  salt  in  payment  for  their  services,  and  were  enabled  to  secure  some  fish  for 
their  own  use,  if  the  fishery  was  not  over.  They  frequeutiy  took  advantage  of  the 
foreigners  and  overcharged  them,  in  consequence  of  which  foreign  vessels  b*>)raii  to 
make  their  voyages  with  full  complements  of  men  ;  this  year  especially  every  schooner 
from  abroad  was  manned  with  a  com]>lete  crew,  and  for  want  of  salt  the  islimilers 
were  unable  to  take  advantage  of  the  splendid  run  of  tisb,  while  the  limited  quantity 
which  was  pickled  was  prepared  in  a  bad  condition.  Several  of  these  ])uor  fisLermeu, 
unable  to  procure  the  necessary  salt  to  preserve  their  winter's  supply  offish,  bavo  beeti 
seen  gathering  the  pickle  flowing  from  the  vessels'  pumps,  and  with  this  stuff  puck 
away  the  fish  recinired  for  the  sustenance  of  themselves  and  their  families  f'ortheverv 
lung  winter.  One  can  imagine  from  this  in  what  a  state  of  destitution  these  people 
will  be  next  spring. 

Q.  Is  that  correct  I — A.  I  never  knew  any  person  die  of  starvation 
there. 

Q.  The  government  sent  a  schooner  there  that  very  year  laden  witli 
provisions? — A.  We  have  always  a  stock  of  provisions  during  the 
winter. 

Q.  Did  not  the  Province  of  Quebec  subscribe  a  sum  of  money  and 
send  a  load  of  provisions  in  a  ~overnment  steamer  to  keep  your  people 
from  starving  ? — A.  Two  yeurs  ago  it  was  reported  at  tiie  very  close  of 
the  season,  when  navigation  was  closing  and  ice  was  forming,  that  the 
■whole  of  onr  fishing  fleet,  twelve  vessels,  and  others,  hjid  been  lost  off 
Cape  Breton.  Application  was  made  to  the  Government  of  Quebec, 
and  they  voted  a  sum  of  money,  and  the  Federal  Government  sent  pro- 
visions. They  supposed  the  statement  was  a  fact.  It  was  not  a  tact,. 
for  only  three  or  four  were  lost.  The  instructions  were  that  those  who 
had  lost  flour  and  could  not  afford  to  pay  for  it  were  to  receive  it  {iiatis, 
and  others  were  to  pay  for  it.  A  portion  of  it  remains  still  not  disposed 
of.  There  was  a  great  quantity  of  provisions  that  year,  quite  sufficient 
to  supply  the  people  of  the  island. 

Q.  You  do  raise  enough,  in  spite  of  what  the  reports  state,  to  support 
yourselves! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  to  export  oats? — A.  Yes,  we  export  oats  almost  every  year. 
Some  of  the  farmers  milk  as  many  as  50  or  30  cows.  You  can  find  as 
good  grazing  land  as  you  can  imagine.  There  are  78,000  acres  of  land, 
and  half  of  it  is  in  a  good  state  of  cultivation.  There  is  excellent  wheat, 
barley,  and  potatoes  in  abundance.  The  people  are  more  in  the  habit 
of  carrying  on  fishing  than  of  cultivating  the  land.  The  French  Cana- 
dians have  been  brought  up  to  fishing  and  won't  cultivate  the  land. 

No.  14. 


Monday,  August  13,  1877. 

The  conference  met. 

George  Mackenzie,  of  New  London,  Prince  Edward  Island,  fisher- 
man,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
\roru  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  How  long  have  you  resided  at  New  London,  in  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island  ! — Answer.  All  my  lifetime. 

Q.  Have  you  been  engaged  in  the  fisheries  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  how  long  a  time  ! — A.  For  the  last  forty  years. 

Q.  What  particular  branch  of  the  fisheries  did  you  chiefly  follow  f— 
A.  The  mackerel  fishery. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


489 


Q.  Go  back  to  the  year  1840.  How  did  you  fish  then  I — A.  I  fished 
in  a  vessel  tbeu,  in  my  own  vessel. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  fished  in  American  vessels  ? — A.  No,  sir;  except  for 
a  few  days. 

Q.  You  have  always  fished  in  British  bottoms  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  you  give  up  that  kind  of  fishing  f — A.  I  gave  up  vessel 
fishing  about  six  years  ago.  Since  that  I  have  prosecuted  the  fisheries 
with  boats. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  your  vessel? — A.  First  and  foremost  I 
fished  in  my  own  vessel  of  34  tons ;  latterly,  in  a  vessel  of  53  or  54  tons. 

Q.  The  first  was  a  smaller  one  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  a  larger  one  ? — A.  About  twelve  years  ago  I 
got  one  of  54  tons. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  describe  the  places  where  you  took 
your  catches!  What  time  would  you  begin  ? — A.  I  used  to  go  out  when 
the  mackerel  were  fat.  Some  years  I  would  go  when  they  were  poor, 
in  June ;  but  generally  the  mackerel  get  good  about  the  first  of  August. 
I  would  go  out  at  that  time  and  commence  from  our  own  shores.  Then 
I  would  go  around  theNorth  Gape,  and  over  to  Escuminac,  fromthatalong 
the  west  shore  to  Miscou,  then  up  the  Bay  Chaleurs.  if  we  would  nob 
find  them  plenty,  we  would  go  down  the  north  side  of  Gasp6  and  up 
to  Seven  Islands.  By  that  time  we  would  perhaps  have  a  fair  catch 
and  return,  catching  all  the  time.    We  would  return  to  East  Point. 

Q.  Did  you  go  along  the  shores  of  Cape  Breton  at  all  ? — A.  Very  sel- 
dom. We  would  go  about  the  1st  of  September  along  the  shore  there; 
but  we  used  to  find  it  rough  and  did  not  care  much  about  fishing  there. 
We  would,  perhaps,  lose  our  vessel.  We  would  return,  stopping  a  while 
at  Georgetown,  and  go  up  twenty  or  thirty  miles,  up  the  island,  with 
the  fleet  sometimes. 

Q.  During  these  years  did  you  fish  in  company  with  the  American 
fleet? — A.  Yes;  always  in  company  with  them. 

Q.  Is  the  mode  of  fishing  along  Prince  Edward  Island  the  same  as  at 
Seven  Islands  ? — A.  No.  At  Seven  Islands  they  could  not  do  anything 
out  in  deep  water ;  the  tide  is  too  strong.  Down  the  southern  side  of 
the  St.  Lawrence  it  is  the  same  way. 

Q.  From  Bic  down  how  would  you  have  to  fish  ? — A.  We  would  have  to 
be  very  close  in,  moored  to  the  shore. 

Q.  And  was  that  the  practice  adopted  by  the  American  vessels  too? — 
A.  Yes ;  they  must  fish  along  the  shore.  That  is  when  the  wind  is  off 
the  land. 

Q.  Was  that  a  good  fishing  ground  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  got  the  best  mack- 
erel tliere. 

Q.  What  is  the  reason  for  the  mackerel  keeping  close  to  the  shore  ? — 
A.  The  feed,  I  suppose.  The  shrimps  that  grcv.  on  the  rocks,  and 
other  little  insects,  and  the  lantz  fish.  That  is  what  we  think  takes 
theili  inshore. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  much  down  the  Bay  Chaleurs? — A.  Yes;  the  most 
tishiufj;  I  have  done  has  been  about  the  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Now,  I  want  to  ask  you  with  reference  to  that  bay.  Describe,  if 
you  please,  whereabouts  the  best  fishing  grounds  in  the  bay  are,  and 
where  the  fish  are  taken. — A.  When  the  wind  was  southerly  the  fish 
were  taken  from  Miscou  to  Caraquette,  along  that  shore  about  a  hun- 
dred miles.  When  there  was  a  northeast  wind  they  would  try  the  other 
side  down  to  Bonaventure,  from  Paspebiao  and  all  in  there.  That  is 
the  way  the  fleet  works.    It  depends  upon  the  wind.    They  fish  either 


i 

I 


490 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


along  the  south  or  the  north  shore  of  the  bay,  according  as  the  wind  is 
blowing. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  are  these  fish  taken  ? — A.  We  have  taken 
them  a  mile  from  the  shore.  Sometimes  less,  sometimes  two  miles;  not 
over  two  miles  at  any  time.    The  water  is  deep. 

Q.  Now,  Bay  Chaleurs  is  a  large  bay,  is  it  not  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  is  twenty 
miles  across  at  the  lower  part. 

Q.  In  the  center  of  the  bay  is  the  fishing  good  ? — A.  Sometimes  when 
the  mackerel  are  crossing  or  leaving  there  is  very  good  fishing  about  the 
middle  of  the  bay.    They  then  strike  in  and  do  well  enough. 

Q.  It  is  just  when  they  are  coming  in  or  going  out  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  fish  do  not  remain  there  ? — A.  No.  About  September  you  will 
find  them  sometimes  in  the  center  of  the  bay — that  is,  going  out,  and 
about  the  middle  of  July  coming  in. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  aii  idea  of  the  proportion  of  the 
mackerel  in  that  bay,  taken  in  the  center  or  outside  of  the  liinits  in  the 
bay  ? — A.  The  catch  for  the  season  ?  Not  over  one-third,  if  there  is  that 
itself;  but  when  there  is  a  catch  it  is  a  very  good  one. 

Q.  They  take  them  in  the  center  as  they  are  coming  in  or  going 
out? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  are  they  sure  to  strike  them  ? — A.  Only  sometimes.  We  try 
very  often  and  miss,  but  we  hit  it  sometimes.  We  would  have  to  follow 
the  rest ;  that  is  the  way  we  would  find  the  fish. 

Q.  I  understand  that  the  main  bulk  of  what  is  caught  in  the  bay  is 
taken  around  the  shores  f — A.  Yes.  If  I  took  you  up  I  could  show  them 
to  you  now  all  along  the  shore  quite  plenty.  This  is  the  very  time  they 
are  around  the  shores. 

Q.  After  you  come  out  of  the  Bay  Chaleurs  and  come  down  the  shore 
of  New  Brunswick,  how  is  it  with  reference  to  the  shore  line ;  do  you 
keep  in  ? — A.  Well,  after  the  mackerel  leave  the  Bay  Chaleurs,  part 
goes  down  the  gulf,  but  the  greater  part  strike  from  Miscou  to  the 
island.    We  follow  them  down  the  bight  of  the  island. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  along  the  west  shore  of  New  Brunswick  ?— A. 
Yes ;  mostly  every  season. 

Q.  In  company  with  the  American  fleet? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  distance  from  the  shore  do  they  fish  ? — A.  Right  around 
close  in  from  Miscou  up  to  Miramichi,  off  Escuminac,  and  as  far  as  Kicbi- 
bucto. 

Q.  When  you  make  use  of  the  term  "  close  in,"  what  do  you  mean  !— 
A.  Well,  close  in  if»  one  mile  from  the  shore;  from  that  to  two  miles. 

Q.  Where  did  you  speak  of — from  Bay  Chaleur  to  what  place  f— A. 
To  Miramichi  and  down.  That  is  what  we  call  the  west  shore,  from 
Bichibucto  down  to  Miscou.    We  fish  all  inshore  there  always. 

Q.  Between  Bay  Chaleur  and  Prince  Edward  Island  you  have  Bank 
Oliphant  and  Bradley  Bank  ? — A.  Well,  Bradley  is  off  the  North  Cape. 
On  a  clear  day  you  can  .  /^e  it.    Bank  Oliphant  is  off  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  These  have  been  UMUtioned  as  fishing  grounds  ? — A.  They  used  to 
be  very  good. 

Q.  Of  late  years  have  they  not  f — A.  No;  not  of  late  years.  They 
very  seldom  go  there  now. 

Q.  W^hen  you  come  to  the  Prince  Edward  Island  coast,  just  describe 
the  mode  of  fishing  there. — A.  We  fish  all  inshore.  The  Americans  and 
ourselves  all  fish  inshore.  Sometimes  we  try  off  shore,  of  course.  Some- 
times we  don't  get  them  inshore,  and  we  ruu  off',  but  we  come  back 
again. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


491 


Q.  What  distance  from  the  shore  of  Prince  Edward  Island  are  they 
generally  taken? — A.  Generally  about  two  miles;  from  one  to  two  miles. 

Q.  I  will  not  take  you  to  Cape  Breton,  as  you  seldom  go  there.  Do 
vou  know  anything  about  the  mode  of  tishing  there? — A.  All  the  fish- 
ing we  ever  did  was  close  to  the  shore,  as  close  as  we  could  get,  about 
Margaree,  Cheticamp,  and  Port  Hood.  We  would  dodge  in  there  in 
thp  fall  of  the  year.  We  would  not  want  to  run  off"  very  far,  as  we  would 
want  to  get  back  at  night,  and  the  days  were  short.  Any  flshiug  I  ever 
did  there  was  that  way,  and  all  hands  were  alike.  The  large  vessels 
would  stay  out  perhaps,  but  before  morning  they  would  be  in. 

Q,  Are  any  fish  down  on  the  Cape  Breton  shore  taken  outside  ? — A. 
Sometimes  there  is  some.    Not  very  often. 

Q.  I  understand  that  you  continued  to  fish  in  your  vessels  up  to  eight 
years  ago  f— A.  Six  years  ago. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  an  idea  of  the  average  number  of  the  American 
fleet  engaged  in  fishing  there  ? — A.  Some  years,  when  the  fishing  was 
good,  there  would  be  500  sail,  some  years  only  about  400.  It  has  dimin- 
isbed  greatly  within  the  last  four  years.  For  about  twenty  years  of  my 
experience  there  would  be  an  average  of  five  hundred  sail. 

Q.  Well,  now,  I  want  you  to  give  the  Commission  an  idea  of  the  result 
of  your  own  catches,  taken  in  your  vessel.  What  was  the  number  of 
barrels  that  you  caught  every  year  ? — A.  Well,  1  used  not  to  stay  out 
the  whole  season.  I  only  staid  while  the  mackerel  were  fat,  and  I 
used  to  take  about  400  or  500  barrels.  Either  one  end  of  the  season  or 
the  otber  there  would  be  something  better  to  do,  and  I  did  not  fish, 
therefore,  the  whole  season.  Some  years,  however,  I  did  fish  the  whole 
season.  We  took  COO  barrels  one  year.  But  we  are  never  equipped  as 
well  as  they  are.  They  have  better  bait,  better  material,  and  better 
vessels. 

Q.  You  did  not  follow  fishing  the  whole  season  through  ? — A.  Some 
years  we  did  and  some  years  we  did  not.  The  average  catch  would  be 
400  barrels. 

Q.  What  is  the  size  of  your  vessel  ? — A.  Fifty-four  tons. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  cost  of  that  vessel  aufl  outfit  for  the  season  ? — 
A.  Our  cost  would  be  about  $2,000,  for  the  season. 

Q.  That  includes  the  vessel  ? — A.  Our  outfit  would  be  that  without 
the  vessel. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  to  include  the  cost  of  the  vessel  ? — A.  We  allow 
the  vessel  nothing  then.  Our  outfits  and  the  pay  of  the  men,  and  all 
that,  would  come  to  about  $2,000,  including  the  salt,  barrels,  and  pro- 
visions. 

Q.  That  includes  the  pay  of  the  men  and  their  living  for  the  season  ? 
—A.  Yes.    That  would  be  when  we  were  out  for  a  whole  season. 

Q.  Taking  the  seasons  you  were  out  as  full  seasons,  what  would  be 
the  average  catch  f— A.  About  five  hundred  barrels. 

Q.  About  500  for  the  full  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  did  you  find  it  a  reasonably  profitable  investment! — A.  We 
did  very  well  at  that. 

Q.  Where  di<l  you  ship  your  fish  ? — A.  We  generally  sold  them  at 
home  on  the  island  to  speculators. 

Q.  What  price  did  you  get? — A.  We  got  sometimes  $10  and  some- 
times $12.50.  They  were  good  mackerel.  We  generally  used  to  have 
good  mackerel. 

Q.  Tbat  would  make  it  a  pretty  profitable  speculation  ?  (and  I  believe 
Captain  Mackenzie  has  succeeded  pretty  fairly.) — A.  Well,  we  would 
lose  sometimes,  too. 


M 


K 


m 


492 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Well,  captain,  while  you  were  fishing  in  yonr  vessel  in  among  the 
American  fleet,  were  you  enabled  to  form  any  idea  of  the  average  catcli 
of  that  fleet  ? — A.  Not  from  ourselves.  We  generally  used  to  hear  what 
they  would  catch.  They  used  to  be  in  our  ports,  and  they  have  ofteu 
told  rae  what  they  would  catch.  I  could  not  say  from  Ashing  on  board 
their  vessels. 

Q.  We  understand  your  means  of  information.  Were  you  in  constant 
intercourse  with  the  Americans? — A.  Yes,  every  day. 

Q.  Speaking  with  your  means  of  information,  at  what  do  you  place 
the  average  catch  of  the  Americans  ? — A.  I  should  say  there  had  been 
an  average  catch  (except  for  the  past  two  or  three  years)  of  about  seven 
hundred  barrels.  £  think  that  would  be  under  what  they  would  aver- 
age. 

Q.  For  the  last  three  years,  I  understand  you  to  say  the  average  has 
not  been  up  to  that! — A.  O,  no.  i»    >4' 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  a  reason  for  that?  Is  there  <iny- 
thing  in  the  course  the  mackerel  have  taken  or  the  habits  of  the  fish  f— 
A.  I  think  they  frequented  the  shore  more.  There  were  so  many  vessels 
that  there  were  not  enough  flea  to  pay  them  for  coming  in.  TUe  tish 
was  scarcer. 

Q.  Will  you  repeat  your  answer? — A.  You  ask  me  what  was  the  rea- 
son the  average  was  not  so  high  of  late  years,  whether  the  fish  was  not 
so  plenty,  or  whether  they  took  another  course  ? 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  understood  you  to  say  the  ttsh  was  not  so  plenty,  and 
that  i^  did  not  pay  them  so  well  to  come  in. — A.  I  think  the  fislii  were 
not  so  plenty.  1  think  they  cut  them  up  and  tora  them  up  a  good  deal 
with  so  many  vessels. 

Q.  During  the  last  three  or  four  years,  and  the  three  or  four  years 
previously,  you  have  followed  fishing? — A.  Yes;  I.  have  followed  fhe 
fishing  steadily. 

Q.  Have  you  found  the  fish  scarce  during  those  times  ? — A.  Sometimes 
pretty  scarce ;  but  at  other  times  they  were  very  good.  Year  before 
last  they  were  scarce,  but  last  year  they  were  good,  and  this  year,  up  to 
this  time,  they  have  been  very  good  close  to  the  shore. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  fish  have  been  keeping  closer  to 
the  shore  than  formerly  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  think  so. 

Q.  How  many  years  back  have  you  noticed  that  ? — A.  I  have  noticed 
it  for  the  last  four  years.  £  do  not  think  there  are  any  fish  in  deep 
water;  very  few,  if  any;  not  that  I  could  find  out. 

Q.  Why  did  you  abandon  vessel-fishing  and  take  up  the  boat-fishing?— 
A.  Finding  that  the  fish  trimmed  the  shore  more  closely  than  they  evei 
did  before,  the  boats  began  to  feed  them  and  they  came  back  to  the 
same  places  again  where  they  were  fed  up  in  previous  years,  and  they  kept 
continually  coming  the  same  way.  They  seem  plenty  along  shore,  and 
come  when  they  are  fed.  In  Kustico  they  would  formerly  catch  good 
hauls,  when  we  would  not  get  any ;  now  we  are  as  far  advanced  in  the 
boat  line  and  in  feeding  them  as  they  are,  and  we  get  plenty.  We  get 
them  close  in  now,  about  a  mile  from  the  stage. 

Q.  How  many  boats  have  you  ? — A.  We  have  eight  boats  fishing  of 
our  own,  and  I  don't  know  how  many  more  fishing  for  us. 

Q.  I  want  the  Commission  to  have  an  idea  of  the  size  of  those  boats 
and  the  expense  of  their  equipment.  What  would  one  cost  ? — A.  Two 
hundred  dollars. 

Q.  You  have  bait  of  your  own  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  there  many  boats  of  that  kind  in  New  London  Harbor !— A. 
About  150. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


493 


Q.  What  is  the  average  catch  of  your  boats  for  the  season  f — A.  One 
haudreil  barrels  per  boat. 

Q.  Do  you  extend  that  to  the  New  London  Harbor  generally? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Has  that  been  the  case  for  some  years  ? — A.  It  has,  ever  since  we 
cominenced,  since  we  have  got  boats  fitted  up  in  proper  shape. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  there  are  in  Bustico  Harbor  ? — A.  About 
the  same  number,  I  should  say. 

Q.  From  Miminegash  to  Oascumpec  how  many  ? — A.  Four  hundred,  I 
sbouUl  say.    I  have  been  sailing  around  there. 

Q.  That  does  not  include  Kew  London  and  Bustico? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  the  numbers  to  the  eastward  ? — A.  I 
don't  know  anything  about  that. 

Q.  These  boats  take  their  fish  within  a  mile  from  the  shore? — A.  We 
never  go  outside  of  a  mile.  If  we  do  we  have  to  come  in  again.  Last 
Friday  several  of  our  boats  went  out  to  see  whether  there  were  any  to 
catcli  out  there,  but  they  very  soon  came  in  again  to  four  fathoms  of 
water.    They  could  not  get  them  in  seven  fathoms. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fish  are  they  catching  there  now  ? — A.  Splendid  fish. 
A  good  many  of  them  make  mess  mackerel.  They  have  either  fattened 
very  nuickly  or  a  new  shoal  has  come  in. 

Q.  You  mean  that  they  have  fattened  up  since  they  came  there  in  the 
spring  If— A.  Yes.  They  would  not  bite  for  the  last  several  weeks  before 
Friday ;  but  last  Friday  or  Saturday  morning  we  got  good  hauls  of  large 
mackerel. 

Q.  Is  it  the  same  in  Bustico  ? — A.  It  is  the  same  along  the  shores  as 
far  as  we  could  hear. 

Q.  What  takes  the  mackerel  so  close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  The  feed. 

Q.  What  do  they  feed  on  ? — A.  Shrimps  and  small  fry. 

Q.  Are  those  kinds  of  food  found  in  deep  sea  i — A.  I  think  not.  I 
don't  know.  I  never  saw  any  coming  up  on  anything  that  we  put  out. 
There  must  be  this  food  in  the  shoal  water,  for  we  find  it  in  them. 

Q.  Have  you  found  boat-fishing  pretty  profitable? — A.  Yes,  sir. 
Every  one  does  not.  Some  make  mistakes,  and  don't  find  it  profitable. 
They  don't  manage  right,  or  somdthing.     Most  of  them  do. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  the  general  mode  of-  fishing  pursued  by  the 
Americans.  Do  you  remember  when  the  cruisers  endeavored  to  keep 
them  outside  of  the  limits? — A.  O,  yes.  We  have  had  them  about 
several  times.  We  were  bothered  with  them  a  good  deal.  When  we 
got  well  under  way  they  used  to  come  driving  the  Americans  off,  but  we 
wonld  stand  our  ground. 

Q.  What  was  the  eft'eot  of  those  endeavors?  Did  they  succeed  in  keep- 
ing the  Americans  out? — A.  Not  much.  Captain  Caruachy,  I  think  it 
was,  came  aboard  one  time.  There  was  then  a  fleet  fishing  on  Cara- 
quette  Bank.  When  they  saw  the  smoke  the  Americans  put  off  towards 
Gaspe.  He  did  not  say  anything.  I  gave  him  my  lines  and  he  soon 
got  himself  speckled  over  with  mackerel  scales.  He  said,  "  Where 
have  those  fellows  gone  ?"  I  said,  "  Y^ou  have  frightened  them  away." 
He  said,  "  I  would  not  hurt  them."  He  had  seven  men  with  him,  and 
they  bothered  us  a  good  deal.    They  took  lines,  but  they  could  not  fish. 

Q.  Did  the  cruisers  succeed  ? — A.  Not  at  all.  As  soon  as  ever  they 
passed  along,  the  vessels  came  right  in  again  and  fished  just  as  eagerly, 
and  more  eagerly  than  if  they  had  never  been  disturbed. 

Q.  Supposing  we  could  keep  them  out,  what  would  be  the  effect  on 
the  American  fleet,  in  your  opinion;  would  they  pursue  the  deep-sea 
Ashing  ?— A.  They  would  not  come  there  at  all.  Why,  what  would  be 
the  use  1    They  would  not  get  any  fish  outside,  not  in  my  experience. 


ill 


m 


494 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


m 


I  could  never  catch  any.    What  woald  be  the  use  of  them  comiDg 
seeking  fish  when  there  were  none  f 

Q.  Have  you  ever  conversed  with  them  ? — A.  Yes,  for  hours.  They 
have  come,  a  dozen  of  them,  and  stopped  with  me  over  Sabbath  and 
gone  away  Monday  morning. 

Q.  What  is  their  opinion  with  respect  to  our  fisheries — the  qiuuititv 
of  fish  taken  within  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  I  never  heard  them  say 
much  about  it,  but  I  have  heard  them  say  that  they  would  not  come  in 
the  bay  if  they  would  not  be  allowed  to  fish  where  they  pleased  the 
next  year.  But  perhaps  next  year  they  would  be  in  the  same  as  ever. 
I  have  heard  them  say,  "  We  would  not  come  in  unless  we  could  fish 
where  we  wanted  to  catch  them."  Still  they  would  come.  I  would  see 
the  same  captain  there  next  year  who  said  that. 

Q.  You  have  given  me  the  average  number,  in  your  opinion,  of  the 
American  fleet,  and  their  opinion  of  the  average  catch  for  a  number  of 
years.  I  want  to  ask  you  your  opinion  as  to  what  proportion  of  the 
catch  taken  by  the  American  fleet  is  within  and  what  proportion  is  be 
yond  the  three  miles  from  shore  ? — A.  From  their  own  statements  they 
would  take  two-thirds  inside,  and  the  other  third  too,  pretty  nearly, 
from  their  own  statement.  Some  do  fish  in  deep  water  when  the  iish  is 
plenty. 

Q.  On  those  banks  I — A.  In  deep  water. 

Q.  Some  catches  have  been  taken  ! — A.  Yes,  there  have  been  a  few 
catches.  Some  skippers  would  sooner  go  there  and  fish  if  they  did  not 
get  any  fish  than  run  the  risk. 

Q.  And  they  did  get  a  few  If — A.  Some  skippers  got  all  they  caught 
in  deep  water. 

Q.  There  have  been  cases  when  a  vessel  has  taken  a  cargo  in  deep 
water  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  But  taking  the  proportion  yon  think  that  two-thirds  are  taken  iu- 
side  and  nearly  the  other  third  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  over  two-thirds  of  the  catch  of  the  whole  fleet 
have  been  taken  within  the  limit  ? — A.  Yes,  always.  There  would  not 
be  one  vessel  out  of  twenty  that  would  take  a  cargo  in  deep  water. 
Perhaps  about  one  vessel  out  of  twenty.  They  would  be  large  ones  that 
would  do  that. 

Q.  There  could  be  no  doubt  about  that  matter  ? — A.  No.  I  have  been 
among  them  all  my  life-time,  although  I  never  fished  on  board  them. 

Q.  I  understand  that  the  better  class  of  mackerel  are  taken  iu  August 
or  later  on  in  the  fall  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  with  reference  to  this  class  of  fish,  are  they  taken  closer  hi 
to  the  shore  than  the  smaller  fish  or  farther  out  ? — A.  They  are  taken 
in  right  along  the  shore. 

Q.  Then  the  big  ones  are  taken  in  the  same  places  as  the  small  ouesf- 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  I  understood  that  the  small  ones  kept  off  the  shore  ?— A.  The 
small  ones,  that  are  not  fit  for  catching,  keep  off  the  shore,  and  do  not 
come  in  until  it  is  late  in  September.    They  do  not  bother  us  until  then. 

Q.  The  big  mackerel  keep  inshore  If — A.  Yes.  The  small  ones  gro^ 
up  somewhere  on  the  Banks,  I  believe,  and  they  never  come  in  until 
from  the  middle  to  the  last  of  September.  They  are  then  about  three 
inches  long,  some  of  them  not  that  length.  Next  year  they  will  be  a 
little  larger,  perhaps  six  inches  long.  These  will  appear  in  the  same 
way,  late  in  the  season.  I  am  doubtful  if  they  come  in  until  they  are 
from  nine  inches  to  a  foot.    They  may  not  come  in  again  for  a  couple  of 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


495 


years,  or  perhaps  never.    I  am  not  aware  that  they  do.    We  are  very 
geldotu  troubled  with  tinkers — that  is,  mackerel  about  six  inches  long. 

Q.  Is  it  only  when  the  mackerel  are  full  size  that  they  come  inshore  1! — 
A.  Yes ;  we  are  never  bothered  with  anything  inshore  but  good  mack- 
erel, until  late  in  the  season. 

Q.  Now,  there  are  the  Magdalen  Islands ;  are  they  a  good  flshing- 
grouud?— A.  Sometimes;  formerly,  when  the  mackerel  were  plonty,  it 
was  a  very  good  fishing-ground.  There  are  a  considerable  number  of 
macliercl  there  now. 

Q.  Is  it  as  good  as  the  other  places  you  have  mentioned  f — A.  When 
they  strike  coming  in  or  going  out  it  is  a  good  fishery. 

Q.  Ho'   long  do  the  fish  last  there  ? — A.  About  three  weeks. 

Q.  Have  you  caught  much  of  your  fish  there? — A.  Sometimes  we 
would  blow  oft"  with  a  west  wind  ofl:'  our  own  shores  and  take  shelter  there, 
and  when  the  wind  would  die  out  we  would  get  a  catch.  The  Ameri- 
cans would  be  there  in  hundreds.    I  have  seen  Pleasant  Bay  full. 

Q.  Some  of  the  witnesses  have  spoken  of  the  high  winds  preventing 
a  successful  fishery  I — A.  Yes ;  it  is  a  very  windy  hole. 

Q.  Has  that  any  effect  upon  the  fishery  there? — A.  Well,  if  it  were 
not  for  the  good  shelter  in  Pleasant  Bay  I  don't  know  that  we  could 
stay  there  at  all.  It  is  a  good  fishing-ground  provided  there  is  good 
shelter. 

Q.  But  in  the  absence  of  good  shelter? — A.  That  spoils  the  fishing. 

Q.  Taking  it  as  it  stands,  are  the  mackerel  fisheries  there  resorted  to 
to  the  same  extent  as  the  fisheries  around  Prince  Edward  Island,  Cape 
Breton,  and  Bay  Chaleurs  ? — A.  No,  not  at  all.  Next  month  is  the 
month  around  the  Magdaleas.    The  fish  will  be  going  down. 

Q.  This  season,  you  say,  is  a  good  season  ? — A.  So  far  it  has  been. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  any  of  the  American  fleet  around  your  harbor  of 
New  London  ? — A.  Yes ;  there  were  a  good  many  that  came  in  week 
before  last — large  vessels. 

Q.  Can  you  point  to  New  London  ? — A.  It  is  about  the  middle  of  the 
island;  right  in  the  bend  of  the  island.  It  is  as  near  the  middle  as  it 
can  be,  on  the  north  side.  A  northeast  wind  blows  directly  into  the 
harbor.  A  southwest  wind  blows  directly  out.  A  good  many  large 
vessels  have  gone  up — all  seiners. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  with  respect  to  that  seining,  what  efl:ect  it  has 
upon  the  fisheries  ? — A.  O,  that  is  part  of  a  branch  that  would  soon 
clear  out  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence. 

Q.  Is  it  destructive  f — A.  Yes,  because  very  often  they  get  a  haul 
and  lose  them,  that  is,  they  lose  one-half  of  them  before  they  get  them 
in.  Perhaps  they  lose,  in  some  cases,  the  whole  of  them.  If  the  fish 
once  get  in  the  seines  the>  clear  out. 

Q.  A  large  proportion  of  them  are  killed  ? — A.  Yes,  sir.  They  take 
everything,  young  and  old,  mixed. 

Q.  Can  they  seine  in  shallow  water  as  well  as  in  deep  water  ? — A. 
Yes.  I  was  speaking  to  the  captain  of  the  Eastern  Queen.  He  has  a 
shallow  seine.  He  got  a  haul  down  at  Pomquet  Island.  About  three 
weeks  ago  he  was  inquiring  if  there  was  much  chance,  and  I  told  him 
they  were  done  schooling.    He  took  100  barrels. 

Q.  Close  in  f — A.  It  must  have  been  close  in.  There  was  no  more 
schooling,  and  he  went  up  to  Bay  Chaleurs.    He  was  not  long  gone. 

Q.  Suppose  the  fishery  was  prosecuted  with  seines  for  some  years,  how 
would  it  leave  you  ?— A.  It  would  leave  us  without  fish.  It  would  soon 
take  them  off.  They  were  a  little  too  late  in  the  case  I  have  mentioned. 
1  expect  they  heard  they  were  schooling  there,  but  they  were  done  before 


'Hi 


496 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


they  camo.  I  am  speaking  now  of  New  Loudon,  and  all  along  the  shore 
from  North  Cape  to  West  Point.  They  were  schooling  in  every  direc- 
tion along  there.  If  the  Americans  had  happened  to  hit  in  about  that 
time  they  would  have  made  a  good  haul. 

Q.  How  would  it  have  been  for  you  ? — A.  They  would  have  soon  driven 
the  fish  off. 

Q.  As  a  rule,  are  you  fond  of  seeing  the  Americans? — A.  Well,  we 
never  say  anything  against  them,  but  we  would  not  like  to  see  thein 
seining  if  we  could  help  it. 

Q.  Is  their  presence  a  benefit  to  the  boats  or  not! — A.  No;  they  are 
right  the  opjjosite.  We  don't  like  to  see  them  come  at  all.  They  trouble 
us  a  good  deal.  But  our  boats  have  now  got  so  numerous  that  \vht>n  an 
American  gets  the  fish  they  get  around  him  too.  We  had  no  market 
for  our  fish  formerly,  and  did  not  care  how  many  of  them  came,  but  now 
that  we  send  our  fish  to  the  States  it  is  difi'erent.  We  have  our  own 
merchants  to  receive  them.  If  we  were  prohibited  now,  that  would  knock 
us  up. 

Q.  Will  you  please  repeat  that  answer  ? — A.  We  do  well  enough  now 
by  sending  our  fish  to  the  United  States,  but  if  we  were  prevented  by 
them  coming  seining  and  taking  them  away,  that  would  knock  as  up. 
That  is  what  I  said,  I  think. 

Q.  Supposing  you  kept  them  out,  or  that  the  British  Government 
kept  them  out  beyond  the  limits  altogether,  and  you  had  the  three  miles 
from  shore  all  to  yourselves,  would  you  care  about  the  duty  then  ?— A. 
No,  we  would  not.  I  think  we  would  have  it  all  to  ourselves.  Tbey 
would  soon  catch  all  the  fish  belonging  to  themselves,  and  if  they  were 
kept  out  altogether  beyond  the  three-mile  limit  we  would  be  all  right 
enough.    We  would  continue  fishing. 

Q.  How  do  you  send  the  fish  on  ? — A.  By  packet  to  Charlottetown, 
then  by  the  American  steamer  to  Boston.  Sometimes  we  send  thera  to 
Shediac.    Last  fall  we  sent  them  to  Shediac. 

Q.  With  respect  to  the  practice  generally  prevailing  in  most  American 
vessels  of  cleaning  the  fish  on  deck,  and  throwing  the  offal  over,  what 
is  your  experience  as  a  practical  fisherman  of  the  effect  of  that  ?— A.  1 
would  not  throw  it  over  if  I  could  do  anything  else,  because  I  thiuk  it 
destroys  the  fish.  It  hurts  them  a  good  deal.  When  tliere  used  to  be 
ofi'al  thrown  over  it  drove  them  away.  I  think  it  hurts  the  fish  a  good 
deal  throwing  so  much  offal  overboard,  but  it  can't  be  helped.  You  must 
do  it.    You  have  no  place  to  put  it. 

Q.  Your  boats  do  not  do  it  ? — A.  O,  no.  They  would  not  clean  the 
fish  on  the  grounds  for  anything.    They  clean  them  on  shore. 

Q.  And  your  experience  has  been  tliat  when  the  fish  are  cleaned  on 
deck  and  the  offal  thrown  over,  the  fish  are  destroyed  ? — A.  It  hurts  the 
fish.  I  do  not  know  whether  they  do  not  like  it  and  hunt  up  clear 
waters,  or  whether  it  kills  them  ;  I  do  not  know.  But  it  hurts  the  grounds 
exceedingly.  In  a  few  days  it  drives  them  all  off.  There  is  a  great  ileal 
of  blood  in  the  mackerel.  There  is  no  fish  that  has  so  much  according 
to  its  size. 

Q.  The  right  to  transship  their  cargo,  is  that  valued  bv  the  Ameri 
can  fishermen — or  is  it  of  much  value  ? — A.  I  would  say  it  was  when 
the  fish  was  in,  or  there  were  good  prospects  for  fish.  They  used  to  land 
them  at  Ganseau  and  it  would  save  them  a  trip.  They  get  their  litout 
as  cheap  or  cheaper  than  they  could  in  the  United  States.  I  never  knew 
that  they  were  prevented  from  transshipping.    I  always  saw  them  do  it. 

Q.  Of  late  years?— A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


497 


Q.  Tbere  was  a  time  wbeu  they  had  no  right  to  do  it.  I  suppose  you 
are  awnre  of  that  f — A.  I  don't  know,  but  I  have  seen  them  do  it. 

Q.  Well,  as  an  actual  fact,  without  regard  to  the  right  to  do  so,  is  that 
trausshipping  a  benefit  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  should  say  so. 

Q.  Is  it  so  looked  upon  by  them  ? — A.  Yes ;  if  it  was  not,  they  would 
not  do  it. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  give  some  idea  of  what  value  it  is.— A.  Well,  I 
could  not  say  that.  They  might  get  a  cargo  while  they  were  going 
home.  I  have  beard  them  say  that  themselves.  They  used  to  run  into 
Cbarlottetown,  a  good  many  of  them,  and  send  off  their  fish.  If  they 
(lid  not  find  it  a  benefit  they  would  not  do  it. 

Q.  No,  I  suppose  not.  They  are  generally  pretty  shrewd  men,  the 
American  fishermen  ? — A.  If  they  were  not  they  had  no  business  in  the 
bay  wben  the  cutters  were  in. 

Q.  You  never  fished  with  them  1 — A.  No. 

(j.  I  do  not  know  whether  you  have  been  engaged  to  any  extent  iu 
the  cod  fishing.    Have  you  f — A.  No ;  not  iu  the  Labrador  cod  fishery. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  pursue  that  fishery  at  all  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  To  any  extent  ? — A.  They  used  to  largely.  I  can't  say  for  the  last 
two  years.  They  used  to  go  to  Labrador,  bank  fishing.  In  the  spring 
a  good  many  come  down  to  Cape  North  and  between  that  and  Bradley 
Bank. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  bait  around  the  coasts  of  the  island  ? — A.  Yes. 

l].  You  mean  yourself? — A.  I  go  for  them  myself.  I  charter  a  small 
vessel  and  load  it. 

Q.  Where  are  the  cod  caught  about  the  L;ibrador  coast  ? — A.  All 
around  the  shore — close  in  to  the  shore. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  it  I — A.  Bight  by  tVe  shore;  fast  by  the 
cliSs. 

Q.  You  refer  now  to  codfish? — A.  Yes;  they  could  not  be  caught  any- 
where else.    Iu  the  spring,  tliey  are  all  caught  with  hand-lines. 

Q.  Are  any  cod  caught  outside  in  deep  water? — A.  No,  they  do  not 
try  for  them  outside. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  of  fleet  engaged  in  prosecuting  this  fishery? — 
A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  You  could  not  give  an  approximate  to  the  number? — A.  No;  I 
saw  American  vessels  almost  everywhere  along  the  shore,  but  I  never 
took  count  of  their  number. 

Q.  Does  not  an  American  fleet  fish  on  the  Banks  ? — A.  There  are  the 
40  sail  in  the  spring  of  the  year,  which  I  mentioned  ;  sometimes  there  are 
more  or  less.    I  have  seen  forty  coming  for  bait. 

Q.  Do  they  use  ice  ? — A.  O,  yes.    They  all  do. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  it?— A.  Some  fetch  it  with  them  ;  I  don't  know 
where  they  all  procure  it ;  some  obtain  it  in  Nova  8cotia,  and  others  at 
the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  some  at  Cape  North.  They  could  not  keep 
their  bait  fresh  without  ice.  This  lacking,  the  bait  would  not  last  any 
time.  They  generally  take  two  large  dory  loads  for  bait,  and  they  pay 
81  a  dory  load.    I  have  myself  often  sold  it  to  them. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Two  large  dory  loads  of  what  ?— A.  Of  herring. 
Q.  And  they  pay  $1  a  boat  load  for  it  ?— A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 
Q.  Tbey  are  cheap? — A.  Y'es.  That  is  the  price  as  a  rule. 
charge  more  that  $1  for  a  dory  load. 
32  F 


They  never 


''■'i,J 


M 


498 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  many  barrels  are  tberc  iu  such  a  load  .'—A.  Dories  uie small- 
tbey  will  bold  from  1)  to  VJ  barrels.  ' 

Q.  Tbese  flsh  must  be  very  pleutiful  there  f — A.  Yes,  at  times,  tbey 
are  very  plentiful ;  tbere  is,  tben,  any  quantity  of  tbem. 

Q.  Are  tbere  any  salmon  to  be  found  to  any  extent  around  our  coiists 
in  the  gulf? — A.  Plenty  of  salmon  are  found  around  Miramichi,  audall 
round  tbat  bay,  outside  and  about  Anticosti,  and  also  where  I  Lave 
been  on  the  northwest  coast  of  Newfoundland,  and  all  down  that  coast. 
There  are  very  few  of  tlieni  about  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Leaving  out  Prince  Edward  Island,  salmon  are  found  around  thu 
coast  throughout  the  gulf? — A.  They  are  to  be  seen  around  the  New 
Brunswick  coast  and  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Are  tbey  caught  to  any  exteut  by  the  Americans  ? — A.  I  do  not 
know  that ;  I  cannot  tell. 

Q.  They  are  caught  about  theBayof  Chaleurs?— A.  Yes;  I  Laveseeu 
Americans  coming  down  to  some  parts  of  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrcucebv 
Sbediac,  but  I  cannot  tell  you  whether  it  was  their  intention  to  buy  or 
to  flsh.  Tbey  have  made  inquiries  of  me  when  coming  down  aud  1 
lather  think  tbat  tbey  intended  to  buy.  I  do  not  know  of  any  of  tbem 
catching  these  tisb  there. 

Q.  Captain,  you  have  been  for  forty  years  constantly  engaged  in 
prosecuting  these  fisheries,  and  have  you  ever  gone  to  Americuu  waters 
to  fish  ? — A.  Never. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  kno^i'  a  man  leave  our  gulf  and  go  to  fish  in  Arner- 
can  waters? — A.  Well,  yes.  Tbey  have  stopped  up  there  and  gont  out 
in  the  spring,  ready  to  come  down  with  the  Americans. 

Q.  But  have  you  known  any  Canadians  go  down  there  to  fish  ?— A. 
No;  I  never  knew  any  one  go  from  here  on  his  own  account  to  flsh 
there. 

Q.  You  never  knew  any  one  to  go  tbere  in  British  vessels  ?--A. 
ISeveT. 

Q.  Why  do  not  Canadians  go  and  prosecute  that  fishery?— A.  It 
would  be  no  use  to  go  there  to  fish. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  The  Americans  would  run  us  off. 

Q.  You  would  not  like  to  invest  much  money  in  such  a  venture?— A. 
I  would  not  think  of  doing  it.  I  would  sooner  wait  until  the  fish  come 
up  on  our  coast. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  From  whom  are  those  dory  loads  of  bait,  bought? — A.  From  any- 
body that  will  sell  them ;  they  are  obtained  from  Canadians  sometimes, 
and  as  often  out  of  their  own  schooners  as  any  other  way.  If  tbey  do 
not  take  them  out  of  their  own  seines,  they  secure  them  from  anybody 
they  can. 

Q.  The  Americans  and  you  too  buy  them  ? — A.  We  do  not ;  we  catcli 
them  ourselves. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  buy  them  of  each  other  or  catch  them  tbem- 
selves? — A.  They  will  not  buy  fish  from  Canadians  while  they  can  get 
them  from  their  own  men  ;  but  they  must  have  the  herring  as  quickly 
as  possible. 

Q.  Why? — A.  They  want  to  get  on  the  fishing-grounds. 

Q.  On  what  grounds  ? — A.  The  trawling-grounds. 

Q.  Where  is  that  ?— A.  Out  back  of  the  Magdalen  Islands,  about 
Cape  North  and  Bank  Bradley,  about  20  miles  or  40  miles  from  where 
the  herring  are  caught. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


499 


Q.  Where  do  tUe  American  fishermen  come  to  trawl  for  cod  f — A. 
Xbey  HhIi  around  the  Magdalen  Islands  and  Bank  Bradley,  &c. 

Q.  Tliey  do  not  wait  to  catch  the  herring  for  bait,  but  secure  them  as 
quickly  as  they  can  f — A.  The  first  thing  a  cod-fisherman  does  when  he 
cotoes  tliere  is  to  secure  bait ;  in  twenty  minutes  afterward  he  will  have 
n  load  if  possible.  They  lay  the  vessels  ott'  and  never  come  to  anchor. 
The  Yankees  are  not  very  apt  to  lose  time  if  they  can  help  it. 

Q.  Because  their  vessels  are  large  and  expensive,  I  suppose  ? — A. 

Yes. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  vessels  you  own  as  costing  for  outflttings  and  wages 
i^:',UOO  a  year.  How  long  would  a  full  season  la^it  < — A.  That  is  for  the 
oiitfittiujjs  without  the  vessel. 

{},  But  it  includes  the  pay  of  the  crew  f — A.  Yes. 

(J.  How  many  would  there  be  in  the  crew  ? — A.  About  twelve  hands. 

Q.  How  much  are  they  paidf— Q.  Either  $25  per  month  or  one-half 
ut  what  they  catch. 

Q.  When  you  were  estimating  the  cost  of  the  outflttings  at  $3,000, 
Toii,  of  course,  included  the  wages  paid  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  portion  of  that  $2,000  would  be  the  wages  of  the  crew  ? — A. 
It  would  be  according  to  the  time  we  would  bo  out.  For  four  months 
It  would  be  $500. 

(l  Five  hundred  dollars  for  the  twelve  men  ? — A.  Yes. 

Cl  When  you  speak  of  $2,000  as  paid  for  a  full  season,  do  you  mean 
a  season  of  four  months  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  Then  of  the  estimate  of  the  cost  of  outflttings  and  wages  for  one 
of  your  vessels,  with  a  crew  of  twelve  men,  the  wages  paid  would  be 
ouequarter — $500  in  the  $2,000.  Does  that  include  the  captain's 
wages  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  he  paid  t — A.  He  would  want  $25  or  $30  a  month  at  any 
rate;  but  he  does  no  more  than  any  other  person  on  board. 

Q.  Did  you  include  that  in  your  estimate  ? — A.  Yes.  There  would 
be  twelve  all  told — cook  and  all.  The  cook  generally  gets  more  than 
any  other  man. 

Q.  Does  the  owner  pay  the  cook,  too  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  would  amount  to  more  than  $500,  would  it  not  ? — A.  Some- 
times this  would  be  the  case ;  but  this  is  generally  what  we  lay  out. 
Ttie  average  would  be  $500,  taken  either  on  shares  or  on  wages. 

Q.  And  that  would  cover  the  wages  of  a  captain  and  cook  f — A.  Yes. 

(l.  How  many  men  would  there  be  in  your  boat,  which  averages  a 
catch  of  one  hundred  barrels  ! — A.  Four. 

Q.  Aud  how  long  is  the  flshing  season  for  boats  ? — A.  From  the  first 
of  July  to  the  last  of  Septem»^er. 

Q.  You  spok*"  of  the  time  when  the  flshing  was  good,  and,  as  I  under- 
stood, made  thtii,  time  end  about  four  years  ago  ? — A.  Y"es,  it  would  be 
about  six  years  ago  since  I  gave  fishing  up. 

Q.  And  did  you  give  it  up  because  it  was  poor  ? — A.  Yes ;  partly. 

Q.  You  told  the  Commission  that  on  the  average  500  American  ves- 
sels had  been  there  yearly  for  the  last  twenty  years ;  what  would  the 
number  be  for  the  last  five  or  six  years!— A.  I  do  not  think  that  it 
would  be  one  hundred. 

Q.  Were  there  one  hundred  during  the  last  five  j'ears  ? — A.  There 
were  more  than  that  during  this  period.  During  the  last  two  years 
tliere  would  not  be  over  flfty ;  and  I  do  not  think  that  the  average  for 
tbe  past  four  years  would  be  one  hundred. 

Q.  How  many  have  you  known  to  come  up  this  year ! — A.  1  should 
think  about  fifty  sail. 


il 


It 

ii 


500 


AWARD    OK   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


r 


Q.  Up  to  the  present  time? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  say  that  they  were  rather  late  for  seiuiug 
operations  this  year? — A.  They  were  a  week  late. 

Q.  Are  they  there  now  ?— A.  Yes ;  a  good  many  of  theiu.  Tliey  are 
the  very  finest  vessels  lever  saw  in  the  gulf;  I  never  saw  such  large 
vessels. 

Q.  Have  not  some  gone  home  ? — A.  Perhaps ;  but  I  am  not  aware 
of  it. 

Q.  Have  you  been  in  the  habit  of  buying  mackerel  at  all  of  other 
boats? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  buy  them  fresh  and  cure  them  yourself? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  you  pay  for  mackerel  in  the  fresh  state  ?-— A.  When  they 
are  poor  we  give  $1  a  hundred.    We  are  now  paying  -12  a  hundred, 

Q.  Is  that  for  such  as  make  number  ones? — A.  Yes;  but  they  are 
not  all  number  ones.    We  have  to  take  them  as  they  are  caught. 

Q.  Do  you  pay  $2  a  hundred  for  them? — A.  We  were  paying  $l,.W. 
but  when  I  left  home  we  were  giving  $2. 

Q.  For  a  luindred  fish  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  fish  are  there  in  a  barrel  ? — A.  About  300  now.  ;V 
month  or  two  ago  it  would  have  taken  350  or  390. 

Q.  Then  do  you  pay  as  hjg'h  as  $6  a  barrel  for  fresh  fish  ?~A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  last  year  ? — A.  We  did  not  then  i>ay  higher 
than  $1.50. 

Q.  That  would  be $4.50 a  barrel?— A.  Ye.s. 

Q.  And  the  year  before  last  ? — A.  The  price  then  was  the  same  as  it 
was  last  year. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  four  years  ago  ? — A.  About  the  same,  from 
$1  to  11.50 

Q.  What  did  fresh  mackerel  sell  for  during  the  years  when  the  Ssbiag 
was  good — prior  to  the  last  five  or  six  jears ! — A.  We  never  l)onght aiy 
then. 

Q.  W^hat  became  of  those  which  were  caught  in  the  little  boats  ?— A, 
We  could  not  get  them  to  buy.  Only  a  few  individuals  .started  Uie 
business,  aud  very  few  caught  them. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  there  was  not  much  boat  fishing  during  tlic  good 
year?~-A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  those  who  did  catch  in  the  boats  had  to  sell  ac  a  very  low  tig 
ure? — A.  Yes;  they  put  them  up  themselves  and  sold  low. 

Q.  They  could  hardly  sell  the  fish  when  fresh  ? — A.  They  would  havi 
so  sold  if  they  could,  but  there  was  nobody  to  buy. 

Q.  Could  they  buy  them  for  $1  a  barrel! — A.  No;  nor  for  $3. 

Q.  What  would  they  fetch  a  barrel  then  ? — A.  IJotweeu  $G  and  fv 
Mr.  Hall,  Mr.  Howland,  and  some  others  used  to  buy  them. 

Q.  There  is  no  mistake  but  what  the  American  bait  is  'v  g»od  deal 
better  than  any  other ;  there  is  no  question  abou'u  that  ? — A.  >'o,  it  i> 
always  very  well  liked,  but  we  have  to  pay  pretty  high  for  it. 

Q.  Do  you  buy  it? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  of  it  do  you  use  ? — A.  I  used  20  barrels  last  yeai  aud  1 
l)ought  20  more  barrels  this  year,  at  $5  a  barrel 

Q.  That  makes  $100  spent  for  menhaden  bait  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  mix  this  bait  with  herrinji;  t — A.  Y^esj  and  sometimes  «t 
mix  it  with  clnms.  At  the  latter  end  of  the  season  it  is  that  bait  whicli 
we  want.  When  the  fish  are  poor,  almost  any  bai^  will  do ;  but  wheu 
thfv  Bi'«*  in  good  condition,  they  require  good  bait. 

Q.  W'ien  do  you  u^e  herring  bait? — A.  In  the  spring  of  the  year  aud 
July. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


501 


Q,  Dt>  you  mix  mcubaden  with  it? — A.  Sometimes. 

Q,  If  it  was  not  for  its  expensiveuess,  you  would  uot  use  herring  at 
all  f-A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  use  mills  to  grind  the  bait  ? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  And  you  mix  the  herring  and  menhaden  together  ? — A.  Yes  :  we 
also  chop  up  olams  with  it.    Bait-mills  will  not  grind  clams. 

Q,  1  understood  you  to  say  that  the  Americans  ha<l  shoal  seines — do 
you  ailiule  to  purse  seines  ? — A.  I  do  uot  know  whether  they  are  purse 
uma  or  not,  but  they  are  shoal  seines.  I  asked  the  captain  of  a  vessel 
at  what  depth  of  water  he  was  seining,  and  he  said  at  13  fathoms.  I 
said  1  thought  that  was  too  deep  for  along  the  shore,  but  he  stated  that 
he  cohUI  work  it. 

Q.  You  have  not  personally  seen  i)urse  seines  used  except  in  deep 
water?— A.  O, yes. 

Q.  In  shallow  water? — A.  No,  in  deep  water.  I  have  seen  them  take 
fish  with  purse  seines  in  liO  fathoms  of  water ;  some  years  ago,  I  saw  an 
American  skipper  employ  them. 

Q,  I  wish  you  ^>ould  explain  to  the  Commission  the  course  which  the 
Amerieuns  pursue  when  tliey  desire  to  transship  fish.  Where  do  tiiey 
land  them  flrst  ? — A.  The  first  place  I  ever  knew  used  for  this  puri>ose 
wa?the  (lilt  of  Canso. 

Q.  How  do  they  ship  from  there  to  Boston  ? — A.  I  do  not  know.  1  think 
!boy  ship  into  other  vessels  or  steamers.  1  have  understood  so.  I  have 
iit'vor  myself  seen  them  transship.  I  know  I  have  observed  3  or  4  ves- 
st'is  lying  at  Queen's  wharf  landing  mackerel. 

Q,  Do  they  land  them  on  the  northern  coast  of  yonr  island  I — A.  No ; 
liut  they  do  at  Charlottetorn. 

Q.  Tliey  do  not  send  them  across  the  island  by  rail  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  personally  known  them  to  transship  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  Where  have  you  seen  Americans  land  fish  except  at  the  Gut  of 
Canso?— A.  At  Cbarlottetowu. 

(^  And  when  they  did  so,  were  they  left  in  storage  ? — A.  They  re- 
mained on  the  wharf  until  taken  off  by  a  steamer,  or  some  other  vessel. 
1  have  seen  1,000  barrels  of  American  mackerel  lying  there,  which  had 
ne  er  been  inspected. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  transshipment  of  flab  had 
never  been  preveat«*d  at  any  time  i — A.  I  never  knew  it  to  be  prevented. 

Q.  You  never  knew  of  any  objection  being  made  to  it  ? — A.  No,  never. 

Q.  Did  yon  ever  know  of  any  objection  being  made  to  the  purchase  of 
"iipplies  by  Americans  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Or  of  ice  !— A.  No. 

Q.  Nor  of  anything  else  which  the  merchants  had  to  sell  them  ? — A. 
Xo;  I  nover  knew  any  objection  made  save  to  the  landing  of  barrels. 

Q.  Tliey  were  allowed  to  buy  clothing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  butter  ami  vegetables  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  tbey  always  did  so  ? — A.  Yes. 

(},  You  never  knew  of  any  diflerence  V)eiiig  nuide  in  the  treatment  of 
tlieni,  either  before  the  ratification  of  the  treaty  or  afterward  ? — A.  No 
more  than  with  regard  to  any  other  people  in  the  world. 

(I  Ydu  w  ere  p,lad  to  trade  with  them  as  much  as  i)ossibIe,  I  sup- 
l>08e  ?--A.  Yes ;  they  never  had  to  pay  duties  save  for  landing  barrels 
uii  the  Magdulen  Islands,  as  far  as  I  know. 

Q.  When  was  that  f — A.  Of  late  years ;  last  year,  I  think. 

Q.  They  had  to  pay  duties  for  landing  barrels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  :<uppose  that  this  was  proper  ? — A.  I  do  not  know.  That  is  for 
tlie  ciistonis  otlicers  to  decide.    They  took  the  barrels  away. 


ti 


502 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


to  pav 
Tbey 


i 


They 


Q.  They  carried  them  away  because  they  were  not  willing 
duty  ! — A.  They  had  to  pay  duty  and  they  took  thetn  away  again. 
only  paid  duty  for  the  privilege  of  landing  the  barrels. 

Q.  You  do  not  pay  the  duty  ? — A.  Xo. 

Q.  This  oflFal  spoken  of  accumulates  in  all  fishing-vessels  ami  lias  to 
be  thrown  aomewher?  ? — A.  Of  course. 

Q.  There  is  no  doubt  about  that  ? — A.  Yes. 

ii.  It  is  not  the  practice  of  fishing-vessels  to  dump  the  otfal  among  ii 
school  of  fish  while  fishing  ? — A.  They  do  not  hesitate  about  that  ii 
they  are  in  a  hurry  to  get  to  another  school.  If  there  is  a  school  along. 
side  under  these  circumstances  they  will  not  wait  long  about  it,  uuml 
what  I  tell  3'ou.  They  must  get  rid  of  it  as  quickly  as  possible.  It  is 
the  most  filthy  thing  that  one  can  have  about  a  vessel. 

Q.  And  this  spoils  the  fishing  about  the  vessel  ?'A.  Yes. 
throw  it  over  wherever  they  can. 

Q.  That  has  been  the  practice  as  far  back  as  you  remember  ?— .\    I 
has  always  been  the  practice  since  mackerel  fishing  commonciMi 

Q.  Do  you  really  think  that  the  failure  of  the  fisheries  (luring;  the  'hm 
five  or  six  years  is  to  be  attributed  to  this  practice  ". — A.  1  do  not  know 
anything  to  the  contrary. 

Q.  Do  you  think  so  much  of  it  as  that? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  The  fisheries  failed  pretty  suddenly,  did  they  not  .'—A.  No;  toi  a 
good  many  jears  they  were  failing. 

Q.  Which  was  the  last  good  year? — A.  We  have  not  really  hail  a 
good  year  during  the  last  seven  years. 

Q.  Was  not  the  year  1872  a  good  year  ? — A.  Only  on  shore.    It  v 
good  for  boat-fishing,  butnot  for  the  vessels. 

Q.  Which  was  the  last  good  year  for  vessels  ? — A.  I  could  not  toll  von. 

Q.  Which  was  the  last  year  when  there  were  as  many  as  five  inm 
dred  American  vessels  down  there  ? — A.  About  twelve  years  ago.  I 
was  fishing  then  myself,  and  the  fishing  was  Aery  good. 

Q.  In  a  vessel!— A.  Yes;  and  the  vessels  then  did  very  well. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg: 

Q.  When  was  the  first  year  that  you  saw  purse  seines  used  ?— A.  I 
think  that  would  be  about  twelve  years  ago.  A  man  at  that  time  ha<l 
snob  a  seine  down  here,  and  be  took  boats  avd  all.  He  was  a  pretty  old 
man,  and  on  his  first  throw  he  caught  herring  .vhen  he  expected  to  se 
cure  mackerel.  He  let  them  go,  and  there  ^^n»  another  old  man  lishJDr; 
quite  near.  He  pitched  the  seine  and  took  the  latter,  anchor,  boat,  ami 
all.  This  man  talked  pretty  loud  about  it,  but  the  seiner  said  to  him: 
"O,  well,  be  quiet,  and  1  will  give  you  all  the  herring,  while  I  take  the 
mackerel."  ISo  he  was  well  paid,  obtaining  as  his  share  seven  or  eigtit 
barrels  of  fat  herring. 

Q.  That  was  the  first  purse  seining  which  you  saw? — A.  Yea;  and 
this  man  caught  the  fish  very  quickly.  He  was  not  long  about  it.  Uo 
was  off  in  comparatively  deep  water.  I  do  not  know  whether  his  nauii' 
was  Captain  Parker  or  not — there  are  so  many  of  them.  I  really  forget 
the  man's  name,  but  I  know  he  threw  the  seine  in  deep  water  and  took 
about  sixty  barrels.    ThU  was  the  first  seining  L  ever  saw  off  our  shore. 

Ko.  15. 


^^    ■/   / 


Thomas  R.  Bennett,  47  years  of  age,  judge  of  the  district  court  at 
Harbor  Grace,  Newfonndlandf  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government 
of  Her  Britannic  Mi\jesty,  sworn  and  examined. 


■"&'■■- 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


503 


By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Question.  How  loug  have  you  resided  iu  Newfoundland  ? — Answer. 
Since  1854. 

Q.  Have  you  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  fisheries  of  that  island  ? — 
A.  I  have  an  intimate  knowledge  of  them. 

Q.  How  did  you  obtain  it  ? — A.  For  many  years  I  was  engaged  in 
mercantile  business  in  connection  with  these  fisheries. 

Q.  Both  on  the  Southern  coast  and  on  the  Eastern  coast  ? — A.  Not 
on  the  Eastern.  Th«  coast  in  the  District  of  Fortune  Bay  is  usually 
spoken  of  in  Newfoundland  as  the  Western  coast.  I  merely  mention  it 
ia  order  that  I  may  be  understood  if  I  make  use  of  the  expression  after- 
ward. 


Q. 


Q. 

Bay 


As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  it  is  the  Southern  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Where  is  Harbor  Grace  ? — A.  On  the  Eastern  coast,  in  Conception 

it  is  situated  on  one  side  of  this  bay. 


By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  You  are  a  native  of  Nova  Scotia  ? — A.  Yes. 

'}.  Uow  loug  did  you  reside  at  Fortune  Bay? — A.  About  nineteen 

ars. 

t}.  This  is  iu  close  proximity  to  the  islands  of  St.  Pierre  and  Mique- 
loll  '.—A.  Yes ;  the  islands  of  St.  Pierre,  Langley,  and  Miquelou  lie 
acros!>  from  tbe  entrance  to  the  bay. 

Q.  """^ules  a  thcrough  knowledge  of  the  Newfoundland  fisheries,  you 
bav  )  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  manner  iu  which  the  fish- 
eries jtie  carried  on  by  the  French  ? — A.  I  have.  I  have  been  at  St. 
Pierre  Island  probably  one  hundred  times. 

Q.  What  fisheries  exist  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  ? — A.  The  cod, 
salniOD,  herring,  halibut,  turbot,  and  seal  fisheries. 

Q.  Are  not  caplin  and  squid  caught  there? — A.  Yes;  and  there  are 
a  mimber  of  other  species  of  fish  which  are  sometimes  taken  for  bait 

Q.  Herring,  caplin,  and  squid  are  the  fish  which  are  usually  used  for 
bait?— A.  Yes;  some  fishermen  use  shell  fish,  but  this  is  very  rarely 
(lone. 

Q.  Will  you  point  on  the  map  the  Earaea  Islands  ? — A.  They  are  here, 
on  the  Western  coast. 

Q.  Will  you  trace  the  map  around  Cape  Ray  to  Quirpon  and  Cape 
Jolui?— A.  Here  is  Quirpon^  and  here  White  Bay,  and  there  is  Cai)e 
Jobu. 

Q.  Between  Quirpon  and  C»pe  John  lies  the  part  of  the  coast  along 
«hich,  I  believe,  the  French  and  English  enjoy  concurrent  right  to  fish, 
and  where,  under  the  Washinjjton  Treaty,  the  Americans  have  a  right 
to  flsh  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  Washington  Treaty  gave  to  the  Americans  th"?  privilege 
of  tishing  from  Itameaux  eastwardly  to  Cape  Kace,  an  I  th»,»; :  \orth  to 
Quirpon?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  that,  on  this  portion  of  the  coasc,  from  Cape  Ray  by  Quirpon 
to  Cape  John,  the  Americans,  English,  and  French  have  now  concur- 
rent right  to  fish,  and  the  Americans  and  English  on  the  remainder  of 
tbe  co4ist  ?— A.  Yes.  On  the  East  coast  are  situated  Noire  Dame  Bay, 
Bonavista  Bay,  Trinity  Bay,  and  Conception  Bay ;  and  on  the  West- 
ern coast  Saint  Mary's  and  Placeutia  an<l  Fortune  Bay.  The  otheris  are 
smaller  inlets. 

Q.  Up  to  Ramea  Islands  I— A.  Ye:*. 


504 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


•       r  ; 


ii,:J^ 


Q.  By  the  Washington  Treaty  the  Americans  have  concurrent  right 
with  the  English  to  fish  on  that  portion  of  the  coast  ? — A.  Yes ;  aiKfoii 
the  whole  of  the  coast. 

Q.  Proceeding  from  the  Earn  >a  Islands  to  Gape  Bay,  did  the  Ameri 
cans  prior  to  the  Washington  Treaty  enjoy  concurrent  right  of  ttsbinc 
there  with  the  British  ? — A.  Yes ;  under  the  Convention  of  1818. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  is  the  cod-fishery  carried  on  be 
tweeu  the  Bamea  Islands  and  Quirpou  ? — A.  This  part  of  the  coast  from 
Quirpon  to  Cape  John  has  rarely  been  fished  on  by  the  English  until  you 
arrive  at  Cape  John.  From  Cape  John  around  the  whole  of  this  part 
of  the  coast,  by  Cape  Bace  to  Cape  Bay,  it  has  been  carried  on  as  an 
inshore  fishery,  and  from  that  point  north  it  is  carried  on  as  an  inshore 
fishery  by  the  English  and  French. 

Q.  It  is  prosecuted  as  an  inshore  fishery  ? — A.  Yes,  entirely. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  an  inshore  fishery,  within  what  distance  from  the 
coastal  line  do  you  mean  that  the  fish  are  caught  ? — A.  Generally  within 
a  mile  of  the  shore.  There  are  not  more  than  half  a  do/eu  places  on 
this  part  of  the  coast  whence  the  fishermen  go  beyond  a  mile  and  » 
half  or  two  miles  from  the  shore.  They  usually  fish  within  a  mile  of 
it.  I  have  even  seen  tbem  conduct  a  very  excellent  fishing  witbiu  one- 
quarter  of  a  mile  of  the  shore. 

Q.  As  a  general  rule  they  fish  within  a  mile  and  a  mile  and  a  half  ot 
the  shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  occasionally  they  go  beyond  that  distance  ? — A.  Tbey  go  be- 
yond it  very  rarely — out  to  the  Lower  Banks — which  lie  7  miles  from 
the  shov^.  A  few  boats  go  out  there  late  in  the  season ;  that  is,  after 
the  bai :  has  left  the  shore.  The  fish  have  then  gone  oif  into  deeper 
water ;  this  would  be  about  the  month  of  October.  They  will  make,  per 
haps,  1;W0  or  three  trips,  lying  off  one  night  and  returning  tlie  evening 
of  the  next  daj-. 

Q.  That  is  outside  of  the  .{mile  limit ! — A.  It  is  7  miles  ott".  This  is 
the  only  bank  I  am  aware  of  where  they  fish.  Tbere  is  another  called 
the  Cape  Ballard  Bank.  It  is  also  about  7  miles  from  the  shore.  I  am 
DOC  so  intimately  acquainted  with  it  as  with  the  other,  but  I  am  aware 
that  some  boats  belonging  to  Benews  iish  there,  but  only  a  very  limited 
number. 

Q.  A  limited  number,  and  only  occasionally  ? — A.  Only  occasionally, 
as  I  have  always  understood. 

Q.  With  your  intimate  knowledge  concerning  these  fisheries,  could 
you  form  an  estimate  of  the  quantity  of  cod  which  would  be  taken  out- 
side of  the  3-mi!o  limit  by  the  fishermen  from  Newfoundland  ?— A.  Only 
a  very  small  quantity  is  so  taken — I  should  say  not  more  than  r),(»(M)or 
6,000  quintals.  To  my  personal  knowledge  not  1,500  quintals  are  taken ; 
but,  unless  the  Ballard  Bank  yields  more  fish  than  I  am  aware  of,  I 
should  say  that  not  more  than  6,000  quintals  are  so  cougbt.  I  should 
judge  so  from  all  the  information  which  I  have  received  ou  the  ])oiiit 

Q.  Describe  the  cod-fisheries. — A.  There  is  what  is  usually  known  as 
the  Bank  fishing  of  Newfoundland. 

Q.  What  fishery  is  that?— A.  There  has  been  a  limited  Bank  fishery 
during  the  past  three  or  four  years.  Some  three  or  four  vessels  iiave 
been  fitted  out  for  the  purpose.  An  experiment  has  been  niiule  in  tliis 
connection. 

Q.  I  believe  that  upward  of  2.")  and  30  years  ago  the  Bank  tishery 
was  carried  on  extensively  around  Newfouodlaiiu  f — A,  Ves;  very 
largely. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


505 


and  ou 


r»,(MK)  or 
ire  taken ; 
rare  of,  I 
1  should 
jmiiit. 
known  ;is 


k  tislieiy 
es;   very 


Q.  What  do  j'ou  mean  by  the  Bank  fisheries  ! — A.  The  deep  sea  fish- 

erj% 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  coast  is  the  nearest  Bank,  so  called,  of 
Newfouodland  ? — A.  About  35  miles.  The  fishermen  formerly,  when 
they  carrieii  on  this  fishery,  ran  down  until  they  were  about  35  or  40 
miles  from  the  St.  Pierre  and  Miqnelon  Islands ;  they  then  came  to  and 
fished.  Some  old  experienced  fishermen  have  told  me  that  this  was 
their  rule.  They  would  run  oft  southwest  of  these  islands  and  fish 
about  35  and  40  miles  from  them. 

Q.  Tbat  is  what  is  termed  the  Grand  Bank ! — A.  No ;  !t  is  St.  Peter's 
Bauk. 

Q.  The  Grand  Bank  is  about  thirty-five  miles  from  Cape  Kace  ? — A. 
The  inshore  edge  of  it  is  about  that  distance  of  I  think  that  the  prin- 
cipal and  best  fishery  is  situated  from  eightv  lo  one  hundred  miles  oft' 
the  coast  of  Newfoundland. 

(j.  The  deep-sea  fishery  is  carried  on  at  distances  varying  from  thirty- 
five  to  two  hundred  miles  of  the  coast  by  the  bankers? — A.  Quite  so. 

Q.  And  this  fishery  has  not  been  carried  on  from  Newfoundland  for 
upwards  of  twenty-live  or  thirty  years  ? — A.  It  is  longer  than  that.  It 
is  a  very  expensive  fishery. 

Q.  Uiitil  within  the  last  four  ye.irs  ? — A.  Within  the  last  fonr  years 
the  government  of  Newfoundland  has  been  giving  a  bounty  in  onlt^r  to 
encourage  that  fishery ;  and  some  four  or  five  vessels,  I  think,  have  been 
fitted  out  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  And  tliese  are  the  only  two  places  where  the  cod-fishery  is  prose- 
cuted inshore  and  on  the  banks  ? — A.  Precisely. 

Q.  What  other  fishery  is  curried  on  the  coast  ? — A.  There  is  also  the 
isdluion-tisbery. 

Q.  This  is  carried  on  principally  with  nets  set  out  from  the  shore  2 
A.  Yes,  altogether.    There  are  one  or  two  rivers  which  the  flsherMua 
bar,  in  some  out-of-the-way  places;  but  this  is  illegal. 

Q.  It  is  carried  on  along  the  coast  and  in  the  rivers  as  well  ? — A.  It 
is  prosecuted  in  the  rivers  to  a  limited  extent. 

ii,.  There  is  also  the  herring  fishing  ? — A.  Yes ;  there  is  a  large  herring 
fishery. 

Q.  Where  is  it  carried  on? — A.  In  nearly  all  the  large  bays  of  the 
island.    The  principal  home  for  the  herring  is  Fortune  Bay. 

Q.  Are  they  taken  in  Fortune  Bay  all  the  year  round  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  in  Placeutia  Bay,  also  ? — A.  Not  all  the  year  round ;  but  large 
'luautities  are  taken  there  ou  some  occasions,  especially  in  the  spring 
of  the  year,  in  April  and  May. 

(}.  When  do  the  herring  make  their  appe<arance  on  the  eastern  coast 
of  the  island,  from  Cape  Kace  northerly  ? — A.  They  appear  in  Concep- 
tion Buy  in  April  and  in  Trinity  Bay  about  the  last  of  April.  I  am  not 
^lersonallv  ac(|uaiuted  with  the  bays  farther  north  than  that;  but  I  am 
infornn'd  that  they  appear  about  the  same  time  in  Bonavista  and  Notre 
iJunu-  Bays. 

<i>.  Between  Cape  Race  and  St.  John's  and  Conception  Bay  they  make 
their  appearance  about  the  same  time  ? — A.  Between  Cape  Race  and 
Conception  Bay,  yes.  -,^,  ,....  ^   <• 

Q.  llow  long  do  they  remain  on  that  coast  ? — A.  Until  the  month' of 
•^uly;  an«i  in  fact  they  may  remain  longer.  They  are  hardly  used  ex- 
•eptfor  ba  t.  and  they  continue  there  until  better  bait  conies, and  prob- 
lil'ly  loiigt'i'. 

^>!.  Do  tliey  remain  there  until  toward  the  end  of  the  year,  in  Novem- 
ber t— A.  I  imagine  so;  but  the  fishermen  do  not  then'take  the  trouble 


il 

m 

k 


iiii 


606 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


IW 


!',  »   ■ 


m^ 


to  catnb  tbein.    As  soon  as  the  caplin  strike  the  coast  the  fishermeu  take 
them,  these  being  better  bait. 

Q.  When  do  the  eaplin  strike  the  coast f — A.  Usually  from  about  the 
5th  to  Jthe  10th  of  June,  on  the  western  coast.  Perhaps  they  are  a 
week  later  on  the  eastern  coast.  They  usually  strike  around  Deadmau's 
Cove  in  Fortune  Bay  about  the  5th  of  June. 

Q.  How  long  do  the  eaplin  remain  on  the  coast  ? — A.  I  should  think 
on  the  average,  six  weeks.    I  have  known  them  to  remain  two  months. 

Q.  And  are  they  used  as  bait  by  the  cod  lishers  during  that  time  ?— 
A.  They  are;  they  form  the  choicest  bfilt  the  dshovir'en  can  then  get. 

Q.  When  do  the  squid  make  their  appeivance?--A.  This  year  they 
appeared  on  the  coast  about  the  Ist  of  July  ;  usually,  I  think  you  may 
say  that  they  appear  from  the  8th  to  the  20th  of  July.  They  do  not 
always  come  exactly  at  the  same  time. 

Q.  They  are  generally,  in  fact  almost  always,  in  before  the  cai»lin 
leave? — A.  Yes;  always. 

Q.  And  they  then  succeed  the  eaplin  as  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  do  they  continue  on  the  coast  f — A.  As  long  as  the  tisb 
ermen  require  to  use  them.  The  last  place  where  I  have  known  squid 
to  be  taken  is  Bay  North,  and  the  time  was  about  the  15th  December. 

Q.  They  continued  on  the  coast  during  the  whole  of  the  fishiu;,'  sea 
son? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  yon  call  the  cod-flshiug  season  of  Newfoundland  within 
the  limits  referred  to? — A.  It  varies  to  a  certain  exijent  along  the  coast. 
In  fact,  from  Channel  to  Pass  Island  and  along  thM  coast  it  is  conducted 
the  whole  year  round. 

Q.  Name  the  localities. — A.  From  Channel  to  Hermitage  Bay  and 
Bay  North,  and  through  the  whole  of  Fortune  Bay,  until  you  arrive  at 
Garnish  on  the  eastern  side  of  Fortune  Bay,  it  is  conducted  throughout 
the  year ;  also  in  Placentia  Bay  toward  the  head  of  it ;  but  along  the 
more  exposed  parts  of  the  coast  it  is  conducted  dnriug  the  summer  for 
about  six  months;  and,  generally,  along  the  northern  part  of  the  island 
it  is  conducted  for  about  six  months  in  the  year. 

Q.  This  is  on  the  eastern  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  conducted  there  for  about  six  months ! — A.  Yes ;  they  begin 
about  the  month  of  May. 

Q.  And  terminate  about  the  month  of  November  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  this  period  of  the  year  has  there  ever  been  a  scarcity  of 
bait,  or  has  there  always  been  a  good  supply  of  bait  on  the  coast  f— A. 
I  think  so;  I  never  knew  of  any  scarcity.  I  am  aware  that  there  have 
been  local  scarcities,  but,  universally  speaking,  bait  has  always  been 
found  in  abundance  around  Newfoundland. 

Q.  That  is,  the  bait  you  have  just  referred  to  ? — A.  I  allude  to  her 
ring,  eaplin,  and  squid. 

Q.  Where  are  eaplin  and  squid  taken? — A.  Around  the  whole  island 
and  inshore — close  to  the  shore,  in  the  beach  coves,  and  in  shallow 
water. 

Q.  Where  they  come  to  spawn  ? — A.  Yes.  I  think  they  also  follow 
small  anirnalcnla  there  for  food.  I  do  not  think  that  they  spawn  all 
the  time  during  this  period,  for  they  are  there  from  six  weeks  to  two 
months.  I  tiiink  they  come  sometimes  to  feed,  and  they  attract  the 
codtish  close  in  to  the  shore.  The  codfish  follow  them  close  in  to  the 
shore. 

Q.  And  remain  in  shore? — A.  Yes  ;  feeding  on  them. 

Q.  You  referred  just  now  to  a  fishery  carried  on  in  some  places  one 
quarter  of  a  mile  from  the  coast ;  have  you  known  of  the  fishery  being 


AWARD   OF   THE   i'lSHERY   COMMISSION. 


507 


in  some  places  carried  on  so  close  that  the  flsbermen  would  go  on  shore 
tor  their  meals  every  day  nt  meal-hours? — A.  This  is  at  New  Harbor  on 
tbe  western  shore,  and  at  one  or  two  other  harbors.  They  fish  at  these 
points  very  close  to  the  shore.  On  one  or  two  occasions  I  saw  the  peo- 
|)Ie  belonging  to  the  shore  calling  them  to  dinner.  I  made  inquiry  of 
tiie  people,  and  they  told  me  that  they  put  their  moorings  down  in  au- 
tumn within  a  short  distance  of  the  shore,  and  fished  for  six  months 
with  tlie  same  moorings.  They  would  thus  proceed  with  the  fishery 
(luring  the  winter  months,  and  when  the  spring  opened  they  laid  their 
moorings  down  a  little  farther  oft'. 

{}.  To  all  intents  and  i>urposes  it  is  entirely  an  inshore  fishery  ? — A. 
Yes ;  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  t  hat. 

Q.  Do  yon  remember,  Mr.  Bennett,  the  period  during  which  the  Kec- 
iprocity  Treaty  between  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States  was  in 
operation  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether,  during  that  period,  American  vessels  did 
fish  on  the  Newfoundland  coast  and  obtain  bait  there' — A.  No.  Dnriug 
that  period  they  never  used  their  fishing  privileges;  in  fact,  I  think 
they  never  came  on  the  coast  until  within  the  last  four  years  before  the 
treaty  expired. 

Q.  With  regard  to  theherring-flshery  of  Fortune  Bay — is  it  prosecuted 
to  iiny  very  considerable  extent  by  Newfoundlanders  and  others,  and 
bow  f— A.  As  a  matter  of  commerce. 

Q.  In  both  ways ! — A.  It  is  carried  on  to  a  large  extent  for  bait.  The 
Americans  get  a  large  quantity  of  bait  there,  and  the  French  also. 

Q.  Is  it  from  Fortune  Bay  that  the  fishermen  of  Saint  Pierre  and 
Miqnelon  are  supplied  with  bait? — A.  Yes;  also  from  Placentia  Bay; 
but  they  are  principally  supplied  from  Fortune  Bay. 

Q.  Are  the  herring  sold  to  the  French  in  a  fresh  state  ? — A.  Yes,  and 
they  buy  large  quantities  of  them. 

Q.  What,  on  the  average,  would  be  the  quantity  of  bait  supplied  to 
tbe  French  vessels  for  baiting  purposes  f — A.  It  would  be  very  large. 

Q.  Does  it  altogether  consist  of  herring? — A.  No,  not  of  herring; 
caplin  and  squid. 

Q.  Can  you  form  an  estimate  as  to  the  average  quantity  supplied  ? — 
A.  I  tbiuk  that  the  (piautity  taketi  by  each  vessel  would  be,  for  the 
larger  bankers,  from  100  to  200  barrels  of  herring  for  each  trip,  and  from 
St)  to  200  barrels  of  caplin  for  each  trip;  as  to  squid,  I  could  scarcely 
form  an  estimate,  because  they  are  in  the  habit  of  taking  large  quanti- 
ties of  it  in  their  own  harbors  of  Saint  Pierre  and  Langley,  besides  buy- 
ing from  English  fishermen. 

Q.  These  fish  are  bought  by  the  French  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  then  they  are  used  for  the  purposes  of  the  Bank  fishery  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Have  the  Americans  obtained  bait  there  since  the  Washington 
Treaty  came  into  operation  ? — A.  Y'es,  and  previously ;  indeed,  they 
have  secured  large  quantities.  Of  course,  previously,  it  was  illegal  to 
<lo  so,  but  they  avoided  coming  near  where  there  was  any  magistrate  or 
customs  officer.  Then,  however,  they  did  not  come  to  the  coast  to  any 
great  extent ;  they  did  so  to  a  limited  extent. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  did  they  then  come  there  ? — A.  They  did. 

Q.  To  localities  distant  from  any  magistrate  or  customs  oflBcers  ? — A. 
Precisely.  In  1872,  over  two  hundred  sail  of  American  vessels  came  to 
Fortune  Bay.  They  were  then  made  bolder,  because  that  was  the  yoir 
^vhen  the  NVashington  Treaty  was  negotiated ;  and  although  it  was  not 


""I 


508 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


at  the  time  accepted  by  Newfouudland,  still  it  was  assumed  they  had  a 
right  to  come.    They  did,  at  all  events,  come  for  bait. 

Q.  Did  they  catch  it  themselves  or  buy  it  from  the  people? — A.  Tbey 
partly  caught  it  and  partly  bought  it.  They  made  urrHUgemeiits  with 
fishermen,  which  they  called  selling  bait,  but  it  was  partially  selling  aud 
partially  catching.  I  will  describe  it.  They  were  in  the  habit  of  calling 
into  some  of  the  outlying  harbors,  Balloran,  St.  Jacques,  and  Englisii, 
and  one  or  two  others,  aud  making  arrangements  with  some  man  who 
had  a  seine;  and  they  would  then  go  up  Fortune  Bay,  say  to  Long  liar 
bor,  fifteen  or  eighteen  utiles  up,  or  to  Mai  Bay,  Bay  Recontre,  oi  Bay 
d'^orth ;  there  are  deep  arms  in  the  bay,  with  bait  in  them  all  the  season 
round,  and  they  are  very  quiet  places  for  the  taking  of  bait.  Tlie.v  make 
arrangements  with  the  seine  owner  to  go  himself  and  catch,  with  their 
assistance,  what  bait  they  require.  They  usually  pay  out  during  the 
summer  about  $20  for  each  trip,  aud  take  from  fifty  to  eighty  barrels  ot 
herring.  They  pay  it  in  a  lump  sum  for  the  use  of  the  seine  and  the 
skill  of  the  seine  owner.  The  latter  would  be  unable  to  haul  the  seine 
without  the  assistance  of  the  American  crew  from  the  schooner.  The 
crew  do  the  work,  and  the  Newfoundland  skipper  conducts  the  opera- 
tions. 

Q.  The  crew  of  the  American  vessel  actually  takes  the  bait  1'— A.  As 
far  as  my  experience  has  gone,  yes.  I  observed  mitters  very  narrowly 
that  year,  and  I  never  knew  a  crew  of  Newfoundland  tisherinen  duriuj; 
this  time  wholly  take  the  bait  for  the  Americans.  1  have  only  known 
of  it  being  procured  in  the  way  I  have  told  you. 

Q.  So  that  is  what  the  Newfoundlanders,  in  common  conversation, 
term  selling  bait  to  the  Americans? — A.  Certainly;  quite  so.  There 
may  have  been  cases  in  which  the  Americans  were  supplied  with  bait, 
when  Newfoundlanders  had  illegally  stopped  herrings.  What  I  mean 
by  stopping  herrings  is,  to  put  out  a  large  seine  and  surround  a  lar^'e 
school  of  herring  in  a  quiet  place,  and  keep  them  thus  inclosed  for  a 
mouth  or  more.  If  the  Americans  wanted  bait  quickly,  they  might  have 
on  some  occasions  purchased  it  from  those  who  had  stopped  herrings  ia 
this  manner.  It  is  an  illegal  practice,  aud  is  ouly^  carried  out  in  places 
where  custom  officers  or  magistrates  have  no  supervision  ;  that  is,  too 
far  away  from  them  to  permit  of  this  being  done  effectually.  Such  par 
chase,  of  course,  encourages  illegal  conduct  on  the  part  of  our  peo))le. 

Q.  The  herring  come  in  very  large  quantities  and  rr.i  up  into  small, 
deep  inlets,  where  a  stop  of  seines  has  been  put  across  ? — A.  Not  across. 
They  surround  the  schools  of  herring. 

Q.  They  are  then  kept  inclosed  for  a  month,  you  say! — A.  I  am  told  a 
month,  and  I  believe  it.  I  am  (juite  certain  that  it  is  the  case.  Many  o[ 
the  fish  die;  and  sometimes  a  gale  of  wind  necessitates  the  tripping  ot 
the  seine  and  the  taking  of  it  up.  The  whole  mass  of  the  herrings  is 
then  killed,  aud  allowed  to  remain  on  the  bottom  and  rot. 

Q.  There  is  a  law  which  prohibits  this  custom  ! — A.  Yes;  it  his  ex 
isted  for  many  years. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  regarding  the  effect  of  that  mode  of  tisbiup; 
on  the  herring-fishery  ? — A.  I  thin!;  it  is  most  destructive,  aud  the  law 
prohibiting  it  I  consider  to  be  a  most  wise  one.  It  was  found  necessary 
many  years  ago  to  pass  a  law  prohibiting  the  use  of  seines  from  the  Ist 
of  November  until  the  12th  of  April,  and  prohibiting  absolutely  the  iise 
of  seines  for  any  other  purpose  except  that  of  casting  and  forthwith 
drawing  them.  This  extra  demand  for  bait  no  doubt  has  arisen  in  con- 
sequence of  the  Americans  coming  there,  and,  I  suppose,  inducing  par- 
ties to  commit  a  breach  of  the  law  outside  t!ie  effectual  jurisdictlou  of 


Tl 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


509 


customs  officers  or  magistrates.  I  believe  that  they  are  vevy  scarce 
aronud  tbe  coast.  It  is  very  thinly  isettled,  aud  has  very  few  custom- 
house  officers  staticued  along  it.  There  are  not  nearly  as  many  of  them 
nsare  required  now,  whatever  may  have  been  the  case  in  former  times. 
More  are  now  needed,  because  there  is  more  inducement  presented  to 
violate  the  law  than  there  was  before  the  Washiugton  Treaty  was  nego- 
tiated. 

Q.  And  there  are  now  more  facilities  for  smuggling? — A.  O,  pre- 
cisely.   There  is  no  doubt  about  that. 

Q.  The  population  of  tbe  island  is  about  1.50,000  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  are  the  people  located  around  the  coast  ? — A.  The  farthest 
official  of  the  Newfoundland  Government  is  stationed  at  Channel.  Then 
there  are  three  on  this  southern  coast  until  yon  arrive  at  Ilriton  Harbor, 
where  one  is  stationed;  and  then,  say  for  sixty  miles  up  the  bay,  there 
are  no  customs  officers  or  magistrates,  unfortunately. 

Q.  The  officials  of  the  government  of  Newfoundland  are  stationed  be- 
tween Channel  on  the  south  and  around  to  where  ? — A.  To  Tilt  Cove  on 
the  north ;  but  there  is  no  government  official  on  the  north  of  the  island. 

Q.  And  there  is  none  between  Cape  John  and  Cape  Ray  on  the  other 
coast? — A.  No. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  they  are  even  scarce  on  the  portion  of  the  coast 
you  have  pointed  out  f — A.  O,  there  are  large  tracts  of  the  country 
where  there  is  no  government  official. 

Q.  Are  the  people  living  in  every  small  cove  and  inlet  along  the 
coast !— A.  Yes ;  on  this  southern  coast  they  arc. 

Q.  And  north,  too? — A.  In  the  north  every  harbor  is  settled ;  but  the 
harbors  are  not  so  numerous  on  the  southern  part  of  the  island. 

Q.  They  are  in  smaller  numbers? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Uo  all  of  them  carry  on  the  fishery  ? — A.  Yes.  When  I  say  all,  I 
might  explain  that  the  agriculturists  are  very  few  in  number.  The  cen- 
sus will  show  that  they  are  not  numerous,  and  they  are  not  really  agri 
calturists,  because  they  pursue  fishery  and  agriculture  combined. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  herring  fishery  at  Fortune  Bay ;  is  there  a  large 
winter  tiahery  carried  on  there? — A.  This  has  been  the  case  for  a  nnra- 
ber  of  years.  During  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  it  was  prosperous ;  in  fact, 
it  was  tbe  only  branch  of  commerce  in  Newfoundland  that  benefited 
to  any  extent  by  the  Reciprocity  Treaty.  At  that  time  there  was  a  large 
herring  fishery  for  the  supply  of  the  slaves  of  the  Southern  States,  prin- 
cipally A'irginia  and  North  and  South  Carolina,  and  also  for  the  supply 
of  tbe  West  Indies.  The  description  of  herring  caught  in  this  bay  is 
very  suitable  for  hot  climates  and  these  markets.  From  60,000  to  70,000 
barrels  of  herring  were  annually  taken  for  the  purpose  of  being  exported 
from  Fortune  Bay  alone  for  several  years,  until  the  war  broke  out. 

Q.  These  were  not  caught,  I  think,  by  Americans,  but  purchased  from 
Fortune  Bay  people  ? — A.  Tlie  Americans  themselves  did  not  engage  in 
it.  During  the  first  six  years  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  it  was  wholly 
in  the  bauds  of  those  doing  business  on  the  Newfoundland  coast. 

Q.  And,  during  the  last  four  years  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  you  say 
that  it  was  altogether  carried  on  by  the  Americans  bv  purchasing  from 
Newfoundlanders  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tbey  did  not  fish  there  themselves?— A.  No;  not  during  the  ex- 
istence of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  Since  the  Washington  Treaty  came  into  operation,  has  any  new 
trade  in  herring,  in  which  the  Americans  are  concerned,  sprung  up  ? — A. 
They  began,  four  years  before  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  terminated,  to  ship 
herring  in  a  frozen  state  to  supply  the  New  York  market  and  to  supply 


^11 


-*  In 


510 


AWARD    OF   THK    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


their  fishermcu  at  Cape  Aun  wltb  early  bait  for  tbe  George's  Bank.  Tbcy 
fisb  on  tbo  George's  Jtauk  duriug  February  and  March.  Some  'io  ur  40 
vessels  commenced  to  come  there  perhaps  two  or  three  years  before  the 
Keciprocity  Treaty  expired,  and  afterwards  they  still  continued  to  come. 

Q.  Uave  American  vessels  during  the  last  two  or  three  years,  since 
the  Washington  Treaty  has  come  in  operation,  taicen  largo  car;;oeH  ot 
herring  to  Sweden  and  other  countries  from  Fortune  Bay  ? — A.  1  believe 
so.    I  have  heard  so,  and  I  believe  that  it  is  a  fact. 

Q.  You  have  no  doubt  of  it ! — A.  None  at  all.  I  have  not  observed 
it  myself,  but  there  is  no  doubt  of  the  fact  at  all. 

Q.  And  as  a  matter  of  fact,  you  also  know  that  the  herring  tlsbery  of 
Fortune  Bay  and  Placentia  Bay  is  very  prolific  ? — A.  Yes. 

(J.  Do  they  take  or  ))urchase  the  herring  sent  to  Sweden  and  the 
States! — A.  I  think  they  generally  purchase.  I  have  known  tlieui, 
however,  to  catch  herring  themselves.  1  remember  that  a  steamer 
called  Montecello  cume  there  and  caught  large  cargoes.  This  was  some 
four  years  ago,  I  think. 

Q.  You  were  a  member  of  the  legislature  for  some  time  .' — A.  Yes; 
for  eleven  or  twelve  years. 

Q.,And  yon  have  some  knowledge  concerning  general  statistical 
information  and  customs  returns  relating  to  the  islaixl  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Will  you  kindly  refer  to  those  returns  and  read  their  heading  f— 
A.  This  is  a  return  showing  the  quantities  and  values  of  Hsh  and  pro 
ducts  of  fish  irnt)orted  from  the  United  States  of  America,  an»l  exported 
to  the  United  States  and  all  other  countries  from  the  Colony  of  New- 
tbuudland  during  each  year  from  1851  to  1870  included. 

Q.  That  relates  to  twenty-six  years  ? — A.  Y^es. 

Q.  Judging  from  these  returns,  what  advantage  is,  or  is  any  advan- 
tage, derived  by  Newfoundland  from  the  concessions  made  to  you  In 
the  Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  You  cannot  infer  from  these  returns  that 
Newfoundland  has  reaped  any  advantage  from  any  commercial  conces- 
sion made  under  the  Washington  Treaty.  On  the  contrary,  the  exports 
of  Newfoundland  products  to  the  United  States  since  the  ratification  ot 
the  Washington  Treaty  have  been  very  much  lower  than  they  were 
during  the  period  when  there  was  a  heavy  duty  on  these  products. 
They  have  since  been  very  much  lei's.  The  average  value  of  these  ex- 
ports for  the  four  years  preceding  the  Keciprocity  Treaty  amounted  to 
$225,722,  and  for  the  twelve  years  ending  with  the  Reciprocity  Treaty, 
$3t)7,500,  and  for  the  seven  years  after  the  abrogation  of  that  treaty, 
$348.281 ;  and  during  the  three  years  the  Washington  Treaty  has  beea 
in  existence  the  average  value  of  the  exports  of  Newfoundland  to  tiie 
United  States  has  been  $222,112. 

Q.  Then  they  were  less  under  the  present  Washington  Treaty  than 
they  were  while  there  were  heavy  duties  imposed  ? — A.  They  were  very 
much  so. 

Q.  What  deduction  do  you  draw  from  that  ? — A.  That  the  quantity 
exported  to  the  United  States  is  so  trifling  it  has  no  appreciable  efi'ect 
on  the  commerce  of  Newfoundland.  For  instance,  the  quantity  of  tish 
shipped  last  year  from  Newfoundland  to  the  United  States  was  about 
9,000  or  10,000  quintals  out  of  a  catch  of  1,300,000  quintals.  It  is  a 
mere  bagatelle. 

Q.  Who  supplies,  then,  the  American  market  with  fish  ?— A.  They 
supply  themselves.  They  have  greater  facilities  to  do  so  under  the 
treaty  than  they  had  before.  There  is  no  likelihood  of  Newfoundland 
ever  having  to  supply  them  now,  whatever  it  might  have  done  before 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHKRY   COMMISSION. 


511 


granting  tbein  the  privilege  tu  catch  Anh  iushoro  and  take  bait  on  the 

const. 

Q.  Your  exports  to  the  United  States  amounted  to  far  more  when  the 
(huy  existed  than  now  the  duty  is  ottf— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tb«  Americans,  having  now  the  privilege  to  catch  fish  and  bait  on 
the  Xcwfouudland  (ioast,  they,  you  say,  supply  themselves  ? — A.  To  a 
large  extent. 

Cl  What  are  the  markets  essentially  of  Newfoundland?— A.  Our 
largest  markets  are  the  Jirazils,  the  Mediterranean,  and  Knglaud.  To 
Spain,  Portugal,  Italy,  and  England  we  send  the  Labrador  tish,  an  in- 
terior description.    But  our  best  markets  are  certainly  the  lira/ils. 

Q.  Are  your  Ash  cured  in  a  particular  manner  to  suit  the  requirements 
of  those  markets  ? — A.  They  are.  The  Brazils  re(|uire  a  very  hard-cured 
fislj,  and  a  very  superior  quality  of  fish ;  and  in  Spain  they  require  a  very 
hard  and  well  and  carefully  cured  fish  ;  also  up  the  Mediterranean. 

Q,  Are  you  aware  as  to  whether  fish  have  been  imported  into  the 
United  States  from  Newfoundland,  anil  exported  to  the  Brazils,  West 
Indies,  and  other  tropical  markets ! — A.  1  am  not  personally  aware  of 
it,  but  I  believe  such  is  the  case.  I  have  heard  so  from  those  who  told 
uie  they  exported  fish. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  any  difference  in  the  mode  of  curing  American 
and  Newfoundland  fish  i — A.  There  is  a  very  great  difl'erence.  I  have 
observed  curing  at  the  establishments  at  Cape  Ann,  Gloucester,  and 
liavo  visited  there.  The  usnal  mode  was  to  dry  the  fish  three  or  four 
(lays,  not  generally  more  than  four  days,  they  told  me,  and  then  it  was 
tit  for  bouie  consumption,  it  would  not  stand  a  hot  climate,  nor  would 
it  answer  to  kee|). 

Q.  Their  fish  is  brought  in  in  salt  from  the  banks  ?— A.  And  then  it 
is  pnt  in  pickle  in  the  stores,  and,  as  required,  it  was  sold  out,  perhaps 
UK)  (juintals  with  three  days'  drying,  and  another  hundred  quintals  might 
rei|uire  five  days'  drying,  according  to  the  distance  it  had  to  go.  This 
was  the  system  they  told  me  they  had  pursued  at  Gloucester. 

Q.  Would  fish  so  cured  be  suitable  for  the  Brazil  or  Mediterranean 
luarket  ? — A.  No.  Our  fish  is  kept  on  hand  sometimes  for  six  months. 
It  would  not  answer  at  all  unless  it  was  hard-cured,  and  that  requires 
from  four  to  six  weeks,  under  a  moderate  suu  and  cool  winds. 

Q.  You  are  well  aware  of  the  climate  of  Cape  Ann,  Gloucester,  and 
that  neighborhood,  and  also  of  Newfoundland.  What  is  your  opiuiont 
with  regard  to  that  climate,  as  to  suitability  for  curing  fish  for  tropical 
markets !— A.  I  don't  think  it  is  suited.  It  is  too  humid  and  too  hot. 
I  find  it  oppressively  hot  here,  and  I  know  it  is  much  hotter  at  Glou- 
cester and  Cape  Ann. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect  upon  the  fish  ? — A.  I  am  certain  the  fish 
would  melt — would  fall  to  pieces.  If  they  attempted  to  cure  with  light 
salting,  as  in  Newfoundland,  where  the  curing  is  found  more  suitable 
for  the  Brazils  and  European  markets,  I  am  sure  the  fish  would  be  sun- 
burnt and  fall  to  pieces,  and  it  would  not  be  a  merchantable  article.  I 
am  quite  certain  of  that. 

Q.  How  long  does  it  take  to  cure  fish  in  Newfoundland  ?— A.  To 
thoroughly  cure  fish  fit  for  those  markets,  from  4  to  6  weeks. 

Q.  Then,  in  your  opinion,  the  opening  out  of  the  United  States  mar- 
kets, coupled  with  the  concession  to  the  Americans  to  fish  on  our  coasts, 
is  really  no  advantage  whatever  to  the  people  of  Newfoundland  ? — A.  I 
think  not.  The  statistics  prove  it  is  no  advantage ;  they  speak  better 
than  any  other  testimony. 

Q.  You  are  fully  aware  of  the  mode  in  which  the  Americans  formerly 


V] 


<^ 


^;. 


';' 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


|50      ~ 

1^ 


il2i 


I.I 


Ki    12.0 


1.8 


Photographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


T 


// 


w 


^t  ^^ 


:/ 


t/j 


■«^ 


^<- 


^ 


1.25      1.4      1 A 

^ 

6"     

► 

23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  M5S0 

(716)  872-4503 


&? 


512 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


got  their  bait  to  fish  on  the  banks  of  deep  sea  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  am  aware 
of  their  mode  of  procuring  bait.  They  usually  used  claais,  pogiesjor 
inerbaden. 

Q.  What  was  the  value  of  the  bait  which  they  brought  down  in  the 
spring  of  the  year  to  commence  bank  fishing,  and  what  was  the  value 
of  the  bait  they  used  during  a  season's  fishing  ? — A.  I  have  paid  myself 
$8  per  barrel  for  clams  and  $7  for  pogies.  I  believe  the  average  cost 
might  be  fairly  estimated  at  $6  per  barrel  to  American  fishermen. 

Q.  What  was  the  quantity  used  during  a  season  ? — A.  It  is  only  a 
short  time  ago  since  one  of  them  admitted  that  each  used  from  ir>0  o 
200  barrels  of  herring  and  other  bait  during  the  season  ;  they  could  not 
conduct  a  season's  bank  fishing  with  less  than  100  barrels  of  bait— not 
successfully. 

Q.  An  average  of  what  ? — A.  An  average  of  100  barrels ;  they  could 
not  con-lnct  fishing  successfully  with  less  than  100  barrels  of  bait. 

Q.  T)a  you  mean  for  the  whole  season  or  each  trip  I — A.  For  the  season 
I  mean. 

Q.  What  would  those  100  barrels  of  bait  cost  prior  to  the  Americans 
having  the  privilege  of  gettingthat  baiton  the  coast  of  Newfoundlaud?— 
A.  Suppose  there  are  300  vessels  on  the  banks  fishing — and  I  believe 
there  is  pretty  good  evidence  that  there  are  600  sail  this  season ;  admit 
that  there  are  300  sail 

Q.  Take  an  individual  vessel. — A.  An  individual  vessel,  100  barrels, 
at  $6  per  barrel,  would  be  $600. 

Q.  For  what  can  that  bait  be  obtained  on  the  coast  of  Newfound- 
land ? — A.  For  about  $40.  I  am  certain  they  never,  during  my  knowl- 
edge, paid  more  than  $40  for  100  barrels  of  herring. 

Q.  That  would  be  a  saving  of  $560  upon  each  vessel  ? — A.  Yes ;  there 
^ould  be  a  saving  of  that  much. 

Q.  That,  for  300  vessels,  would  be  a  large  sum  t — A.  A  saving  of  over 
$160,000  a  year. 

Q.  Upon  300  vessels  * — A.  Yes,  upon  300  vessels. 

Q.  Resulting  from  the  privilege  being  granted  them  of  getting  herriDi; 
and  bait  at  Newfoundland  instead  of  having  to  bring  it  from  the  United 
States  or  Nova  Scotia  ? — A.  Resulting  from  the  privilege  of  getting  bait 
on  the  Newfoundland  coast  instead  of  bringing  it  from  their  own  country. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  as  to  any  practice  on  the  part  of  the  American  bauic 
or  deep-sea  fishermen  of  throwing  small  fish  overboard? — A.  Yes;  I 
have  been  on  many  occasions  told  they  always  threw  the  small  fish  over 
board — fish  under  22  inches  in  length,  they  told  me.  These  fish  were 
not  suited  to  their  market  and  were  thrown  overboard.  That  had  beeu 
their  practice,  I  know,  for  years. 

Q.  Since  the  operation  of  the  Washington  Treaty,  what  practice  has 
grown  up  with  regard  to  those  small  fish  ? — A.  They  save  the  fish  no« 
and  bring  them  into  Newfoundland  market,  and  sell  them  there  at  from 
$1.50  to  $2  per  quintal. 

Q.  And  over,  I  believe  ? — A.  I  believe  so,  but  I  speak  within  the  mark 
when  I  say  from  $1.50  to  $2  per  quintal.  The  quantity  each  vessel 
would  catch  would  be  about  200  quintals.  That  is,  the  quantity  every 
vessel  would  otherwise  have  thrown  overboard  would  be  200  quintals, 

Q.  How  do  you  get  your  information  ? — A.  I  got  it  through  the  cap 
tain  of  an  American  vessel. 

Q.  His  estimate  was  that  every  American  banker  would  throw  over- 
board 200  quintals?— A.  About  200  quintals  of  small  fish  during  a  suc- 
cessful voyage. 

Q.  Now,  that  is  entirely  utilized  by  it  being  sold  in  Newfonndliuult- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


613 


in  aware 


A.  Yes ;  and  there  is  a  duty  on  fish  brought  into  Newfoundland  of 
$1.30  per  qnintal,  which  the  American  fishermeu  are  now  relieved  of 
under  the  Washington  Treaty. 

Q.  Figure  that  amount  up,  supposing  the  vessels  to  number  300. — A. 
300  vessels  at  200  quintals  each  vessel,  would  be  00,000  quintals  of  fish, 
which  at  $1.30  per  quintal  would  give  $78,000  as  the  amount  of  duty 
saved  by  300  sail  of  vessel  on  fish  brought  into  Newfoundland.  There 
is  also  the  value  of  the  iish  which  would  be  thrown  overboard  if  the 
American  fishermen  were  not  permitted  to  bring  it  into  tlie  Newfound- 
hiutl  market.  At  the  low  estimate  of  $1.50  per  quintal  the  amount 
would  be  $90,000;  and  at  $3,  $120,000. 

Q.  That  fish  is  very  lightly  salted ?•— A.  It  is  lightly  salted;  they  salt 
it  to  meet  the  Newfoundland  market ;  they  formerly  threw  it  away.  So 
600U  as  they  discovered  there  was  a  market  for  the  small  fish,  that  it 
was  well  adapted  for  the  Brazils,  they  immediately  salted  it  lightly,  as 
the  Newfoundland  manner  is,  for  sale  in  Newfoundland.  They  would 
otherwise  have  thrown  it  away. 

Q.  What  quantity  of  salt  would  be  used  on  that  fish — 100  quintals? — 
A.  About  12  hogsheads  to  100  quintals. 

CJ.  How  much  is  it  per  hogshead  ? — A.  The  price  in  Newfoundland  is 
about  7s.  per  hogshead. 

Q.  Then,  I  suppose,  there  is  the  labor  of  putting  it  down  into  salt, 
which  would  be  comparatively  trifling  ? — A.  The  oil  would  pay  well  for 
salt  and  labor.  I  have  not  computed  the  value,  but  it  is  the  usual  com- 
putation in  Newfoundland  that  the  oil  pays  handsomely  for  salt  and 
labor  of  salting  the  fish. 

Q.  But  the  oil  would  be  saved  whether  the  fish  were  thrown  over- 
board or  not? — A.  That  I  cannot  speak  of. 

Q.  Presuming  the  small  fish  were  thrown  overboard  immediately 
they  were  taken  out  of  the  water,  and  the  livers  were  not  saved,  yoa 
say  the  oil  in  the  small  fish  would  pay  for  the  salt  and  labor  used  iu 
curiug  them  ? — A.  Undoubtedly,  it  would  handsomely  pay  for  them. 

Q.  Then  you  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that  the  value  of  that  fish  sold 
to  Newfoundland,  heretofore  thrown  away,  is  clear  profit  to  the  Amer- 
ican fishermen  ? — A.  There  is  no  doubt  about  that.  I  have  no  doubt 
that  the  remission  oi  duties  on  that  quantity  of  fish  is  far  larger  than 
the  remission  of  duty  on  all  products  sent  by  Newfoundland  to  the 
United  States  market. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  amount  of  duties  on  Newfoundland  products 
remitted  by  the  United  States  during  the  last  four  or  five  years? — A.  I 
did  not  make  up  the  average  for  the  last  five  years.  In  the  last  three 
years  the  average  amount  of  duties  remitted  on  products  shipped  by 
Newlouudland  to  the  United  States  is  $49,000. 

Q.  Then  the  actual  remission  of  duties  under  the  Washington  Treaty 
by  the  United  States  amounts  to  under  $50,000,  while  the  actual  amount 
remitted  by  Newfoundland  is  $60,000?— A.  Seventy-eight  thousand 
dollars. 

Q.  8o  tbat  in  remission  of  duties  alone  the  account  stands  $28,000  in 
your  favor  ?— A.  Precisely. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  a  Newfoundland  fisherman  to  go  to  the  coast  of 
the  United  States  to  fish  ?— A.  You  mean  a  Newfoundland  vessel  ? 

Q.  Yes.— -A.  Never;  such  a  thing  was  never  known.    I  never  knew 

them  leave  the  Newfoundland  coast,  except  on  one  occasion,  twelve 

years  ago,  when  four  vessels  tried  the  experiment  of  fishing  round  the 

Magdalen  Islands— British  fisheries  in  the  gulf— but  found  the  fish  so 

33f 


i 


514 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISUERY   COMMISSION. 


inferior  to  that  caught  on  our  own  shores  they  never  went  again.  That 
is  the  only  occaHion  I  knew  tbein  leave  our  shores  to  fish  elsewhere. 

Q.  From  your  knowledge  of  the  statistics  of  the  island,  what  is  the 
value  of  the  fish  and  fish  products  taken  by  Newfoundlanders  from 
Quirpon  to  Cape  Race  and  from  Cape  Race  to  Ramea  Islands  ?— A.  The 
valne  by  the  statistics  is  about  $5,000,000. 

Q.  Will  you  enter  a  little  into  details  with  respect  to  this  ? — A.  There 
are  between  900,000  and  1,000,000  quintals  annually  taken  on  the  in- 
shore  fisheries  of  Newfoundland.  I  estimate  the  value  of  that  fish  at  SJ 
per  quintal.    There  are  salmon,  herring,  squid,  and  caplin  also. 

Q.  By  what  number  of  fishermen,  approximately,  is  that  product 
obtained ;  in  other  words,  how  many  are  actually  engaged  in  takiug  it 
from  the  water  ? — A.  I  am  speaking  now  of  the  codfishing  on  our  shores. 
Between  900,000  and  1,000,000  quintals  are  caught,  and  the  number  ot 
fisherman  may  be  fairly  estimated  at  about  15,000  men ;  I  mean  in  the 
actual  catching  of  the  fish. 

Q.  By  the  census  returns  there  appear  to  be  of  the  people  of  Ne«' 
foundland  about  24,000  engaged  in  catching  fish.  Now,  how  do  vou 
account  for  the  difference  between  15,000  and  the  24,000  mentioued  in 
the  census  returns  ? — A.  The  others  are  engaged  in  the  Labrador  fishery. 

Q.  From  the  returns  it  appears  that  the  exports  amount  to  between 
seven  and  eight  million  dollars,  and  you  value  the  catch  on  that  portion 
of  the  coast  from  Querpon  to  Ramea  Islands  at  five  millions  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  the  small  amount  apparently  caught  by 
tbe  9,000  fishermen  as  compa^'ed  with  $5,000,000  worth  caught  by  the 
15,000  fishermen  ? — A.  The  shore  fish  is  of  very  much  greater  value  than 
that  of  the  Labrador  coast.  The  price  of  the  shore  fish  last  year  was 
29«.  6(1.  per  quintal,  while  the  current  price  of  the  Labrador  fish  was  U-s. 
and  23«.    The  Labrador  fish  is  always  5s.  or  6«.  per  quintal  less. 

Q.  Or  even  more  than  that  sometimes K — A.  Sometimes;  but  you 
may  take  it  as  a  general  average  6«.  per  quintal  difference  in  price. 

Q.  In  the  customs  returns  there  is  a  general  valuation  of  the  whole, 
is  there  not ;  what  is  the  valuation  of  the  whole  ? — A.  The  general  val- 
uation of  the  whole  Newfoundland  fish,  including  inshore  fish,  was  for 
last  year  under  $4  per  quintal.  I  notice  the  fish  caught  on  the  2few- 
fouudland  shores  was  put  in  at  the  same  rate,  evidently  an  oversight  of 
the  customs  authorities,  as  it  is  far  below  the  actual  value,  because  un 
doubtedly  the  actual  value  last  year  was  29«.  6d.  per  quintal,  and  this 
year,  before  I  left  St.  John's,  shore  fish  were  selling  at  27s.  M.  per 
quintal.  I  estimate  $5  or  25s.  per  quintal  as  a  fair  average  price  of  New- 
foundland shore  fish. 

Q.  Then,  after  a  very  careful  investigation  of  these  returns,  you  arrive 
at  the  conclusion,  to  Which  you  are  satisfied  to  pledge  yourself  on  oath, 
that  between  Quirpon  and  Cape  Race  and  Ramea  Islands,  on  a  fixiresti 
mate,  the  fish  caught  annually  would  be  worth  $5,000,000  ?— A.  I  am; 
I  believe  that  to  be  a  fact. 

Q.  And  they  are  caught  by  about  15,000  men? — A.  I  estimate  that. 
The  other  point  is  carefully  worked  out. 

Q.  There  are  other  fish  taken  which  you  make  use  of  for  other  pur- 
poses t — A.  The  fishing  class  live  almost  entirely  on  fish,  of  course,  and 
all  classes  in  the  country  consume  considerable  qnai>  titles  of  iish. 

Q.  Do  you  make  an  estimate  as  to  the  consumption  ?— A.  There  are 
150,000  in  population,  and  say  five  persons  in  a  family — the  census 
shows  more  than  that,  but  for  the  purpose  of  this  calculation  take  that 
—there  are  30,000  families.  I  think  five  quintals  of  fish  would  be  a  lo«r 
average  of  the  consumption  of  each  family,  and  they  would  use  five  bar- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


515 


rels  of  herrings  to  each  family.  I  have  known  instances  where'families 
have  set  aside  ten  barrels  of  herring  each.  All  the  fishing  class  partake 
of  fish  and  herrings  three  times  a  day.  That  fish  I  would  value  at  less 
than  the  cured  fish,  because  all  consumed  during  the  summer  would  be 
fresh,  and  not  worth  within  $1  per  quintal  of  the  value  of  other  fish. 

Q.  Then  there  is  a  large  amount  of  caplin  and  herring  used  for 
manure? — A.  Yes;  and  in  fact  it  is  almost  the  only  manure  they  use 
on  the  island. 

Q.  Taking  the  whole  together,  what  do  you  make  up  the  amount  to 
l)e? — A.  I  think  the  value  of  the  home  consumption  and  that  used  for 
iigriciiltural  purposes  is  fully  $1,000,000,  or  very  u^ar  to  it.  I  think  it 
i8  not  an  unfair  estimate  to  put  it  down  at  $1,000,000. 

Q  Then  you  consider  the  value  of  the  inshore  flshi^rv,  as  at  present 
prosecuted,  is  worth  about  $0,000,000  annually  ? — A.  Yes,  I  thiuk  so. 

Q.  Are  these  cod  fisheries  {capable  of  further  development  in  the  col- 
ony j_A.  We  have  every  reason  to  believe  so.  The  fishery  has  been 
gradually  increasing  for  a  number  of  years,  as  the  popii'aMon  has  in- 
creased I  think  we  hive  every  reason  to  believe  than  there  is  an 
abiiuflaace  of  fish  round  the  island  when  the  fishing  is  pri)pi3rly  prose- 
cuted. 

Q.  In  regard  to  bait,  you  say  the  bait  is  found  in  large  quantities  in 
the  coves  and  at  every  inlet  and  beach  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  the  last  two  or  three  years  have  there  been  American  ves- 
sels on  the  coast  for  baitf — A.  There  has  been  a  great  number.  lu 
1872,  immediately  the  Washington  Treaty  had  been  negotiated,  and 
before  it  was  accepted  by  Newfoundland,  I  took  special  interest  in  the 
matter  and  made  special  inquiry,  as  at  that  time  I  was  in  the  legislature 
and  speaker  of  the  house,  and  I  was  anxious  to  inform  myself.  I  found 
over  200  vessels  had  entered  Fortune  Bay.  I  counted  47  vessels  myself 
in  one  week,  and  from  that  date  to  this  they  have  continued  visiting  the 
whole  island.  At  that  time  they  had  not  gone  farther  east  than  Pla- 
ceiitia  Bay.  The  people  of  St.  John's  had  never  seen  any  Americaa 
fishing  vessels  after  bait,  nor  had  any  been  seen  at  Conception  Bay  or 
Bonavista  Bay. 

Q.  During  the  last  two  years  many  vessels  have  visited  the  east  coast 
as  well  as  the  south  coast  for  bait? — A.  I  have  seen  a  great  number  of 
them.    I  have  seen  a  great  number  of  them  this  summer. 

Q.  How  far  north  have  they  gone  ? — A.  They  have  gone  to  my  knowl- 
edge to  Trinity  Bay,  but  you  may  have  evideuce  that  they  have  gone 
farther  north. 

Q.  Have  they  gone  farther  north  f — A.  They  have  gone  to  my  knowl- 
edge to  Trinity  Bay;  but  I  am  not  aware  that  they  have  gone  farther 
north. 

Q.  I  believe  as  a  matter  of  fact  they  have  not  gone  farther  north? — 
A.  I  don't  think  they  have.  As  far  as  my  knowledge  goes,  they  have 
not  gone  farther  north. 

Q.  Their  principal  resort  is  between  Cape  Race  and  Conception  Bay, 
incinsive?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  between  Cape  Race  and  Fortune  Bay,  inclusive  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  the  past  summer  were  there  great  numbers  of  American 
vessels  in  these  localities  ? — A.  There  were.  Every  harbor  had  more  or 
less  of  them.  At  St.  John's,  during  one  week — I  was  living  there,  and 
'ny  hotel  overlooked  the  harbor— I  counted  over  50  sail.  Some  of  the 
customs  authorities  told  me  over  100  vesselt?  had  come  in  the  bay  and 
entered  the  harbor  or  remained  just  outside.    On  my  way  across  to  Con- 


516 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ception  Bay  and  Harbor  Grace,  on  14th  or  16th  July,  I  saw  three  Amer- 
ican fishermen  in  Portugal  Cove.  I  saw  their  dories  and  the  crew  get- 
ting squid.  I  made  inquiry,  and  was  told  they  were  purchasing  tbem 
at  Ed.  and  6d.  per  hundred,  and  they  also  caught  all  they  could  them- 
selves. I  made  further  inquiry  at  Holyrood  and  found  they  were  doiug 
the  same.  They  were  catching  squid  as  fast  as  they  could,  and  were 
buying  at  the  same  time.  At  Slosquito,  near  Harbor  Grace,  there  was 
an  ice-house,  and  they  furnished  themselves  with  ice.  During  tlie  week 
of  July  14  six  American  vessels  had  got  ice  there,  and  they  jigged  squid 
at  Harbor  Grace  Island,  about  one  mile  or  one  mile  and  a  half  horn 
Harbor  Grace,  and  they  had  rather  thinned  the  squids  out. 

Q.  I  want  to  understand  whether  in  those  localities  Americai'  flsber- 
men  have  been  constantly  coming  in  during  the  summer  for  bait  ?— A. 
Yes ;  every  day  during  the  season. 

Q.  The  bait  was  sometimes  purchased  from  the  people  and  sometimes 
caught  by  themselves? — A.  I  think  they  always  combined  the  two  to- 
gether. When  taking  the  herring  themselves  with  seines  their  crew 
would  haul  in  the  herring  with  the  assistance  of  the  seining-master, 
and  when  jigging  for  squid  the  crew  jig  what  they  can  and  the  skipper 
buys  what  he  can.  TV  hen  seeking  caplin,  they  assist  in  the  same  way. 
Some  vessels  bring  their  own  seines  for  the  purpose  of  taking  caplin. 

Q.  What  are  the  habits  of  squid  ? — A.  Squid  are  never  taken  around 
Newfoundland,  except  near  the  shore,  on  ledges ;  generally,  in  a  harbor 
or  entrance  to  a  harbor. 

Q.  They  come  in  the  coves? — A.  No ;  they  don't  come  in:o  the  coves. 
The  caplin  do  so,  but  squid  are  caught  on  what  are  called  squid  ledges, 
which  are  a  short  distance  off,  perhaps  a  quarter  of  a  mile. 

Q.  They  are  taken  on  jigs,  not  in  seines  ? — A.  I  have  known  tbem 
taken  in  seines. 

Q.  It  is  prohibited  ? — A.  It  is  prohibited ;  it  is  contrary  to  law. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  temporary  effect  on  local  fishermen  of  the 
great  draught  made  in  son.  places  among  the  squid? — A.  It  basde 
prived  the  local  fishermen  of  bait  for  the  time  being.  I  can  describe  the 
effect  it  had  on  the  fishermen  of  Harbor  Grace  Island.  I  conversed 
with  three  of  them,  and  they  told  me  they  had  been  five  days  without 
sufficient  bait  to  catch  the  codfish,  because  the  squid  had  been  swept 
from  their  little  jigging  ledge.  It  was  a  place  of  very  limited  extent, 
and  not  like  the  usual  places  for  catching  squid. 

Q.  Then,  although  there  may  be  a  large  quantity  of  squid  bait  on  the 
coast,  constantly  coming  in  and  out,  still  the  increased  demand  upon 
these  ledges  make  it  temporarily  difficult  for  local  fishermen  to  get 
squid  ? — A.  To  only  a  limited  extent,  because  they  are  taken  more  gen 
erally;  but  it  would  apply  more  particularly  to  caplin,  which  can  only 
be  taken  in  narrow  coves.  I  have  known  many  cases  in  which  a  seiner 
bas  completely  swept  the  cove  and  left  the  local  fishermen  without  any 
bait  for  the  day.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  capliu  come  in  with  high  tide, 
and  if  you  do  not  then  take  them,  you  will  not  get  any  till  the  next 
high  tide ;  so  that  if  five  or  six  caplin  seiners  take  the  bait  for  Ameri 
can  fishermen,  the  local  fishermen,  with  their  dip-nets,  will  have  no 
opportunity  of  taking  any  until  the  next  high  tide.  It  certainly  makes 
a  local  scarcity,  which  sometimes  will  last  three  or  four  days. 

Q.  So  far,  then,  it  is  a  temporary  injury  to  the  local  cod  flshermea  ?- 
A.  No  doubt  it  is.  Without  destroying  the  immense  quantities  of  bait 
on  the  coast,  it  does  produce  a  local  scarcity  occasionally. 

Q.  The  Americans  purchasing  the  bait  from  the  seller  puts  so  much 
money  into  bis  pocket,  and  so  far  as  a  matter  of  trade,  is  an  advantage 


AWARD   Oi    THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


517 


to  no  individual ',  bat  wbat  is  the  effect  upon  a  small  commn- 
nity  of  one  or  two  individuals  supplying  American  vessels  with 
l){,i't»_A.  My  own  impression  is,  that  supplying  American  vessels  with 
bait  is  one  of  the  most  demoralizing  things  for  our  fishermen.  I  think 
they  are  acting  as  mere  jackals  tor  the  lion.  It  is  most  injurious  to  the 
local  fishermen  in  more  ways  than  one.  The  system  of  trade  in  New- 
foundland is  principally  on  the  credit  system,  and  a  very  expensive  one 
it  is,  and  most  of  the  fishermen  are  indebted  to  the  merchants,  and  they 
are  ready  enough  to  take  $20  from  an  American  fisherman  when  they 
ought  to  be  catching  cod  for  the  merchants  who  are  supplying  their 
families  Avith  goods.    1  therefore  think  it  is  a  demoralizing  trade. 

Q.  Would  the  fisherman's  time  not  be  much  More  beneficially  and 
advantageously  employed  if,  insteadof  getting  $20  for  supplying  Ameri- 
cans with  bait,  he  applied  himself  to  catching  codfish  with  that  bait? — 
A.  Decidedly.  To  illustrate  it :  Two  days  before  I  left  St.  John's,  a 
man  belonging  to  Bay  Bulls,  18  miles  from  St.  John's,  was  in  the  office 
of  tbe  Hon.  Ambrose  Shea,  and  informed  me  that  two  days  previous 
ten  American  vessels  were  in  that  bay,  and  engaged  a  number  of  local 
fishermen  to  catch  bait  for  them,  for  which  they  obtained  about  9d.  per 
100  for  squid.  During  the  same  day  a  fisherman  went  out  and  caught 
ten  quintals,  worth  $5  per  quintal.  So  any  person  can  estimate  what 
the  value  of  bait-fishing  is.    This  I  am  certain  is  the  fact. 

Q.  You  say  business  in  I^^ewfoundland  is  generally  conducted  on  the 
credit  system  1 — A.  Yes ;  pretty  generally.  It  is  so  all  over  the  world, 
wherever  cod  fishing  is  carried  on.  It  requires  such  an  enormous  out- 
fit, it  is  generally  done  on  the  credit  system. 

Q.  Then  there  is  great  attraction  in  $20  in  cash  to  a  fisherman  ? — A. 
Some  of  them  are  verj'  reluctant,  but  money  and  rum  are  a  great  object 
with  tbem  there. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  mode  in  which  the  Americans  prosecute  the 
Bniik  fishing  ? — A.  I  am  aware  they  prosecute  it  with  trawls  or  bultows, 
and  tlif^  deep-sea  fishing  with  deep-sea  lines. 

Q.  What  is  the  general  opinion  entertained  as  regards  the  Immense 
diatriVuition  of  bait  upon  the  deep-sea  fishery  on  the  coast  of  Newfound- 
land ?— A.  The  general  opinion  is  that  it  keeps  the  fish  on  the  Banks. 
To  illustrate  it :  about  twelve  years  ago  there  had  been  a  law  passed  to 
prohibit  the  hauling  of  herring  before  12th  of  April,  but  practically  the 
law  was  avoided,  because  there  were  no  persons  to  carry  it  out,  and  the 
French  were  fishing  with  bait  before  1st  April,  in  many  inatances  on 
L'otb  March ;  they  got  early  to  the  Banks,  and  the  consequence  was  we 
had  a  season  of  poor  fishing.  I  remember  that  I  induced  the  govern- 
ment to  place  a  steamer  on  the  western  coast  for  the  purpose  of  carry- 
ing out  that  law  rigidly,  and  I  volunteered  myself  to  carry  the  law  out. 
From  Luat  day  to  this  it  has  been  rigidly  enforced,  and  the  consequence 
has  been  that  the  fish  have  struck  in  during  all  these  years  much  earlier 
than  before,  and  we  have  had  much  better  fishing.  I  think  we  may 
assume  from  this  that  a  large  and  early  supply  of  bait  on  the  Banks  is 
injurious  to  the  local  shore  fisheries  of  Newfoundland.  It  is  a  fair  in- 
ference. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  What  was  it  that  the  vessel  was  to  prohibit  f  — A.  To  prohibit  the 
hauling  of  herring  before  12th  April ;  the  law  now  is  before  the  20th 
April. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 
Q.  On  the  eastern  and  south  coast  of  the  island,  how  has  the  cod  fish- 


518 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ing  been  during  the  past  two  years  ? — A.  I  think  not  so  good  as  it  was 
before.  The  Americans  have  been  supplied  with  abundance  of  bait,  and 
they  have  laid  down  far  more  hooks  than  they  were  able  to  do  before. 
I  understand  the  bankers'  catch  has  considerably  increased,  and  we  may 
infer  that  this  is  the  cause  why  the  flsh  are  scarce  on  the  southern  coast 
of  Newfoundland.  The  flsh  are  scarce  there,  and  American  bankers  are 
more  plentiful  and  they  have  bait  more  plentiful  than  before. 

Q.  There  are  larger  quantities  of  bait  obtained  from  the  coast,  a 
larger  number  of  American  fishermen  are  on  the  Banks,  and  as  they 
have  increased  the  cod  fishery  has  decreased  on  the  shore  ? — A.  These 
are  the  facts. 

Q.  The  general  impression  is  that  the  fish  are  prevented  corriing  on 
the  Banks? — A.  Undoubtedly;  you  could  not  meet  with  three  flsheriueu 
in  Newfoundland  who  are  not  very  clear  on  that  point. 

Q.  North  of  Bay  Conception,  where  the  Americans  have  fished,  what 
has  been  the  fishing  during  the  last  two  years? — A.  There  was  good 
fishing  last  year  in  Bonavista  Bay  and  on  the  north  side  of  Trinity  Bay, 
while  south  of  that  there  was  poor  fishing.  I  only  state  these  as  facts; 
I  don't  assume  to  know  the  reasons. 

Q.  You  are  thoroughly  conversant  with  the  mode  of  carrying  on  the 
fishing  as  regards  supplies  and  profits? — A.  Yes;  I  had  many  years' 
experience  of  it. 

Q.  Will  you  state  to  the  Commission  the  profits  of  a  voyage?— A.  I 
have  prepared  two  statements,  as  lollows : 


Outfit  for  two  men  in  one  punt. 


100  fathoms  ropo,  9-ply  ratlin 

13  lines,  at  40  cents 

2  nets,  at  $20 

4  dozen  hooks,  at  12  cents 

Jiggers,  gaffs,  knives,  cast  and  dip  nets. 


$a  00 

4  80 

40  UU 

5  00 


55  2S 
Punt  will  cost  $40,  and  last  6  years 6  liO 

ProvUiona  ttpo  men  one  month. 

icwt.  bread $3  00 

icwt.flour 2  SO 

50  pounds  pork 5  00 

8  pounds  butter,  at  30  cents 2  40 

2  pounds  tea,  at  60  cents 1  20 

2  gallons  molasses 1  20 

15  60— 12  months....      $187  20 

Making  160  quintals  flsh,  at  20  cents 32  UO 

Wages,  one-third  their  catch 260  66 

547  80 
A  fair  average  catch  will  be  80  quintals  per  man — 160  quintals, at  $5  ......       800  00 

Net  profits ' 252  20 

Equal  to  32^  per  cent. 

A  boat  with  4  hands,  average  catch,  400  quintals,  at  $5 2, 000  00 

Outfit,  provisions  5  monthb 156  00 

Fishing-boat $400  00 

Will  last  15  5  ears  with  repairs 100  00 

Sails 100  00 

Sopeand  material 140  00 

740  00 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


519 


Say,  por  year M  00 

I'lllltS *'J  W* 

Caplia  seine  $80,  last  10  years 8  00 

New 12  00 

Lines,  4  dozen 19  20 

Ro<l» 10  00 

Sundries ' ^  00 

Makiuglish 80  00 

363  20 
Wages,  one-half  their  catch 1,000  00 

1, 3H3  20 
Fish 2.000  00 

030  dO 
Net  profit  equal  to  32  per  cent. 

Q.  These  are  statements  to  which  you  pledge  your  oath  as  being,  in 
your  opinion,  correct  ? — A.  1  am  certain  they  are  correijt.  The  estimate 
of  the  quantity  of  fish  is  an  estimate ;  I  am  certain  it  is  a  correct  one. 
The  other  points  I  swear  positively  to  as  being  correct ;  that  is,  as  to 
the  cost. 

Q.  It  is  alleged  that  only  small  herring  are  used  for  bait ;  is  that  the 
case  ?— A.  Certainly  not.  They  could  never  stop  to  catch  only  small 
berriugs.  They  take  the  herrings  as  they  catch  them.  They  take  the 
same  herring  for  bait  as  are  used  for  commerce. 

Q.  Under  the  circumstances  you  have  referred  to,  Newfoundland  does 
not  appear  to  be  much  benefited  by  the  Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  It  is 
most  injurious  to  Newfoundland  ;  perhaps  I  may  be  prejudiced.  From 
the  beginning  I  have  always  been  of  that  opinion,  that  it  would  act 
iujnriously,  and  I  believe  it  has  acted  injuriously;  and  further,  you 
would  not  find  three  men  in  the  island — I  only  know  of  one,  and  he  is 
a  man  who  never  changes  his  opinion — who  do  not  believe  it  is  disastrous 
to  the  country. 

Q.  It  seems  strange  that  the  legislature  should  have  been  induced  to 
pass  the  treaty;  can  you  give  any  reasons  for  it? — A.  There  were 
several  motives.  One  motive  was  that  it  was  part  of  the  imperial  policy. 
5^'ewfonndland  is,  generally  speaking,  a  very  obedient,  humble  servant  of 
Her  Majesty.  Another  reason  was  that,  I  think,  the  merchants  inferred 
from  the  eiiects  of  the  Eeciprocity  Treaty  that  their  fisheries  would  not 
he  injuriously  affected  by  the  fishery  privileges  granted  under  the 
Washington  Treaty.  They  are  located  in  Saint  John's,  and  had  not 
many  means  of  communication  with  the  intern  districts,  and  they 
asitumed  that  because  the  Americans  did  not  visit  the  island  for  bait 
(luring  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  therefore  they  would  not  visit  the  island 
(luring  the  term  of  the  Washington  Treaty.  Another  reason  was,  that 
they  thought  it  would  give  them  a  market  for  their  cod  oil,  and  they 
certainly  all  anticipated  that  seal  oil  would  be  allowed  in  under  the 
treaty.  We  are  so  ignorant  in  Newfoundland  we  could  not  discrimi- 
nate between  one  fish  and  another  so  far  as  products  went.  We  assumed 
that  seal  oil  would  be  admitted  into  the  United  States  as  cod  oil.  These 
are  generally  the  motives  that  Induced  the  merchants  to  accept  the 
treaty. 

Q.  As  regards  salmon — don't  you  obtain  a  quantity  of  salmon  T — A. 
There  is  a  quantity  of  salmon  there,  but  there  is  rather  a  difficulty  in 
shippiug  it  to  the  United  States,  for  although  salmon  is  allowed  in  free 
of  duty,  the  American  Government  has  decided  that  the  tins  that  cover 
tpe  salmon  should  pay  the  duty. 

Q.  So  then  all  anticipations  as  regards  salmon  have  completely  dia- 


620 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


appeared? — A.  They  have  all  fallen  through.  The  Newfoundland  mer- 
chants assumed  that  if  the  duty  were  tak'^n  off  codtlshoil  they  still 
would  get  the  same  price  for  the  oil  that  it  was  selling  at  before  the 
duty  was  removed;  but  to  their  astonishment  they  found  so  soon  as  the 
duty  was  taken  off  that  cod-oil  fell  in  price,  and  so  it  did  not  realize  any 
more  to  them,  and  the  United  States  was  no  market.  The  oil  purchased 
on  speculation  in  view  of  the  treaty  being  passed  had  eventually  to  be 
sold  to  English  merchants  and  was  never  sent  to  tiie  United  States,  be- 
cause the  American  market  was  lowered  so  soon  as  the  duty  came  ott". 

Q.  Was  there  nothing  else  in  the  mind  of  the  legislature  which  passed 
the  treaty? — A.  1  don't  remember. 

Q.  Nothing  in  regard  to  compensation  1 — A.  Yes ;  it  is  one  of  the  most 
important  items. 

Q.  They  fully  anticipated  compensation? — A.  I  know  they  expected 
a  reasonable  compensation;  it  is  all  we  have  a  right  to  look  for. 

Tuesday,  Auyust  U. 
The  conference  met. 
The  examination  of  Judge  Bennett  was  continued. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Question.  You  spoke  of  the  deep-sea  or  bank  fishery  being  conducted 
by  Americans  and  others  with  trawls;  what  do  you  mean  ? — Answer.  I 
meant  bultows  or  deep-sea  lines.  It  is  the  old  English  word  used  in 
ancient  documents  about  three  hundred  years  ago;  "  bulter  "  in  English, 
but  "bultow"  is  used  in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Will  you  describe  what  is  the  mode  of  fishing  ? — A.  The  bultow- 
line  is  about  100  fathoms  long  and  about  the  size  of  one's  little  tiuger, 
and  as  conducted  by  American  fishermen  they  join  a  number  of  those 
lines  together  until  they  have  sufQcient  to  hold  about  1,000  hooks  at 
about  one  fathom  apart.  That  is,  a  bultow  line  would  be  6,000  feet 
long,  each  line. 

Q.  And  those  lines  are  buoj'ed? — A.  No;  they  lie  on  the  bottom,  but 
there  are  buoys  to  indicate  where  they  lie. 

Q.  Then  one  vessel  fishing  with  an  immense  number  of  those  lines 
covered  a  large  area  of  ground  ? — A.  Of  course,  so  far  as  I  am  informed 
each  dory  requires  two  bultows,  and  there  are  usually,  I  think,  about  four 
or  five  dories  to  each  American  vessel.  The  large  vessels  may  take  six 
dories. 

Q.  And  when  you  spokeof  the  bait  being  distributed  from  the  banks  or 
deep  sea,  did  you  mean  that  a  large  number  of  bultows  coveran  immense 
area  of  ground? — A.  Undoubtedly.  Three  or  four  hundred  vessels 
each  with  six  or  eight  bultows  of  the  size  I  have  described  would  cover 
an  immense  area  of  ground. 

Q.  Thereby  distributing  a  large  quantity  of  bait  and  attracting  flsli 
to  that  locality  ? — A.  Certainly  ;  that  would  be  the  effect. 

Q.  Now,  '>vith  regard  to  tne  western  coast  of  the  island  over  wbicb 
the  Americans  prior  to  the  Washington  Treaty  enjoyed  the  privilege  of 
fishing,  that  is  from  Bamea  Islands  to  Cape  Bay  and  from  thence  to 
Quirpon,  is  that  suitable  as  a  basis  for  carrying  on  the  bank  or  ileei> 
sea  fishing? — A.  Only  to  a  limited  extent.  The  bait  would  not  be  found 
at  all  seasons  of  the  year  at  that  part  of  the  coast.  Only  in  a  few  local- 
ities or  indentations  is  there  sufli'^^ent  depth  to  hold  the  herring  or  other 
bait.  It  could  not  be  relied  on  as  a  basis  for  operations  to  any  great 
extent. 

Q.  Then,  again,  it  is  far  distant  from  the  banks  ?— A.  It  is  much  far- 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


521 


tber  distant  tban  Placentia  anil  Avalon  on  tbo  southeast  part  of  the 
island  from  the  banks ;  but  of  course  very  much  nearer  than  is  Glou- 
cester in  the  United  States.  I  may  say  in  connection  with  that,  I  never 
knew  or  beard  of  Americans  malting  that  a  basis  of  banking  operations 
previous  to  the  privileges  conceded  by  the  Washington  Treaty. 

Q.  You  say  American  bankers  take  40  or  50  barrels  of  bait  each  time 
they  come  to  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  I — A.  Yes ;  that  is  about  the 
usual  quantity,  1  think. 

Q.  What  is  the  usual  number  of  bait  trips  that  a  banker  makes  in 
order  to  obtain  a  voj'age  of  codfish  ? — A.  Well,  I  think  usually  about 
two  or  three  times  they  will  require  to  bait ;  twice  certainly,  and  for  the 
last  two  or  three  jears,  or  at  least  this  summer,  the  fish  are  not  as 
plenty  on  the  banks,  and  I  understand  they  have  been  obliged  to  come 
to  the  coast  more  often  for  bait  before  they  made  up  the  trip. 

Q.  When  you  spoke  before  of  an  American  vessel  requiring  100  bar- 
rels ofbaiting,  starting  from  Gloucester  or  8alem,  or  an  American  port, 
to  prosecute  the  bank  fishery,  did  you  mean  that  that  would  be  all  the 
bait  that  vessel  would  require  for  the  season  ? — A.  No;  certainly  not.  I 
meant  that  they  could  not  carry  on  their  operations  with  any  success  at 
all  without  at  least  100  barrels,  but  in  order  to  conduct  their  operations 
as  successfully  and  as  fully  as  they  do  now,  they  require  at  least  200 
barrels  of  fish,  probably  250  barrels.  1  fully  believe  they  are  using 
ranch  larger  quantities  of  bait,  now  that  they  have  an  abundant  supply 
which  can  be  got  at  readily,  than  they  formerly  did  when  obliged  to  pay 
a  very  large  price  at  home  and  bring  it  such  an  immense  distance  with 
them. 

Q.  No  American  vessels  would  think  of  starting  on  Bank-fishing  with- 
out 100  barrels,  and  depend  for  the  remainder  upon  what  they  could  get 
ou  the  Banks  in  the  shape  of  squid  and  other  bait  ? — A.  Well,  I  doubt 
if  they  would  ever  take  100  barrels  of  salt  bait  when  they  left  on  the 
tirst  trip,  but  I  think  they  would  require  that  much  salt  bait  for  three 
trips,  in  addition  to  what  fresh  bait  they  could  secure  on  the  Banks  and 
elsewhere.  They  would  require  that  in  order  to  insure  a  fishery.  In 
tact,  until  the  last  four  or  five  years,  squid  were  rather  abundant  on  the 
banks,  and  the  Americans  were  able  to  obtain  during  the  months  of 
August  and  September  a  considerable  portion  of  bait  on  the  Banks 
without  leaving  them. 

Q.  Yon  say  that  heretofore  squid  were  found  on  the  banks ;  what  is 
the  case  now  as  reported  to  you  by  American  captains  ? — A.  On  the  day 
previous  to  my  leaving  St.  John's  I  was  in  conversation  with  a  gentle- 
man and  an  American  captain,  and  he  informed  me  there  were  very  few 
squid  on  the  Banks ;  they  had  taken  a  few  and  had  found  them  such 
excellent  bait  there  was  a  fish  on  every  hook  that  had  a  squid  on  it,  and 
tiiiding  he  could  not  get  sufficient  of  them  he  immediately  hauled  up 
and  came  to  St.  John's  to  procure  a  supply.  But  he  told  me  at  the  same 
time  that  squid  had  not  been  plenty  on  the  Banks  for  some  four  or  five 
years. 

Q.  Taking  an  American  vessel  fitting  out,  say  at  Gloucester,  for  the 
Bank  fishery,  taking  her  first  bait  from  there,  and  subsequently  during 
the  fishing  season  going  either  to  an  American  port  or  a  Dominion  port 
for  bait,  as  compared  with  a  vessel  fitting  out  at  Gloucester  and  having 
the  privilege  of  obtaining  bait  on  the  Newfoundland  coast,  what  is  your 
opinion  as  to  the  number  of  cod-fisbing  voyages  the  one  would  make  as 
compared  with  the  other  ? — A.  Of  course  I  can  only  give  an  approximate 
opinion.  There  is  a  very  great  difference  between  being  obliged  to  go 
70  or  80  miles  for  bait  and  going  1,000  miles  for  bait.    That,  of  course^ 


m 


522 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


I  I 


is  a  large  item.  I  should  think  that  the  Americans  might  now  well 
make  four  voyages  wliere  they  formerly  made  two. 

Q.  Four  cod-fishing  voyages  where  they  formerly  made  two?— A.  I 
should  think  so  ;  and  it  appears  to  me  that  with  the  line  of  steamers 
now  running  from  St.  John's  they  may  have  great  facilities  for  trans- 
shipment there.  They  have  not  up  to  the  present  time  used  this  Hue- 
it  has  only  been  established  a  short  time — but  as  they  are  an  enterpris- 
ing people  I  imagine  very  little  time  will  elapse  before  they  will  make 
use  of  the  steamers  to  transship  their  fish  and  save  all  the  time  re- 
quired for  vessels  to  go  1,000  miles  and  return  1,000  miles  for  the  pur- 
pose of  delivering  their  cargoes.  I  suppose  that  they  may  do  ao ;  tbey 
have  done  so.  I  understand,  at  other  colonies  with  regard  to  portions  ot 
their  cargoes. 

Q.  Well,  in  addition  to  the  privilege  of  obtaining  bait  on  the  coast 
and  also  of  transshipment,  what  facilities  are  there  there  for  obtaining 
ice  for  the  preservation  of  the  bait? — A.  There  are  quite  a  number  of 
ice-houses  on  different  parts  of  the  coast.  They  find  no  ditHculty  in 
getting  ice.    They  tell  me  they  get  it  at  $4  or  $5  per  ton. 

Q.  Now,  what  time  would  it  take  for  a  Banking  vessel  to  leave  the 
cod-fishing  ground  on  the  Banks,  come  into  the  shores  of  NewfouiKlland, 
and  go  back  and  commence  operations  again  ? — A.  That  would  depend 
somewhat  on  the  distance  they  were  out  fishing.  If  a  vessel  was  fishing 
150  miles  out  she  would  certainly,  with  a  favorable  wind,  reach  the 
Newfoundland  coast  within  24  hours,  for  they  are  a  very  superior  class 
of  vessels  and  sail  well.  In  nine  cases  out  of  ten  they  need  not  be 
delayed  more  than  one  day  to  obtain  bait,  and  they  would  proceed  back 
in  about  the  same  time  as  was  occupied  coming  in.  Certainly  within 
three  days  the  whole  operation  may  be  performed. 

Q.  You  have  said  nothing  with  regard  to  the  halibut  fishing ;  will 
yo'i  describe  it,  and  to  what  extent  it  is  prosecuted  ? — A.  The  halibut 
fishing  on  the  Newfoundland  coast  is  a  very  limited  one,  so  far  as  I  am 
aware.  It  is  limited  to  the  waters  between  Brnnet  Island  in  Fortune 
Bay  and  Pass  Island  in  Hermitage  Bay.  It  is  conducted  close  inshore, 
and  was  a  very  prolific  fishery  for  a  number  of  years.  Our  local  fisher- 
men pursued  it  with  hook  and  line.  I  think  about  eight  years  ago  the 
Americans  visited  that  place  for  the  purpose  of  fishing,  and  they  fished 
it  very  thoroughly.  They  fished  early  in  the  season,  in  the  month  of 
April,  when  halibut  was  in  great  demand  in  New  York  market.  They 
carried  them  there  fresh  in  ice,  and  I  know  they  have  pursued  that 
fishery  from  that  time  to  within  the  last  three  years.  I  believe  they 
have  about  exhausted  it  now.  They  have  completely  monopolized  the 
fishery,  and  I  have  myself  seen  six  American  fishing  vessels  within 
three  miles  of  the  land  fishing  for  halibut  on  one  occasion.  That  was,  I 
think,  four  or  five  years  ago. 

Q.  Are  there  any  American  vessels  which  fish  inshore  or  within  the 
three-mile  limit  for  codfish  as  well  as  for  halibut? — A.  I  am  quite  cer- 
tain they  have  fished  at  Grand  Bank,  in  Fortune  Bay,  and  at  the  Keys, 
St.  Mary's  Bay.  I  have  not  seen  them  myself.  I  have  been  creditably 
informed,  and  I  have  every  reason  to  believe,  they  were  seen  fishing  in 
that  locality. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  French  fishery  yesterday ;  do  they  use  salt  or 
fresh  bait  ? — A.  They  use  salt  bait.  They  buy  bait  fresh  from  the  New- 
foundland people  and  salt  it  themselves  on  board  of  their  vessels. 

Q.  Then  there  is  this  distinction  between  the  Americans  and  the 
French,  that  the  French  buy  their  bait  from  the  people,  while  the  Amer- 
icans catch  it  and  buy  it  in  the  manner  you  have  before  described  ?— A 


""■ 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


523 


Yes ;  the  French  never  visit  the  Newfoundland  coast.  The  iHlands  of 
Saiut  Pierre  and  Miqnelon  are  their  headquarters.  The  Newfoundland 
people  carry  the  bait  there  fresh  to  sell  it  to  them. 

Q.  You  refer  to  the  people  of  Newfoundland  living  in  small  settle- 
nioDts  all  along  the  coast  and  carrying  on  Ashing  in  their  immediate 
iieigbl'oriiood  ;  are  these  people  dependent  solely  or  almost  solely  upon 
the  tisliiiig  for  their  support! — A.  They  are. 

Q.  They  are  essentially  a  fishing  people  ? — A.  They  are  essentially  a 
llshini;  population,  and  they  are  settled  on  a  narrow  fringe  of  land  on 
the  seaboard  ;  the  interior  is  unsettled,  and  if  there  are  any  agricultural 
lauds,  and  1  believe  there  are  excellent  agricultural  lands  on  some  por- 
tions of  the  island,  they  have  not  yet  been  cleared  and  cultivated.  The 
people  depend  solely  on  the  fisheries. 

Q.  Deprive  them  of  their  fisheries,  as  at  present  situated,  and  you 
deprive  tbem  of  their  all  ? — A.  Starvation,  and  nothing  el^e  but  that 
for  tbeiu. 

Q.  No  money  compensation  could  recompense  them  for  such  a  loss  as 
the  loss  of  their  fisheries? — A.  1  am  not  prepared  to  say  that  no  money 
compensation  could  do  so.  I  imagine  that  an  amount  equal  to  the  debt 
ot  England  would  compensate  them.  I  don't  estimate  the  value  ;  but 
undoubtedly  men  who  are  left  without  means  of  earning  a  living  for 
themselves  and  their  families  can  scarcely  be  compensated  with  any 
slight  amount  of  money. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  How  far  are  the  hooks  on  the  bultow  suspended  from  the  main 
line  ?— A.  About  half  a  fathom.  With  the  French  the  length  is  nearly 
oue  fathom,  and  with  the  Americans  between  three  and  four  feet. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  The  Hue  is  at  the  bottom  ? — A.  The  line  and  hooks  both  lie  at  the 
bottom. 

Q.  It  is  at  the  bottom  where  the  fish  are  feeding? — A.  The  fish  are 
feeding  on  crabs  and  small  bait,  and  they  pick  up  the  herring  as  they 

come  to  it. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  Do  they  use  squid  bait  on  the  trawls  ? — A.  Yes,  and  find  it  very 
excellent  bait. 

Q.  A  whole  one,  or  squid  cut  up  ? — A.  Newfoundlanders  use  squid 
bait  whole,  but  Americans  economize  the  bait.  They^  put  out  a  far 
larger  number  of  hooks  than  the  Newfoundland  people,  and  ecouomize 
the  bait  by  cutting  it  up. 

Q.  What  bait  do  they  use  for  halibut? — A.  Herring. 
By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  Will  you  have  the  kindness  to  mark  on  the  map  the  portion  of  New- 
foundland that  the  French  have  some  fishing  rights  in  ? — A.  All  right 
round  the  north  part  of  the  island,  from  Cape  John  to  Cape  Ray.  The 
French  have  fishing  privileges  there  with  Americaua  and  English. 

Q.  The  Americans  had  the  right  before  the  Washington  Treaty  went 
into  operation  to  fish  there  ? — A.  From  Bamea  Islands  to  Cape  Bay, 
and  then  northward  to  Quirpon,  and  thence  on  the  Labrador  coast  as 
rar  north  as  they  chose  to  go  without  interfering  with  the  rights  of  the 
Hudson's  Bay  Company. 

Q.  Your  people,  1  believe,  fish  forced  in  boats,  do  they  not,  mainly? — 
A.  Yes,  in  boats,  but  called  by  different  names ;  distinct  descriptions  of 
names,  punts,  seining  skiflfs,  &Ck 


lill 


524 


AWAHD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


Q.  There  was  a  time  when  the  people  of  Newfoundland  sent  oat  ves- 
sels  to  the  Banks  to  fish  in  deep  water  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  was  pursued  to  a 
certain  extent,  but  not  wholly  relied  on. 

Q.  There  was  a  time  when  it  was  entirely  conducted  as  a  Bank  fish- 
ery ?  What  is  the  greatest  number  of  vessels,  owned  and  fitted  out  in 
Newfoundland,  that  went  out  to  the  Grand  Banks  at  any  time  ?— A.  At 
an  early  time  there  were  three  or  four  hundred  sail. 

Q.  That  was  how  long  ago  ? — A.  About  a  hundred  and  twenty  years 
ago. 

Q.  The  population  of  Newfoundland  then  was  nothing  compared  witli 
what  it  is  nowf — A.  It  was  contrary  to  law  to  settle  the  country.  It  was 
not  until  eighty  years  ago  that  permission  was  given  to  British  subjects 
to  settle  on  the  coast  of  the  island. 

Q.  They  were  all  until  then  squatters  ? — A.  I  don't  know  what  tliey 
called  them  ;  that  is  not  a  term  used  in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  You  know  what  it  means  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  their  status  down  to  eighty  years  ago  ? — A.  I  don't  speak 
positively  as  to  the  time,  but  until  thereabouts  1  should  think. 

Q.  The  people  planted  there  in  defiance  of  the  law,  carried  on  a  very 
large  Bank  fishery? — A.  I  did  not  say  that.  At  that  time  the  lishing 
fleet  came  from  the  west  coast  of  England ;  Poole  was  the  headquar- 
ters. 

Q.  What  was  the  population  of  Newfoundland? — A.  Not  more  than 
20,000  in  the  early  history  of  the  colony. 

Q.  At  what  time,  in  its  early  history,  had  Newfoundland  the  largest 
number  of  vessels  engaged  in  the  cod  fishery;  you  went  back  120 
years? — A.  But  I  spoke  then  of  the  English  people  engaged  in  the  cod 
fishery. 

Q.  What  was  the  time  when  the  people  of  Newfoundland  bad  the 
largest  number  of  Bank  fishing  vessels,  owned  and  fitted  out  by  them- 
selves?— A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say.     I  think  about  fifty  years  ago. 

Q.  About  how  many  vessels  in  all  ? — A.  I  think  the  people  of  New- 
foundland never  had  more  than  from  80  to  100  vessels  in  all. 

Q.  When  did  the  Newfoundland  Bankers  begin  to  diminish?— A.  I 
am  not  prepared  to  say,  but  I  suspect  that  they  diminished  during  the 
French  and  American  war — about  1812.  I  have  not  looked  into  the 
matter  carefully,  but  I  think  about  tLat  time. 

Q.  Was  it  a  steady  diminution,  do  you  think? — A.  I  think  a  steady 
diminution  after  that. 

Q.  Down  to  the  present  time? — A.  No;  down  to  say  thirty-flve  years 
ago,  when  it  ceased. 

Q.  That  would  be  about  1842?— A.  Yes;  about  that  time. 

Q.  What  brought  it  down  so  that  it  ceased  altogether;  what  was  tlie 
cause  of  that? — A.  Because  the  shore  fishery  was  found  more  profit 
able;  less  expensive  and  equally  productive. 

Q.  Was  not  one  cause  want  of  capital  ? — A.  I  don't  think  that  has 
ever  been  a  cause  in  Newfoundland.  The  merchants  have  an  abundance 
of  capital ;  so  abundant  is  capital  in  Newfoundland  now  that  large  sums 
of  money  are  lying  uninvested.  There  is  no  scarcity  of  capital  in  New 
foundland,  and  it  is  probably  the  only  part  of  North  America  where 
capital  is  really  plentiful. 

Q.  What  is  the  rate  of  interest  ? — A.  3  and  3J  per  cent. 

Q.  You  say  there  is  plenty  of  money  lying  unused  ? — A.  Lying  unused. 
There  is  abundance  of  money. 

Q.  You  don't  think  the  want  of  capital  ever  caused  the  condition  of 
the  Newfoundland  fleet? — A.  I  don't  think  so. 


AWIBO   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


525 


b  more  than 


[Q.  To  what  do  yoa  attribate  it,  beyond  the  fact  that  they  make  more 
mouey  by  boat  fishing  f — A.  I  dou't  kuow  of  auy  other  reason. 

Q.  Have  they  ever  tried  again ;  have  they  renewed  in  any  degree  fish- 
ing in  ships  ? — A.  Tliey  have  in  schooners  of  50  or  GO  tons  within  the 
last  tbree  or  four  years. 

Q.  What  class  of  persons  have  done  that  ? — A.  Three  or  four  mer- 
chants, I  think,  have  tried  the  experiment. 

Q.  Merchants  at  what  place  ? — A.  At  St.  John's.  I  believe  one  is  at 
St.  Mary's. 

Q.  Tbat  is  all  ? — A.  That  is  all,  and  they  have  done  so  encouraged 
bounty  given  by  the  legislature. 

Q.  There  is  a  bounty  given  by  the  legislature  of  Newfoundland  ! — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  is  that  bounty? — A.  It  is  not  a  large  one ;  I  forget  just  now 
what  it  is. 

Q.  Is  it  on  the  tonnage  employed? — A.  I  think  not.  I  think  it  was 
a  gross  sum  voted  by  the  legislature  to  be  divided  among  the  bankers. 
I  would  not  like  to  speak  positively  on  that. 

Q.  You  think  that  has  encouraged  them  to  send  out  vessels  ? — A.  It 
has  encouraged  them  to  try  the  experiment. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  ? — A.  Six. 

Q.  Have  you  any  return  of  the  results  ? — A.  I  have  not  a  return  of 
the  results,  but  I  have  heard  that  one  vessel  arrived  a  few  days  ago  with 
about  500  quintals  of  fish. 

Q.  How  is  that  as  a  result? — A.  Very  poor  as  compared  with  American 
vessels. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  that  difference  ? — A.  The  crew  was  smaller 
and  the  outfit  smaller,  and  that  was  only  one  trip  ',  perhaps  the  rest  of 
the  voyage  may  be  a  much  larger  catch. 

Q.  So  with  this  exception — the  little  experiment  with  half  a  dozen 
vessels — your  people  who  live  entirely  on  the  sea-coast  and  draw  all 
their  wealth  from  the  sea,  without  that  there  is  starvation,  are  employed 
in  boat  fishing,  catching  cod  and  bait  ? — A.  And  herring  and  salmon. 

Q.  I  mean  to  include  herring  among  bait  f — A.  Yes ;  but  they  catch 
herring  for  other  purposes  besides  b.vit. 

Q.  Will  you  state  to  the  Commissioners  what  the  business  in  frozen 
herring  is  ? — A.  The  business  in  frozen  herring  is,  I  think,  about  20,000 
or  25,000  barrels  a  year. 

Q.  Wbat  is  the  process  ? — A.  The  fishermen  catch  the  herring  and 
usually  freeze  them  on  the  ice. 

Q.  In  winter  ? — A.  In  the  months  of  January  and  Februrary.  They 
raise  scafi'olds  and  on  the  ice. 

Q.  And  then  do  they  export  them  ? — A.  They  sell  them  immediately. 
They  only  catch  them  after  American  vessels  have  arrived  to  purchase. 

Q.  They  sell  them  immediately? — A.  Immediately  to  American  ves- 
sels. 

Q.  Do  American  fishing- vessels  take  ice  on  board  in  which  to  pre- 
serve the  herring? — A.  They  freeze  the  herring  hard,  in  which  state 
they  keep  perfectly  solid,  and  are  sold  in  New  York  markets  as  tresh 
fish  at  a  season  when  they  cannot  readily  get  other  fish. 

Q.  That  is  a  pretty  large  business  ? — A.  It  is  a  very  good  paying 
business  for  the  American  fishermen. 

Q.  How  is  it  to  your  people  ? — ^A.  I  think  it  pays  them,  bat  only 
moderately. 

Q-  But  they  would  not  carry  it  on  if  it  did  not  pay  them?— A.  They 


526 


AWARD   OP   THE   PISOERY  COMMISSION. 


bave  no  other  employment,  or  not  much  other  employment,  during  the 
winter  months  in  some  localities. 

Q.  Now,  as  between  man  and  man,  is  it  not  a  pretty  good  thing  for 
your  people  that  when  they  have  got  no  other  employment  and  unem- 
ployed they  may  starve,  to  have  this  trade  in  frozen  herring f— -A.  I 
think  it  is  a  good  trade  for  them,  but,  as  I  said  before,  the  man  that 
only  gets  5s.  per  barrel  for  his  labor  is  not  so  handsomely  paid  as  he  who 
gets  $8  or  $10  per  barrel  for  the  same  article;  he  not  haviug  done  any 
work  on  it  except  to  carry  it  to  market. 

Q.  To  whom  do  you  refer? — A.  1  refer  to  the  American  fisherman  who 
has  prospered  by  the  Newfoundland  fisherman  who  has  received  only 
5«.  per  barrel  for  his  services. 

Q.  Does  he  not  receive  the  market  value  of  his  services  ?  They  are 
not  obliged  to  work  for  Americans  if  they  do  not  chose  to  do  so ;  they 
have  no  contract  nor  is  there  any  servitude. — A.  No. 

Q.  They  get  the  market  value  for  their  labor? — A.  Precisely. 

Q.  When  an  American  owner  sends  his  ship  out  to  Newfoundhuid  in 
winter  and  buys  this  frozen  herring  and  takes  it  to  market,  it  is  not  all 
income,  but  some  outlay? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  A  very  large  outlay? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  It  may  or  may  not  be  a  profitable  investment? — A.  As  a  matter 
of  fact  it  has  been  a  profitable  investment  to  Gloucester  fisbenneii. 
And  I  may  say,  in  this  connection,  that  Newfoundland  people  consider 
this  a  matter  of  very  great  hardship.  After  the  Keciprocity  Treaty  was 
abrogated  American  fishermen  cleared  out  their  vessels  on  ftsln')^  Vuy. 
ages,  came  to  Newfoundland  and  bought  those  herrings,  and  were  per- 
mitted by  the  American  custom  authorities  to  enter  those  herrings  free 
of  duty,  as  having  been  caught  by  themselves,  the  Newfoundland  fish- 
ermen being  thereby  excluded  from  the  American  market  for  the  sale  of 
those  fish,  because  there  was  a  duty  of  $1  per  barrel,  which  the  Ameri- 
can fishermen  avoided,  but  which  Newfoundland  fishermen  had  to  pay. 

Q.  There  is  such  a  thing  as  getting  excited  over  a  supposed  injury. 
Had  Newfoundland  fishermen  really  sent  frozen  herring  in  their  own  ves 
sels  to  New  York? — A.  The  fisherman  had  not,  but  some  of  those 
engaged  in  the  trade  had. 

Q.  Was  it  not  an  advantage  to  the  Newfoundland  people  that  there 
was  a  good  market  in  the  United  States  for  frozen  herring? — A.  Not  to 
the  whole  people,  but  to  the  few  people  engaged  it  undoubtedly  was  an 
advantage. 

Q.  There  were  as  many  people  engaged  as  the  business  called  for,  and 
no  more? — A.  Yes;  and  no  more. 

Q.  If  the  business  fell  oil"  in  the  United  States  and  there  was  not  such 
a  demand  for  frozen  herring,  to  some  extent  they  would  lose  their  busi- 
ness ? — A.  Yes ;  but  it  was  a  very  small  business. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  say  ? — A.  I  said  alwut  25,000  barrels. 
I  think  if  you  will  refer  to  the  statement  I  handed  in  yesterday  you  will 
find  for  a  number  of  years  it  did  not  exceed  15,000  barrels. 

Q.  When  you  spoke  of  a  very  small  business  I  wanted  to  remind  yon 
of  your  own  figures. — A.  I  had  not  forgotten  them ;  but  it  is  small  coiu- 
paratively. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  your  own  merchants  would  have  paid  them  any 
more  than  the  American  merchants  did  ? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  So  it  was  not  an  intentional  injury? — A.  No. 

Q.  It  was  a  matter  of  trade? — A.  It  was  a  matter  of  trade  in  which 
there  was  very  little  competition  and  an  ample  supply. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  also  that  not  only  American  fishermen,  but  to  a  very 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


527 


great  extent  American  vessels,  traders  in  frozen  herring,  come  down 
and  take  them  to  market  to  sell,  and  are  entered  and  licensed  as 
traders  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  probable.    I  am  not  aware  that  such  is  the 

case. 

Q.  You  know  there  is  a  class  of  American  vessels  coming  to  Newfound- 
land which  fill  up  with  frozen  herring  and  take  them  to  the  United 
States  markets? — A.  Yes;  I  believe  such  is  the  fact. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  growing  business  ? — A.  No ;  it  is  not. 

Q.  Is  it  a  diminishing  business? — A.  I  think  it  is. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  that  ? — A.  Because  one  portion  of  those 
herring  was  required  for  baiting  the  fishermen,  and  tiie  other  portion 
was  required  for  the  Boston  and  New  York  fresh-fish  market.  The 
privilege  of  getting  bait  on  the  Newfoundland  coast  now  no  longer  neces- 
sitates the  carrying  of  bait  from  Newfoundland  to  Cape  Ann  to  the 
same  extent  as  was  done  a  few  years  ago.  So  I  think  it  is  a  diminish- 
iug  business. 

Q.  Did  you  tell  us  that  the  Americans,  irrespective  of  treaties,  used 
to  procure  their  bait  on  the  island  ? — A.  I  did  not  say  for  years  back. 
1  did  say  they  had  before  the  Washington  Treaty.  They  did  so,  for  it 
came  under  my  observation  in  1872.  In  1871  I  am  aware  they  did  it  to 
a  limited  extent;  I  think  for  a  year  or  two  before  that  to  a  very  limited 
extent. 

Q.  Between  18G6  and  1871  ?— A.  I  would  not  say  that. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  there  is  a  herring  supply  at  other  places  besides 
Newfoundland,  say  at  the  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  There  is  a  large  herring 
lishiug  there  in  May ;  but  I  always  understood  that  the  herring  went 
there  to  spawn  and  only  remained  a  short  time,  and  after  spawning  struck 
offshore.    For  years  I  have  understood  that  to  be  the  fact. 

Q.  How  is  it  at  Labrador  ? — A.  There  is  no  herring  on  the  Labrador 
coast  until  about  this  time  of  the  year. 

Q.  In  August ;  how  long  do  they  remain  there  ? — A.  Until  November, 
I  think. 

Q.  Are  they  frozen  therein  November? — A.  No;  they  salt  all  herring 
on  the  Labrador  coast. 

Q.  They  are  taken  as  salt  herring  for  bait  ? — A.  They  are  taken  as  an 
article  of  commerce ;  I  am  not  awaie  they  are  taken  for  bait. 

Q.  Su  the  American  market  is  not  limited  to  Newfoundland  for  its 
herring  as  an  article  of  commerce  ? — A.  No ;  certainly  not.  1  imagine 
the  American  fishermen  catch  a  large  quantity  of  herring  on  the  Labra- 
dor coast,  and  that  may  be  one  reason  why  there  is  so  small  a  demand 
for  Newfoundland  herring  in  the  American  market,  because  they  supply 
themselves. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  American  fishermen  catch  herring  on  the  Newfound- 
land coast  ?— A.  I  think  so;  I  think  they  do. 

Q.  But  they  cannot  afford  to  give  the  time  ? — A.  They  spend  two  or 
three  mouths  there  every  winter.  Do  you  mean  for  commerce  or  for 
bait  ? 

Q.  I  mean  for  bait.  The  American  bankers  when  on  the  Newfound- 
land coast  get  away  as  quickly  as  they  can,  do  they  not  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  said  that  you  thought,  on  an  average,  they  would  not  be  de- 
tained more  than  one  day  to  get  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tbey  are  not,  therefore,  fishing  for  herring.  I  observed  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  question  was  put  by  counsel — "  any  one  who  helped  to 
liaul  a  net." — A.  1  never  saw  Americans  assisting  the  Newfoundland 
people  to  haul  nets ;  I  said  seines.    I  wish  to  distinguish  between  them. 


£28 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  They  come  in  and  make  a  contract  with  a  boat-flsberiuau  for 
baitf — A.  Precisely. 

Q.  They  want  it  as  quickly  as  possible  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  Newfoundland  fisherman  has  got  the  herring  ready ;  be  puts 
a  seine  across  a  little  inlet  and  incloses  a  body  of  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  he  supplies  the  vessel  as  quickly  as  possible  ? — A.  Certainly, 
that  would  be  the  result.  That  is  an  illegal  mode ;  it  is  contrary  to  law' 
and  Newfoundland  men  would  not  violate  the  law  if  not  encouraged  by 
American  fishermen.    Remember,  it  is  illegal. 

Q.  It  is  also  true  that  the  person  who  permits  himself  to  be  teuipted 
is  also  a  little  in  fault? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Without  going  into  the  merits  of  it;  tempted  or  not  tempted,  tbe 
Newfoundlander  does  draw  his  seine  across  the  inlet  and  incloses  a  large 
number  of  fish  ! — A.  Not  as  a  general  rule.  I  wish  to  confine  it  to  a 
very  limited  extent,  because  I  cannot  permit  it  to  be  assumed  that  I  said 
yesterday  it  was  a  general  thing.  I  said  it  was  done  in  a  few  places  far 
away  from  any  magistrate  or  customs  authorities,  and  the  general  rule 
was  that  tbey  engaged  a  man — the  owner  of  the  seine — and  with  his  in- 
telligence and  knowledge  of  the  localities,  and  their  labor,  tbey  were 
enabled  to  secure  the  bait. 

Q.  According  to  your  opinion  a  large  part  of  Newfoundland  was 
beyond  tbe  reach  of  tbe  magistrates  ? — A.  Not  all  of  it. 

Q.  And  having  a  great  part  beyond  the  reach  of  magistrates  and  peo- 
ple who  do  yield  to  money,  they  do  inclose  the  fish  and  have  them  ready 
to  sell  to  Americans? — A.  They  do  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  When  Americans  come  and  wish  to  fish  for  bait,  you  spoke  of  some 
person  who  has  a  boat  and  seine  ? — A.  I  did  not  speak  of  his  boat ;  I 
said  his  seine. 

Q.  And  he  goes  to  work ;  and  it  is  bis  contract  to  furnish  tbe  bait  1— 
A.  Undoubtedly  it  is  his  contract. 

Q.  It  is  his  business? — A.  It  is  his  business. 

Q.  And  the  American  vessel  helps  him  ? — A.  Tbey  conld  not  get  any 
without  helping  him,  and  the  vessel  gets  tbe  herring  at  a  much  lower 
rate  in  consequence ;  it  is  a  joint  affair  in  which  tbe>  are  both  engaged. 

Q.  The  Newfoundlander  is  tbe  man  who  contributes  the  seine  ?— A. 
He  does  that. 

Q.  What  is  the  cost  of  tbe  seine  ? — A.  It  would  depend  a  great  deal 
on  its  size. 

Q.  What  is  the  cost  of  a  seine  such  as  he  would  use  for  that  purpose  ?-- 
A.  Difi'erent  sizes  are  used.  In  some  places,  where  there  is  shoal  water, 
a  seine  costing  £20  would  be  suf&ciently  large,  and  at  other  pla^e^a 
seine  costing  from  £80  to  £100  would  be  sufficiently  large ;  or  from  iJ80 
to  $400. 

Q.  That  is  the  sum  invested  in  the  seine  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  people  are  so  poor  as  to  be  on  tbe  verge  of  starvation !— A. 
You  are  now  assuming  I  said  that.    I  never  said  so. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  tbey  were  in  that  condition  ;  that  if 
they  lost  their  sea-fisheries  there  was  nothing  left  but  starvation  ?— A. 
I  said  if  deprived  of  their  fisheries ;  but  I  did  not  say  that  at  present 
they  were  suffering  starvation.  If  deprived  of  their  means  of  liviug,  as 
would  be  the  case  with  all  of  us,  they  would  be  starved. 

Q.  If  they  had  a  single  season  in  which  the  fishing  was  entirely  an 
successful  what  would  be  their  condition ;  would  they  not  need  a  great 
deal  of  help  to  keep  them  from  the  borders  of  starvation  ?— A.  I  should 
think  so.   It  is  a  hypothetical  case ;  I  never  knew  such  a  case  to  occur. 

Q.  If  a  man  owns  a  seine  and  an  American  comes  along  aud  wants 


AWABD   OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


529 


fish  for  bait  as  soon  as  possible,  the  man  takes  charge  of  the  seine  ?— A. 

Yes. 

Q.  He  takes  charge  and  furnishes  the  seine  and  some  men  f — A.  It 
may  be  so  in  some  cases.  In  the  case  I  spoke  of  yesterday,  I  said  I 
never  knew  any  one  bat  the  seine-master.  I  believe  some  men  may  be 
famished  in  some  cases. 

Q.  Then  the  crew  of  the  vessel  will  take  hold  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And,  having  their  help,  he  charges  less  for  his  herring? — A.  Cer- 
tainly, they  get  the  herring  mnch  cheaper  by  assisting  to  take  them. 

Q.  He  is  paid  by  his  contract? — A.  I  don't  think  he  is  paid  any  com- 
pensatiou  at  that  season  of  the  year  for  the  services  rendered — any  ade- 
quate compensation. 

Q.  I  did  not  ask  whether  he  was  underpaid;  he  is  paid,  whether 
underpaid  or  not  ? — A.  Yes;  paid  something. 

Q.  You  gave  us  some  figures,  yesterday,  to  which  I  wish  to  call  your 
attention.  You  made  a  calculation  about  the  profits  of  an  American 
fishing- vessel? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  You  made  a  calculation  of  the  cost  of  outfit  of  two  men  and  a 
punt.  You  made  that  up  by  charging  certain  expenses  for  lines,  nets, 
books,  &c.,  at  $5;  then  yon  took  the  annual  cost  of  the  investment  in 
the  punt  for  one  year,  supposing  it  to  last  six  years,  at  $6.06 ;  and  pro- 
visions for  two  men  for  a  month,  and  multiplying  that  by  12  for  number 
of  months  in  the  year,  making  $187  ;  then  you  supposed  the  making  of 
160  quintals,  supposing  each  man  to  catch  80  quintals  at  $32,  and  wages 
at  one-third  of  the  catch.  Do  you  think  that  is  the  average  wages  ? — 
A.  It  is  not  thinking,  it  is  a  matter  of  common  custom  in  the  fisheries, 
I  refer  to.  It  is  the  actual  common  custom,  the  usu.al  way  of  paying 
the  fishermen. 

Q.  Not  wages  at  all  ? — A.  Not  wages,  but  as  sharesmen. 

Q.  And  that  would  be  the  average  share  ? — A.  Precisely. 

Q.  You  suppose  that  each  man  catches  80  qnintals,  making  160  quin- 
tals, and  you  put  them  at  $5  per  quintal,  making  $800.  Is  $5  the  usual 
price!— A.  I  think  it  is  a  fair  average  pric^. 

Q.  Now,  you  deduct  from  the  $800  $547,  which  leaves  $252.20,  which 
you  call  equal  to  32J  percent.;  32^  per  cent,  on  what? — A.  Upon  $800, 
the  catch  of  fish. 

Q.  That  is  the  percentage  of  profit  upon  the  catch  of  the  fish,  after 
deducting  all  expenses,  not  on  the  capital  ? — A.  I  put  in  the  whole  cost 
of  catching  the  fish  and  put  in  the  whole  quantity  of  fish. 

Q.  You  deduct  the  cost  from  the  whole  sales  of  the  fish  ? — A.  The 
whole  investment  for  getting  that  quantity  of  fish. 

Q.  That  leaves  a  net  profit  of  32 J  per  cent.  ? — A.  It  leaves  a  net  profit 
of  32 J  per  cent. 

Q.  Have  you  any  change  to  make  in  that? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  they  make  32^  per  cent,  per  annum  ?— A.  I  think 
that  is  what  supports  the  families  of  the  fishermen  throughout  the 
island. 

Q.  But  the  fishermen  have  bee  i  taken  off? — A.  But  there  are  the 
tishernien  and  the  master-fishermen. 

Q.  You  mean  the  owner  ? — A.  The  owners  are  fishermen  themselves, 
but  employ  servants.  The  merchants  do  not  carry  on  the  fishing  busi- 
ness at  all. 

Q.  Y'^ou  mean  to  say  it  is  nothing  but  net  profit  ? — A.  I  put  it  as  such. 
The  whole  calculation  was  complete  within  itself. 

Q.  You  suppose  that  the  gross  sales  being  $800,  the  net  profit,  de- 
ducting all  you  think  should  be  deducted,  is32i  percent.  ?— A.  I  think  so. 
34  F 


630 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  you  have  dedacted,  amoDg  other  things,  the  entire  pay  of  the 
two  men  iu  the  boat  ? — A.  Precisely. 

Q.  Theu  what  becooaes  of  the  32|  per  cent.,  to  whom  does  it  go?--A. 
To  the  owuer,  the  owner  of  the  boats  and  the  owner  of  the  nets,  who 
will  be  a  fisherman  of  the  better  class,  with  credit  at  the  merchants,  and 
who  has  to  support  his  family  out  of  the  32^  per  cent. 

Q.  Do  you  not  consider  that  the  32^  per  cent,  is  a  very  large  profit  ou 
the  gross  sales  ?  Tou  have  the  gross  sale  $800,  and  you  deduct,  iuclod- 
ing  the  pay  of  the  two  men,  only  $252.20,  and  leave  the  balance  as  profit 
lor  the  owuer  of  the  boat  and  nets  f — A.  You  are  mistaken;  the  cost  of 
catching  the  fish  is  $547.  The  net  profit  is  $252 ;  that  would  be  what 
was  to  support  his  family — not  a  very  large  amount  out  of  the  service 
of  two  men.    It  is  a  very  fair  profit. 

Q.  The  question  of  supporting  his  family  is  outside.  Is  not  $252.20 
on  the  amount  invested  a  very  large  return  f — A.  I  think  not ;  it  is  about 
the  usual  return.  I  think  this  statement,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  goes, 
is  honestly  made  up,  and  includes  every  legitimate  expenditure  on  that 
voyage. 

Q.  Do  you  include  with  it  the  making  of  so  many  quintals  offish!— 
A.  That  is  the  usual  price  paid  for  making  fish. 

Q.  So  that  when  you  take  the  usual  price  for  making  fish  that  woald 
be  equivalent  to  allowirg  interest  on  outlay,  such  as  buildings? — A.  I 
thought  that  reasonable.  What  I  meant  certainly  was  to  take  what  i» 
usually  paid  as  a  fair  estimate  of  wiiat  was  right  and  proper. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  these  parties  deal  iu  the  open  market  ou 
equal  terms'! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  that  always  the  case  with  your  fishermen  ? — A.  As  far  as  the 
fishermen  are  concerned. 

Q.  You  think  on  an  equality  for  making  contracts  with  owners?— A, 
The  planters  are.  The  men  who  are  put  down  as  the  fishermen  are  not 
on  equal  terms,  but  the  men  who  fit  them  out  are  on  about  equal  terms 
with  the  merchant  .  There  is  a  distinction  between  the  two  meu— one 
is  a  servant  and  t'  a  other  a  master. 

Q.  The  men  who  are  servants  are  not  on  equal  terms  ? — A.  Tbey  get 
their  one-third  share  and  are  poor  men,  and,  therefore,  are  probably  iu 
not  such  good  credit  as  the  better  class  of  men. 

Q.  There  everything  depends  on  credit;  the  business  is  carried  on  ou 
credit  ? — A.  Yes ;  to  a  large  extent. 

Q.  Next,  you  took  a  boat  with  four  hands.  You  put  the  average 
catch  at  400  quintals,  which,  at  $5  per  quintal,  gives  $2,000.  Why  did 
you  put  the  catch  at  400  quintals,  when  the  catch  of  two  men  you  put 
at  160  quintals? — A.  Well,  the  boats  I  had  in  view  move  to  some  of  the 
best  fishing  localities  on  the  southern  shore  for  a  long  distance,  about 
Gape  Saint  AJary's,  Capes  Pine  and  Lawn,  and  Lameline  Islands.  I 
gave  them  a  boat  which  would  cost  £70  or  £80  or  £100,  instead  ot  a 
boat  costing  ,'JIO,  and  thus  ati'ord  them  greater  facilities  for  catching 
fish.  I  know  that  400  quintals  would  be  a  fair  average  of  the  boats 
with  a  crew  of  four  men. 

Q.  That  is  100  each  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Instead  of  80  quintals  ? — A.  Yes.  You  will  observe  that  tbey  have 
punts  as  well  as  a  vessel  costing  £100. 

Q.  You  have  allowed  half  the  catch  to  the  men.  Why  is  that?— A. 
Because  the  men  are  only  engaged  during  the  four  or  five  best  tisbiug 
months  in  the  year,  and  are  only  fed  by  the  plauter  during  tliat  time ; 
whereas  the  other  men  are  fed  during  the  bad  fishing  months,  as  well  as 
the  good  ones,  all  the  year  round. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


531 


Is  far  as  the 


arried  on  ou 


Q.  Wby  is  that  different  mode  followed — that  the  large  boat  shoald 
be  only  employed  daring  only  a  portion  of  the  time,  and  the  small  boat 
during  all  the  time  ? — A.  The  large  boat  is  engaged  in  baiting  the  French 
in  the  spring  and  in  the  herring  catch  in  winter,  to  a  certain  extent, 
and  some  of  them  are  laid  up  after  the  voyage  is  over,  and  the  fisher- 
men tbeu  pursue  the  tishery  according  to  the  other  practice  at  their 
own  homes. 

Q.  The  large  boats  are  employed  at  bait-fishing  when  they  are  not 
cod-fisbing?— A.  In  the  spring,  for  a  short  time,  two  or  three  weeks, 
before  they  go  cod-fishing. 

Q.  Are  the  herring  caught  by  the  man  who  owns  the  boat  f  Does  he 
employ  the  labor? — A.  They  go  shares,  I  think,  then;  they  are  shares- 
men. 

Q.  These  boats  having  taken  their  herring  they  go  to  St.  Pierre  to 
land  tbem  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  St.  Pierre  is  a  free  port,  is  it  not  ? — A.  It  is  nominally  a  free  port. 

Q.  Is  it  not  in  fact  sol  Can  anybody  go  there  and  buy  without  pay- 
ing duties  ? — A.  The  duties,  I  think,  are  2  per  cent,  on  all  goods  brought 
in  foreigu  bottoms.  It  is  free  to  American  bottoms — it  is  free  to  French 
bottoms,  but  to  all  foreign  vessels  2  per  cent,  duty  is  charged. 

Q.  Are  you  sure  that  is  so  ? — A.  That  is,  not  on  bait,  but  on  merchan- 
dise. 

Q.  What  is  there  to  prevent  that  becoming  a  sort  of  depot  for  bait? — 
A.  It  is  a  depot  for  bait  for  the  French. 

Q.  Why  should  it  not  become  so  for  Americans  ? — A.  I  saw  a  procla- 
niatiou  signed  by  the  governor  at  St.  Pierre,  prohibiting  the  Americans 
from  buying  or  getting  bait  there;  it  also  forbade  the  English  on  pain 
of  having  their  boats  confiscated. 

Q.  When  did  you  see  it? — A.  Five  or  six  years  ago. 

Q.  Is  it  in  operation  now  ? — A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  As  a  point  of  fact,  whatever  the  proclamation  was  five  or  six  years 
ago,  is  it  not  true  that  the  Americans  do  buy  bait  freely  at  St.  Pierre  ? — 
A.  I  don't  know  that  they  do ;  I  have  never  known  them  do  it.  I  have 
never  been  there  for  three  years,  and  therefore  cannot  speak  to  it. 

Q.  You  told  us  that  you  considered  this  treaty,  which  allows  Ameri- 
cans to  fish  without  reference  to  distance  from  your  shores,  as  disastrous 
to  the  fishing  prosperity  of  your  island.  I  think  you  told  us  there  were 
only  three  men  on  the  island  who  did  not  believe  so  ? — A.  That  was  my 
opinion. 

Q.  Could  you  name  these  three  men  ? — A.  I  certainly  would  object  to 
do  so;  I  would  rather  withdraw  the  statement,  because  it  would  be 
most  unfair  to  them. 

Q.  You  would  rather  not  name  the  men  I — A.  Certainly  not. 

Q.  Is  any  injury  likely  to  flow  to  them? — A.  No;  but  it  would  be 
unfair  to  introduce  the  name  of  any  gentleman  before  the  Commission. 

Q.  Tbey  have  made  their  opinions  publicly  known  ? — A.  One  of  them 
certainly  has. 

Q.  He  is  a  public  man  ? — A.  A  public  man. 

Q.  Perhaps  he  would  not  like  to  have  that  known ;  and  the  other  two, 
bave  they  made  their  opinions  known  among  their  neighbors? — A.  They 
luigbt  have  no  objection  to  having  their  names  mentioned  here.  I  think 
it  would  be  an  unwarranted  use  of  their  names. 

Q.  I  think  you  said  they  were  merchants  f — A.  I  don't  remember  say- 
ing tbey  were  so. 

Q.  Have  you  any  objection  to  stating  whether  they  are  so  ? — A.  One 
of  tbem  is  a  merchant,  the  other  two  are  not  merchants. 


532 


AWAHD   OF   THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Can  you  tell  us  how  it  arose  that  Newfoundland  came  into  the 
treaty  when  there  were  but  three  persons  out  of  the  population  wlio 
were  not  opposed  to  it  t — A.  I  never  said  that  at  all. 

Mr.  Whiteway: 

I  think  Judge  Bennett  stated  that  at  the  present  time  all  considered 
the  treaty  disastrous  except  three  persons,  and  went  on  to  state,  more- 
over, that  one  was  a  man  who  never  changed  his  opinion  upon  any  snb- 
ject. 

Witness.  I  did.  I  do  not  remember  being  asked  a«  to  the  feeling  at 
the  time  the  Washington  Treaty  was  accepted. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  There  had  been  an  election  for  the  legislature  between  the  time  of 
the  treaty  being  adopted  and  the  Newfoundland  coming  in  ?— A.  Not 
when  it  was  first  passed  by  the  legislature  of  Newfoundland.  But  there 
was  some  addition  or  omission  in  the  act  which  was  objectionable  and 
it  was  not  adopted. 

Q.  You  had  an  election  in  the  mean  time  ? — A.  Yes. 

[Mr.  Dana  read  from  the  evidence  given  by  witness  on  the  preceding 
day  as  to  the  motives  which  led  the  Newfoundland  legislature  to  accept 
the  treaty,  and  continued  his  examination  as  follows:] 

Q.  Looking  forward,  they  thought  it  would  not  act  injuriously,  reason- 
ing from  reciprocity  '? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  only  one  of  those  three  was  a  merchant.  Who  were  the  mer- 
chants that  thought  so  f  You  say  you  knew  but  three  persons  ^bo  were 
in  favor  of  it — who  believed  it  would  act  well — and  one  of  those  was  a 
merchant? — A.  If  you  will  allow  me  to  explain,  perhaps  I  might  mal^e 
it  a  little  plainer.  Before  the  act  was  passed  by  the  legislature  there 
was  a  strong  feeling  among  the  fishermen,  and  indeed  in  the  legislature, 
against  the  Washington  Treaty,  and  the  commercial  body  of  Saint  John's 
met  to  discuss  whether  it  would  be  wise  for  Newfoundland  to  accept  it. 
After  a  full  discussion  they  took  a  vote  on  the  question,  and  they  did,  by 
a  very  large  majority,  agree  that  it  should  be  accepted  by  the  legisla- 
ture, and  they  sent  a  resolution  in  the  shape  of  a  petition  to  the  legisla- 
ture asking  that  it  might  be  adopted.  That  was  what  I  had  in  view, 
although  I  did  not  mention  it,  and  that  is  why  I  spoke  of  the  merchants 
being  desirous  of  having  the  treaty. 

Q.  Then  there  was  a  large  body  of  merchants  who  thought  it  would 
not  be  injurious? — A.  At  that  time. 

Q.  That  was  before  it  was  adopted  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  ago  was  that? — A.  Five  years  ago. 

Q.  Then  five  years  ago  there  was  a  large  majority  of  merchants  who 
thought  it  would  not  act  injuriously ;  well,  how  do  you  make  that  consis- 
tent with  your  statement ;  have  they  changed  their  minds  ? — A.  I  say 
that  if  the  matter  were  tested  ^^efore  them  you  could  not  find  three 
merchants  in  the  island  of  Newfoundland  that  would  agree  to  accept 
the  Washington  Treaty. 

Q.  You  say  the  merchants  "  are  located  in  St.  John's,  and  had  not 
many  means  of  communication  with  the'Oxtern  districts,  and  they  as- 
sumed that  because  the  Americans  did  not  visit  the  island  during  the 
Reciprocity  Treaty,  therefore  they  would  not  visit  the  island  during  the 
term  of  the  Washington  Treaty.  Another  reason  was  that  they  thought 
it  would  give  them  a  market  for  their  cod-oil,  and  they  certainly  antici- 
pated that  seal  oil  would  be  allowed  in  under  the  treaty."  And,  further, 
you  say,  "  We  are  so  ignorant  in  Newfoundland  we  could  not  discrini- 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


533 


ere  the  rner- 


iuate  between  one  fish  anil  another  as  far  as  products  went.  We  as- 
snmed  that  aealoil  would  be  admitted  in  the  United  States  as  co«loil." — 
A.  Tliose  are  not  the  exact  words  I  made  use  of  yesterday.  1  spoke  of 
tbe  (liflFerent  descriptions  of  oil — cod-oil  aifd  seal-oil — and  when  I  spoke 
of  our  being  ignorant  of  the  terms  I  meant  that  we  di<l  not  discriminate 
between  the  two  classes  of  oil,  and  thought  that  both  would  be  admitted 
duty  free. 

Q.  As  fish-oil  ? — A.  Yes,  that  is  what  I  meant. 

Q.  Were  you  in  the  legislature  in  1871  f — A.  I  was. 

Q.  What  office  had  you  ? — A.  I  think  I  was  speaker  of  the  house. 

Q.  Now,  hero  is  a  letter  from  Governor  Hill  to  the  Earl  of  Kimberly. 
I  read  from  the  journals  of  the  council  of  Newfoundland,  Appendix,  page 
21.    The  letter  is  as  follows : 

GOVERNMKNT   HoUSE, 

Netvfoundland,  4th  July,  1871. 

Mr  LoHU :  I  have  the  honor  to  inform  yonr  lordship  that  on  the  Ist  instant  I  sent 
a  tclegiaiii  to  yonr  lordHliip  as  follows,  viz;  "In  reference  to  terms  of  Washington 
Treaty,  it  is  understood  that  tish  oil  includes  wix\  oil.  Explanation  will  oblige  this 
goveninient ";  and  on  the  :kl  instant  received  tho  following  reply,  viz  :  "  I  am  of  opiuioa 
that  Hsh  oil  does  not  include  seal  oil." 
I  have,  &c., 

STEPHEN  J.  HILL. 
The  right  honorable  the  Eari.  ov  Kimbkrly, 

<fc.,  4c-t  40. 

Q.  Now,  the  treaty  was  signed  on  the  1st  of  May.  When  was  your 
final  action  on  the  treaty  ? — A.  I  think  in  1873. 

0.  Now,  as  early  as  July,  1871,  your  governor  writes  to  Earl  Kimberly, 
aoti  receives  a  reply  that,  in  his  opinion,  fish  oil  does  not  include  seal- 
oil?-A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  knew  of  that  correspondence? — A.  I  have  known  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  know  of  it  at  the  time? — A.  I  think  probably  that  when 
it  was  laid  on  the  table  of  the  house  1  knew  of  it,  but  that  would  not 
alter  tbe  fact  that  negotiations  were  going  ou  between  the  Imperial 
Government  and  the  Government  at  Washington  for  the  admission  of 
seal  oil,  and  that  Sir  Edward  Thornton,  the  British  ambassador,  had 
communicated  that  he  hoped  and  believed  that  seal-oil  would  be  admit- 
ted duty  free.  And  further,  tho  premier  of  Newfoundland,  in  introduc- 
ing tbe  bill,  announced  that  he  had  every  reason  to  believe  that  seal-oil 
would  be  admitted  duty  free. 

Q.  Who  sHid  that? — A.  The  Hon.  Charles  Pox  Bennett.  He  was 
premier  at  the  time  I  am  speaking  of. 

Q.  Did  he  produce  anything  from  the  home  government? — A.  I  don't 
remember  whether  he  produced  atiy  dispatch,  or  whether  he  made  it  as 
an  otficial  announcement. 

Q.  VVell,  was  there  any  recall  of  the  Earl  of  KImberley'.s  statement  of 
tbe  iiiteri»retati()M  of  the  treaty  made  by  the  British  Government  in 
July,  and  sent  to  the  Newfoundland  government  officially,  that  flsh-oil 
did  1101  include  seal-oil? — A.  1  am  not  aware  of  that,  but  I  am  aware 
that  tbe  British  Government  contended  strongly  with  the  United  States 
Government  that  it  did  include  seal-oil. 

Q.  That  it  did,  or  that  they  wished  to  have  some  arrangement  by 
which  seal-oil  would  be  admitted  duty  free? — A.  I  tlou't  know  that  it 
was  contended  on  the  mere  terms  of  the  treaty  that  it  was  included  in 
those  terms. 

Q.  The  understanding,  as  stated  by  the  Earl  of  Kimberly,  was  that 
it  did  not  iuclnde  seal-oil,  and  whatever  was  said  by  persons  in  the  leg- 
islature to  induoe  the  house  to  vote  for  the  measure,  whether  officially 


534 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


or  uno£Qcia11y,  I  caiioot  tell  about,  but  the  borne  ^overumeiit  places 
itaelf  upon  record  as  uuderAtanding  that  the  treaty  did  not  include  seal- 
oil  You  have  no  evidence  of  its  ever  receding  from  that  position,  an 
to  the  interpretation  of  the  treaty,  have  you  f — A.  I  don't  know  that  we 
have  any  evidence  of  that  fact  except  what  I  have  stated. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  anything  of  an  offer  made  by  Newfoundland 
before  the  adoption  of  the  treaty,  on  the  subject  of  letting  seal-oil  in 
free  of  duty,  the  Americans  to  participate  in  the  seal-tishery  ? — A.  I  do 
not  remember.  I  think  there  never  was  any  oflFer  of  that  kind  from  tbe 
Newfoundland  government,  but  I  think  a  commercial  society  engaged 
leading  counsel  to  suggest  some  such  matter  as  that.  I  think  wu  have 
heard  that  it  might  be  possible  to  arrange  it  in  that  way ;  that  it  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  would  let  in  seal-oil  free  of  duty  the 
Americans  should  be  admitted  to  the  i»rivilege  of  our  seal  fisherieH. 

Q.  The  seal  fishing  of  Newfoundland  only  ? — A.  Of  Newfoundland. 
I  think  that  was  tbe  proposition,  but  not  an  official  one,  as  I  understood, 
at  all.  A  learned  counsel  was  at  that  time  on  a  visit  to  New  York,  and 
the  commercial  society  suggested  the  propriety  of  his  ascertaining  if 
the  American  Government  would  be  willing  to  make  an  arrangeiuent 
of  that  kind.  I  do  not  speak  positively,  but  I  think  I  have  heard  some- 
thing of  that  kind. 

Q.  Here  is  a  letter  on  page  21  of  the  same  book  from  Governor  Hill 
to  the  Eail  of  Kimberley,  dated  17th  of  July,  1871,  in  which  he  writes 
as  follows : 

Government  House, 
Xewfoundland,  I7th  July,  1871. 

My  Lord  :  As  tbe  legislation  contemplated  in  tbe  Treaty  of  Washington  does  not, 
in  your  lordsbip's  opinion  (received  by  telegram  on  the  3d  instant),  embrace  tlio  con- 
sideration of  seal-oil,  under  tbe  head  of  fish-oil,  as  an  article  to  be  admitted  free  of 
duty  from  tbe  ports  of  the  British  North  American  possessions  by  tbe  American  Oo\- 
ernment  with  the  ports  of  tbe  United  States,  I  have  the  honor  to  forward  to  your 
lordship  herewith  copy  of  a  minute  of  council  which  invites  tbe  attention  of  Her 
Majesty's  Government  to  tbe  seal-fishery  in  relation  to  Newfoundland,  alludes  to  the 
possible  consequences  which  might  ensue  from  the  prosecution  of  this  fishery  hereafter 
as  a  right  by  citizens  of  the  United  States,  and  respectfully  suggests  the  expediency  of 
conceding  to  America  the  right  of  taking  seals  in  the  territorial  waters  of  Newfound- 
land and  of  making  outfit  in  the  ports  thereof,  on  condition  that  the  United  States 
Government  admits  the  produce  of  tbe  seals  of  this  colony  into  their  ports  duty  free. 

2.  Should  your  lordship  consider  tbe  present  moment  a  favorable  opportunity  to 
bring  the  points  raised  in  the  dispatch  under  tbe  notice  of  tbe  American  anthoniies, 
the  favorable  consideration  of  the  subjects  in  question  by  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  would  greatly  facilitate  the  acceptance  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington  by 
tbe  colonial  legislature  when  that  important  statement  is  referred  by  my  advisers  to 
the  assembly  in  February  next. 
I  have,  &c., 

STEPHEN  J.  HILL. 

The  right  honorable  the  Earl  of  Kimbrrly, 

4-c.,  <)-c.,  4-c. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  not  know  that  that  was  a  minute  of  council  f— A.  I 
do  not  remember  ever  seeing  a  minute  of  council.  It  had  escaped  my 
memory.  Of  course  it  is  so  as  it  is  there.  I  do  not  dispute  the  point, 
but  it  bad  escaped  my  memory. 

Q.  I  believe  the  fact  that  the  American  Government  had  construed 
the  treaty  so  as  to  exclude  your  seal-oil  was  stated  by  you,  and  stated 
in  such  phraseology  (I  read  it  just  now ;  you  stated  that  you  were  so 
ignorant  that  you  could  not  see  the  distinction  which  the  Americans 
had  set  up)  so  as  to  leave  the  impression — you  could  not  have  intended 
it — that  the  American  Government,  after  having  got  the  treaty,  put  a 
construction  upon  it  that  nobody  ought  to  have  anticipated.  Now, 
having  read  you  this  statement,  this  telegram  to  Earl  Kimberley  and 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


535 


the  repl.Vi  and  tbu  letter  of  Mr.  Hill,  who  was  then  governor,  reciting 
Lord  Kiinberley's  opinion,  and  making  the  proposal  that  I  have  read 
on  the  subject  of  the  admission  of  seal-oil  into  the  American  Union, 
would  yon  have  made  the  same  statement  that  >ou  made  yesterday  in 
the  same  language  ? — A.  Well,  of  course,  I  do  not  for  a  moment  mean 
toiui|>ute  that  the  American  Government  have  put  any  wrong  construc- 
tion on  the  treaty,  or  on  that  portion  of  the  treaty;  but  what  I  do  say 
is  that  the  feeling  is  general  in  Newfoundland  that  a  constrained  con- 
struction has  been  put  upon  the  treaty.  I  must  say  that  honestly. 
That  is  the  feeling  in  Newfoundland,  notwithstanding  the  opinion  of 
Earl  Kimberley  and  the  action  of  the  American  Government — that  a 
constrained  construction  was  put  upon  that  treaty. 

Q.  By  both  parties? — A.  By  both  parties— that  the  interests  of  New- 
foundland were  sacrificed  because  they  were  trilling. 

Q.  Now, all  this  occurred  before  you  voted  on  it? — A.  I  was  speaker; 
I  never  voted  on  it. 

Q.  I  do  not  mean  you  individually,  but  the  people  of  Newfoundland. 
They  had  knowledge  of  this  correspondence;  they  knew  of  the  construc- 
tion the  British  Government  and  the  American  Government  put  upon 
tbe  treaty,  and  they  knew  what  terms  bad  been  proposed  and  what 
minutes  of  council  had  been  made  in  tbe  matter.  And,  as  yon  say,  the 
treaty  had  received  a  construction  from  both  parties  to  it  that  you 
thought  to  be  wrong  and  injurious  to  Newfoundland,  and  that  their 
interests  wer'  sacrificed;  jet,  after  all  that,  the  legislature  of  New- 
fouudland  accepted  it  all  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  did. 

Q.  Have  you  any  explanation  ?  Haven't  you  a  little  overstated  tbe 
case?  Is  it  not  more  likely  that  you  stated,  of  course  with  the  inten- 
tion of  stating  everything  as  frankly  and  truly  as  any  gentleman  could — 
but  is  it  not  rather  more  likely  that  your  views  are  a  little  extreme  than 
that  uuder  such  circumstances  tbe  legislature  should  have  adopted  tbe 
treaty  ? — A.  I  am  still  of  the  same  opinion,  notwithstanding  these  facts. 

Q.  You  were  not  one  of  the  three  gentlemen  referred  to  ?  Yon  said 
that  there  were  three  that  believed  it  to  be  wrong. — A.  I  said  that 
there  were  three  that  believed  it  to  be  right. 

Q.  You  stated  that  another  evil  that  came  from  the  American  par- 
ticipation in  your  fisheries  was  that  it  had  a  demoralizing  effect — tbe 
Americans  coming  there  for  bait;  that  is,  coming  there  to  buy  bait  and 
sometimes  helping  to  execute  their  own  contract.  One  of  the  learned 
counsel  suggested  tbe  word  seduced,  and  I  understand  you  to  bold  that 
the  fishermen  of  your  country  were  seduced  and  demoralized  in  this 
form  of  seduction  and  demoralization,  namely,  that  the  American  fisher- 
ineu  oflfered  $20  in  cash  to  tbe  natives  to  work  for  them,  and  that  they 
were  seduced  and  demoralized  to  such  an  extent  that  they  actually  took 
the  cash  and  caught  the  herring. 

(Mr.  Whiteway  objects.) 

Q.  You  consider  that  it  was  their  duty  to  be  catching  tbe  codfish  for 
themselves  or  tbe  merchants  who  employed  them.  Now,  don't  you 
think  that  the  natives  of  Newfoundland,  although  you  have  spoken  of 
them  as  ignorant — I  do  not  know  bow  that  is  myself— don't  you  think 
the  natives  understand  their  own  interests,  so  far  at  least  as  to  know 
whether  they  had  better  fish  for  $20  for  tbe  Americans  or  tlsh  for  the 
merchants  at  some  other  rate? — A.  Well,  my  impression  is  that  they 
would  be  honestly  engaged  in  working  for  the  merchants  who  provided 
for  their  families,  and  that  in  fishing  for  the  Americans  they  were  dis- 
honestly working  for  them,  seeing  that  the  merchants  had  already  paid 


536 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


them  for  their  labor.    I  think  if  a  man's  servants  are  enticed  nway  utter 
he  has  already  paid  tliem  their  wages  beforehand  it  is  deniunilizjii;;. 

Q.  I  did  not  understand  you  to  say  it  was  because  tliey  had  received 
the  money  beforehand  to  do  certain  flrork  that  you  objecte<l  to  tlieir  Imit. 
fishing  for  the  Americans. — A.  They  receive  tiifir  outfit ;  tlioy  could  not 
carry  on  their  fishing  without  that.  They  require  bread  and  snpplie.s 
that  they  use.  Nine-tenths  of  them  take  that  outfit  on  credit,  and  tlii'ii 
if  instead  of  catching  codfisli,  which  is  the  oidy  descri|)tiuu  uf  lish  that 
the  merchant  can  make  avaihible  to  pay  himself,  they  catcii  bait  for  tlif 
Americans,  1  think  they  are  demoralized. 

Q.  Then  the  deiiioralization  (and  I  should  agree  with  you)  consLsts  in 
the  fact  of  their  having  received  money  for  the  labor  to  be  perfornu'd 
and  then A.  Not  money. 

Q.  Well,  credit — that  having  got  credit  with  tlie  understanding  tliat 
they  will  work  it  out,  they  throw  it  up. — A.  During  the  time  tliat  they 
are  working  for  the  Americans.  If  they  work  a  day  for  tlie  Amei  leans, 
and  earn  £5  catching  bait  for  him,  they  are  earning  nothing  for  the 
merchant. 

Q.  Well,  as  a  general  thing,  do  yon  think  the  merchants  have  sitfl'ered 
largely  from  breaches  of  contract  of  that  sort? — A.  I  tliink  they  have. 

Q.  Do  you  think  they  have  some  feeling  about  it? — A.  1  tiiiiik  tliey 
feel  very  strongly. 

Q.  And  they  throw  the  blame  upon  the  Americans? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Not  on  their  own  people? 

Mr.  Dana.  As  objection  was  taken  to  a  question  I  was  putting  to  tie 
witness,  I  will  read  from  the  evidence  taken  yesterday  upon  this  sub 
jeet.    The  following  is  the  question  put  and  answer  of  the  wituesM,  as 
given  in  the  official  rei)ort : 

Q.  The  Americans  purchaeinK  tbe  bait  from  the  seller  puts  so  much  money  into  IiIh 
pocket,  and  so  far  as  a  matter  of  trade  is  an  advantage  to  an  individual ;  but  what  is 
the  efi'oct  upon  a  small  community  uf  one  or  two  individuals  supplying  American  ves- 
sels with  baitf — A.  My  own  impression  is,  that  supplying  American  vbssuIh  with  buit 
is  one  of  the  most  demoralizing  things  for  oar  fishermen.  I  think  they  are  acting;  as 
mere  jackals  for  tbe  lion.  It  is  most  injurious  to  the  local  iisbermen  in  more  ways  tlian 
one.  The  system  of  trade  in  Newfoundland  is  principally  ou  tbe  credit  system,  and  a 
very  expensive  one  it  is ;  and  most  of  the  fishermen  are  indebted  to  the  merchants, 
and  they  are  ready  enough  to  take  $20  from  an  American  tisberman  when  they  ought 
to  be  catching  cod  for  the  merchants  who  are  supplying  their  families  with  j>;oo(k  I 
therefore  think  it  is  a  demoralizing  trade. 

Q.  Would  tbe  fisherman's  time  not  be  much  more  beneficially  and  advautaj;eously 
employed  if,  instead  of  getting  $20  for  supplying  Americans  witb  bait,  he  applied  him- 
Beli  to  catching  codfish  with  that  baitt — A.  Decidedly.  To  illustrate:  Two  days  be- 
fore I  left  St.  John's  a  man  belonging  to  Bay  Bulls,  18  miles  from  St.  John's,  was  in  the 
office  of  tbe  Hon.  Ambrose  Shea,  and  informed  me  that  two  days  previous  ton  Amori- 
can  vessels  were  in  that  bay  and  engaged  a  number  of  local  fishermen  to  catcii  bait 
for  them,  for  which  thoy  obtained  about  9d  per  100,  for  squid.  During  tbe  same  day 
a  fisherman  went  out  and  caught  ten  quintals,  worth  $5  per  quintal.  So  any  person 
can  estimate  what  the  value  of  bait-fishing  is.    This,  I  am  certain,  is  the  fact. 

WiTNE  s.  That  is  misreported.  I  did  not  say  "a  fisherman."  All 
the  fishermen  in  the  harbor. 

Mr.  Dana.  I  have  it  here  on  my  manuscript. 

Witness.  I  did  not  say  so ;  or,  if  I  did,  I  did  not  mean  it. 

Mr.  Dana.  I  suppose  not ;  but  when  the  reporter  and  myself  agree 
in  taking  it  down  in  the  same  way,  I  do  not  think  you  should  be  sure  you 
did  not  say  it.  It  is  not  probable  that  a  great  many  or  that  "  all  tbe 
fishermen  in  the  harbor"  got  five  quintals. 

Q.  Your  own  position  is  that  of  an  employer? — A.  No;  I  am  not  en- 
gaged in  trade  at  all. 

Q.  Have  yea  been  ? — A.  I  was  for  a  number  of  5 ears. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


537 


ivituess,  as 


Q.  Up  to  what  timef — A.  TJ|>  to  1873,  since  1854. 

Q.  [  <ii«l  not  know  but  tliut  you  had  invested  capital  in  it? — A.  No; 
I  am  not  in  trade. 

Q.  You  wore  an  employer  for  nineteen  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  ,>ou  think  the  feelinjj  of  the  employer  class  ia  that  tliese  men 
Iia<i  better  l>e  fishing  for  them  than  catchiti};  herring;  for  the  Americans 
atsiioli  rates  as  tliey  do?  You  think  tliere  is  a  general  an«l  strong  foel- 
iii},'  among  them  ? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  The  fishermen  there  are  indebted  to  the  merchants,  are  they  not  1 — 
A.  Well,  they  require  a  large  outfit  in  the  spring  of  the  year  in  order  to 
pursue  the  fisheries. 

Q.  Well,  whatever  the  cause  Is,  they  are  largely  indebted  to  the  mer- 
chants ?— A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  could  say  that. 

Q.  Is  the  business  not  conducted  on  the  credit  system  ? — A.  It  is  a 
credit  system  for  a  limited  time,  but  if  the  voyage  is  prosperous  every 
man  wiil,  by  the  31st  of  October,  have  paid  his  debt  and  be  in  credit. 

Q.  I  did  not  ask  whether  he  paid  or  not.  But  does  not  that  relation 
of  debtor  and  creditor  exist  between  the  fisherman  and  the  merchant? — 
A.  Yes;  but  if  he  is  successful  he  may  wipe  it  out  by  October. 

Q.  And  if  he  is  not  successful  he  does  not  wipe  it  out.  Well,  is  it  not 
the  case  that  they  are  to  a  large  extent  indebted  to  the  merchants,  not  only 
between  May  and  October,  but  afterwards?  Is  it  not  the  case  that  they 
get  credit  and  are  not  always  able  to  meet  it,  and  that  they  are  to  a  very 
considerable  extent  in  the  power  of  those  merchants  to  whom  they  are 

indebted?    I  know  your  natural  feeling  may  be A.  O,  no;  I 

have  no  such  fecM'jg.  You  quite  mistake.  No  doubt  there  is  a  consid- 
erable amount  of  bad  debts  iu  Newfouhdland,  but  that  it  materially 
places  the  fisherman  in  the  power  of  the  merchant  I  think  is  a  mistake. 
It  in  not  the  custom  of  the  merchant  ever  to  exert  that  power  of  collect- 
ing old  debts  unless  the  voyage  is  sufficiently  prosperous  to  enable  him 
to  do  so.    They  do  not  use  the  i)roces8  of  the  law. 

Q.  I  did  not  ask  whether  they  used  the  process  of  law ;  but  does  not 
the  fisbermau  feel  that  he  is  indebted  ? — A.  It  does  not  hurt  his  feelings 
much. 

Q.  Does  it  hurt  the  feelings  of  the  merchant  ? — A.  I  don't  think. 
They  usually  put  on  a  margin  of  {>rofit  to  cover  the  debts. 

Q.  So  they  get  some  pay  in  advance  ?  Then  the  priee  the^  ask  would 
be  more  than  the  price  a  person  would  ask  who  was  entirely  independ- 
ent or  bad  security  ? — A.  It  is  so  the  world  over. 

Q.  Now,  is  it  not  a  great  advantage  to  a  fisherman  in  a  small  town 
that  there  should  be  two  rival  mercantile  houses,  so  that  if  he  thinks 
Mr.  A  charges  him  too  much  for  what  he  wants  he  can  go  to  Mr.  B  ? — 
A.  I  don't  think  it  makes  much  difference. 

Q.  Don't  yon  think  it  is  bad  to  have  a  monopoly  of  that  sort? — A. 
Yes,  perhaps,  if  the  monopoly  is  too  great  it  would  be  bad ;  but  if  the 
competition  is  so  great  that  one  is  inducing  the  other's  employes  to  leave 
him  it  is  injurious. 

Q.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  a  case  where  both  the  rival 
houses  behave  dishonestly,  and  the  man  too.  I  am  supposing  that  all 
behave  honestly.  Each  merchant  must  make  all  the  profit  he  can,  and 
must  bold  out  such  inducements  as  are  proper.  The  fisherman  does  not 
want  to  cheat  anybody,  but  only  to  pay  a  reasonable  price,  and  no  more 
than  that. — A.  I  do  not  see  that  it  would  bo  an  advantage  to  the  fish- 
erman, for  the  reason  that  the  prices  are  generally  fixed  for  the  whole 
season,  and  every  mercbaDt  charges  about  the  same  price. 

Q.  So  that  if  there  are  two  houses  iu  the  same  place,  rivals,  they 


538 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


would  charge  the  same  price  ? — A.  They  would  not  compete  by  under- 
selling. Their  only  competition  would  be  in  securing  the  best  and  most 
reliable  men. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  that  principle  or  practice  which  prevails  pretty 
largely  elsewhere,  of  trying  to  undersell,  does  not  apply  to  Newfound- 
land ? — A.  Not  to  any  great  extent.  Neither  does  it  in  the  purchase  of 
the  produce.  For  they  all  meet  and  decide  what  they  will  give.  They 
fix  the  price. 

Q.  Then  the  merchants,  as  a  body,  act  upon  the  fisherman,  do  they  ?— 
A.  They  decide  what  ])rices  wll  be  given. 

Q.  They  determine  what  it  shall  be  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  expect  all  the  merchants  to  come  up  to  that? — A.  Well,  tliey 
generally  do. 

Q.  Then  the  fishermen  are  in  the  power  of  a  combination  of  merchants 
who  agree  beforehand  as  to  the  prices? — A.  Well,  it  might  result  so, 
but  I  think  the  merchants  are  as  fair  and  honorable  as  anywhere. 

Q.  But  taking  the  merchants  generally,  you  think  that  business  is 
peculiar  in  Newfoundland  t — A.  Well,  I  mean  to  say,  it  does  not  result 
there  as  you  have  stated. 

Q.  Haven't  you  known  cases  where  there  have  been  two  houses,  and 
the  fisherman,  although  he  did  not  mean  to  cheat  anybody,  but  simply 
to  get  his  supplies  as  cheaply  as  he  could,  has  regretted  exceedingly 
that  one  had  to  withdraw  1 — A.  Yes,  but  it  would  be  because  the  house 
that  was  left  would  not  have  sufficient  capital  or  wouhl  not  be  iu  a  posi- 
tion to  supply  all  the  people  and  have  all  the  requirements  there  at  the 
proper  time.  I  think  it  would  arise  from  that  more  than  any  other 
reason. 

Q.  You  are  quite  sure  it  could  not  be  that  the  fisherman  might  think 
that  there  bad  been  an  advantage  to  him  in  the  competition  ? — A.  Prob- 
ably they  may  think  so. 

Q.  But  if  so  they  would  be  iu  error  ? — A.  I  would  not  say  the  compe- 
tition has  no  effect  whatever. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  is  the  difference  generally  between  cash  and 
credit?  Suppose  a  man  goes  in  April  with  $25  that  he  has  been  seduced 
into  earning  and  pays  it  in  cash  for  what  he  wants,  what  difference  is 
there  between  the  price  he  pays  and  the  price  paid  by  a  man  who  goes 
and  asks  for  credit? — A.  That  would  depend  a  great  ileal  on  the  part 
of  the  country  were  the  person  lives.  If  he  were  in  St.  John's  I  have 
no  doubt  there  would  be  a  difference  of  probably  10  per  ceut.  If  he 
were  in  the  outside  districts  I  doubt  if  there  would  be  any  difference. 
I  never  knew  any  difference  between  cash  and  fish. 

Q.  I  mean  to  include  that,  cash  or  tish.  He  may  bring  either  so  long 
as  it  is  a  payment  and  leaves  no  debt  behind.  Now  what  is  the  differ- 
ence between  a  paymeut,  either  in  cash  or  goods,  and  credit? — A.  Well, 
I  think  there  is  a  difference,  but  I  assume  that  throughout  the  wb  ^le 
country  a  difference  of  ten  per  cent,  would  be  fair. 

Q.  Would  that  be  the  average  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  think  so. 

Q.  What  is  it  generally  in  Saint  John's? — A.  Well,  I  think  there  is 
more  difference  made  in  Saint  John's.  There  is  a  competition  of  shop- 
keepers in  Saint  John's. 

Q.  Why,  is  it  possible!  What  is  it  (the  average  difference),  do  you 
think  ?— A.  It  is  rather  hard  to  make  up  an  estimate  of  the  whole 
trade  of  the  country. 

Q.  You  did  not  find  any  difficulty  iu  making  up  an  estimate  for  the 
whole  island ;  why  can  you  not  make  up  an  estimate  for  Saint  John's?— A. 
1  should  think  fifteen  per  ceut. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


539 


Q.  More  than  that  ? — A.  I  woald  not  thiuk. 

Q.  Would  you  be  surprised  to  find  it  20  or  25  per  cent.? — A.  It  might 
be  ou  a  particular  article,  but  I  should  be  very  much  surprised  to  fiud  it 
more  tbau  15  per  ceut.  iu  general  trade. 

Q.  Take  bis  necessaries,  which  he  must  buy  in  the  autumn  for  the 
wiuter,  wliat  is  the  difference  between  credit  and  cash  ur  its  equivalent 
barter,  whatever  it  may  be,  so  long  as  there  is  no  credit  given  ? — A.  I 
tbiuk  tlireefourths  of  the  supplies  in  the  autumn  are  paid  for. 

Q.  Well,  what  is  the  difference  between  the  price  charged  for  these 
antl  for  the  remaining  one-fourth  which  are  not  paid  for? — A.  1  was 
proceeding  to  say ;  I  think  three-fourths  are  paid  for,  and  probably  25 
per  cent,  would  be  charged  in  addition  for  the  other  one-fourth. 

Q.  Well,  then,  when  you  assumed  before  that  there  could  not  possibly 
be  '20  or  25  per  cent,  difference  you  was  referring  to  the  question  first 
putl—A.  Yes,  precisely ;  I  was  referring  to  the  spring  outfit. 

Q.  Then  you  make  15  per  cent,  for  half  the  year  and  25  per  cent,  for 
tbe  other  half,  averaging  20  per  cent,  for  the  year? — A.  With  this  dif- 
ference, that  the  large  majority  require  credit  for  the  outfit  in  the  spring, 
wbereas  I  stated  that  three-fourths  were  able  to  pay  in  tiie  autumn. 

Q.  But  taking  those  who  do  obtain  credit,  there  is  still  an  average  of 
20  per  ce'.it.  ? — A.  No  ;  it  would  not  make  an  average  of  20  per  cent. 

Q.  How  did  you  get  the  average  for  the  whole  island  then  ? — A.  For 
the  spring  of  the  year  ?  1  know  the  ditterence  in  the  outside  districts 
between  credit  and  cash  is  very  little.  In  Si.  John's  there  is  a  greater 
difference  made.  And  the  reason  of  that  may  be  that  there  are  many 
shopkeepers  there  not  engaged  in  the  supplying  business  to  the  coun- 
try. 

Q.  Still  I  do  not  know  why  you  are  able  to  give  instantly  without  a 
mouieut's  hesitation,  an  average  for  the  whole  island  and  yet  not  able  to 
give  one  for  St.  John's. — A.  1  did  give  one  for  St.  John's  surely.  I  said 
there  would  be  15  per  cent,  difference  in  the  spring  and  25  per  cent,  in 
the  autumn. 

Q.  That  would  be  an  average  of  twenty  per  cent.,  would  it  not? — A. 
I  drew  this  distinction,  that  in  the  spring  a  good  many  would  require 
credit,  but  in  tLe  autumn  very  few. 

Q.  But  taking  those  who  would  require  credit  both  times  it  would  give 
yea  au  average  f — A.  No;  you  must  have  the  same  number  of  men  to 
ma''e  an  average.  You  must  have  the  same  number  of  men  and  the 
same  proportion. 

Q.  I  admit  that  it  is  true  that  there  should  be  the  same  amount  of 
sales.    You  mean  to  say  that  the  amount  sold  in  the  autumn  is  less  than 
iD  tbe  spring? — A.  Both  the  amount  and  the  number  of  people  requir- 
ing it. 

Q.  You  told  us  yesterday  that  the  Americans  used  to  throw  overboard 
all  the  cod  on  the  bank^  that  were  not  over — what  size  did  you  say  ? — 
A.  22  inches,  I  think. 

Q.  Latterly  they  have  found  a  market  for  this  cod  iu  Newfoundland  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  any  considerable  extent  t — A.  I  think  so,  to  a  very  considera- 
ble extent. 

Q>  Is  that  trade  solely  for  the  benefit  of  the  Americans? — A.  I  should 
thiuk  the  Americans  benefit  very  largely  by  it. 

Q.  We  are  willing  to  believe  that,  but  can  you  not  admit  that  the 
Newfoundland  men  may  benefit  a  little  too?— A.  The  Newfoundland 
merchant  will  certainly  benefit  by  it,  if  he  sells  at  a  profit. 


540 


AWARD  OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Well,  the  Amevican  won't  benefit  an  less  he  makes  a  proftr?--A.. 
Well,  he  will,  because  otherwise  he  wouM  be  obliged  to  throw  it  awav. 

Q.  The  Newfoundland  merclsaut  is  not  bound  to  buy  unless  he  caii 
get  a  profit? — A.  Well,  it  is  problematic  with  him. 

Q.  Well,  if  for  the  sake  of  selling  that  fish  to  the  Newfoundlaml 
merchant  the  American  saves  it  and  brings  it  into  port,  there  is  tlie 
time  that  is  taken  up  and  some  expense.  The  interest  would  also  tutve 
to  be  included  if  you  were  making  up  an  accurate  account.  He  lias  to 
sell  it  so  as  to  leave  him  a  margin,  and  the  British  merchant  lias  to  buy 
in  such  a  way  as  to  leave  him  a  profit.  It  is  a  matter  of  calculation  on 
both  sides,  is  it  not  ? — A.  It  is  on  the  side  of  the  British  merchant  that 
he  may  get  a  price  that  will  pay  him  and  leave  him  a  profit,  but  it  is  no 
matter  of  calculation  with  the  American,  for  he  was  obliged  otherwise 
to  throw  the  fish  away  absolutely. 

Q.  But  I  have  shown  that  there  are  expenses? — A.  The  expenses  are 
nothing  additional.  I  assumed  yesterday  that  the  oil  would  be  suffi- 
cient to  pay  those  expenses. 

Q.  That  is,  the  merchant  buys  the  oil,^doe8  he? — A.  I  thinii  they  sell 
a  little,  but  the  larger  proportion  is  taken  to  the  United  States,  I  think. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  is  any  difference  in  the  law  of  supply  and  de- 
mand, and  the  desire  of  each  party  to  a  contract  to  make  it  proBtable, 
which  govern  Newfoundland,  and  those  which  are  operative  in  other 
parts  of  the  world? — A.  I  think,  in  this  instance,  if  the  duty  of  $1.30  a 
quintal  were  not  removed,  the  Americans  could  not  sell  them  in  the  New 
foundland  market ;  and  if  they  could  not  sell  them,  their  experience 
shows  that  they  have  no  market  in  the  United  States,  and  they  would 
be  obliged  to  cast  the  fish  overboard. 

Q.  Well,  then,  in  your  aceount,  you  include  the  duty,  which  you  put 
at  $90,000,  don't  you,  on  the  whole  amount  sent  sent  in? — A.  $78,000, 
I  think,  the  amount  was.  $90,000  would  be  the  value  of  the  fish— from 
that  to  $120,000. 

Q.  You  assume  that  $90,000  worth  was  sold  or  from  that  to  $120,000. 
Well,  put  it  at  $100,000.  Then  you  say  the  duties  were  $78,000. 
Do  you  consider  that  the  American  gains  them  both  ? — A.  I  think  iu 
nine  cases  out  of  ten  the  American  gains  because  it  gives  him  a  market 
that  he  could  not  otherwise  have. 

Q.  But  does  not  this  rule  which  all  the  witnesses  agree  in  establish- 
ing, that  the  consumer  pays  the  duty,  apply  in  Newfoundland  ? — A.  No, 
because  the  Newfoundland  people  do  not  purchase  the  codfish  for  home 
consumption.    They  sell  it. 

Q.  But  we  do  not  call  the  consumer  the  man  that  eats  a  thing  ?— A. 
I  call  the  man  that  eats  it  the  consumer  and  nobody  else. 

Q.  Suppose  it  is  not  fish.  Suppose  it  is  a  coat  ? — A.  Well,  the  man 
that  wears  a  coat  is  the  consumer.  He  is  certainly  the  man  that  pays 
the  duty,  if  he  pays  for  the  coat. 

Q.  Does  or  does  not  the  rule  that  has  been  referred  to  apply  to  this 
fish  that  is  brought  into  the  market  by  the  Americans  to  be  sold,  or 
whatever  is  done  with  it,  I  do  not  know  ? — A.  The  duty  had  the  effect 
of  keeping  the  foreign  fish  out  of  the  island. 

Q.  Well,  the  Americans  used  not  to  pay  the  duty  then  ? — A.  No,  they 
threw  the  fish  overboard. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  mean  to  charge  them  with  the  duty  although  for- 
merly they  threw  the  fish  overboard  ! — A.  I  mean  that  they  saved  that 
$78,000. 

Q.  Suppose  the  profits  on  the  sales — 

Witness.  It  is  all  profits. 


AWARD    OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


541 


v^.  Tour  view  then  is  that  the  Americans  are  to  be  charged  wich  the 
whole  $100,UU0,  the  gram  result  of  the  sales,  because  it  is  all  profits,  and 
then  to  be  charged  with  the  duties  besides? — A.  No,  I  do  not  say  that. 
Sor  do  I  say  that  the  Newfoundland  people  should  be  charged  with  the 
daties  formerly  payable  in  the  American  market.  £  put  the  one  against 
the  other  as  about  equalizing  one  another. 

Q.  But  you  say  you  don't  send  to  the  United  States  much  f — A.  We 
don't  to  as  large  an  extent  as  they  do  to  us. 

Q.  Then  you  would  not  get  your  balance? — A.  That  is  for  the  Com- 
missiouers  to  decide. 

Q.  But  they  are  looking  to  you  largely  for  information.  You  have  a 
large  experience  in  these  matters,  and  have  held  a  public  ofiice  in  the 
island.  When  an  American  goes  into  a  port  of  Newfoundland,  Saint 
John's,  or  yonr  own  port,  where  there  is  a  custom-house,  are  not  these 
fish  entered  there? — A.  They  are  not,  and  I  may  say  that  in  a  conversa- 
tion with  the  honorable  attorney-general,  the  premier  of  the  island,  a 
tew  days  before  I  left,  he  told  uie  he  had  made  inquiry,  and  that  not  one 
AraericHn  vessel  had  entered  at  the  customs,  and  that  he  had  given  an 
order  that  they  should  do  so ;  that  it  was  not  to  be  assumed  that  l)ecause 
they  had  the  privilege  of  bringing  in  their  fisb  duty-free,  they  were  not 
bound  to  enter  it  at  the  custom-bouse.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  they  had 
uot  done  so,  and  tlie  customs-officers  had  not  required  it. 

Q.  Tbey  are  to  be  entered  now  ? — A.  I  presume  they  will  be.  It  is  to 
be  required  of  them.  It  ought  to  be,  for  the  purposes  of  statistics,  if 
nothing  else. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  reference  to  other  things  they  bring?  Do  they  not 
have  other  things  on  board  ? — A.  I  think  they  come  and  enter  when  they 
are  on  trading  voyages. 

Q.  Don't  they  do  it  regularly  and  have  a  manifest? — A.  I  think  so; 
that  is,  when  they  are  on  a  trading  voyage.  But  there  is  a  grjat  dili'er- 
ence  made  by  United  States  authorities  theujselves  between  i:  traditig 
and  a  fishing  voyage. 

Q.  If  tbey  are  trading,  and  bring  anything  they  have  to  sell,  or 
deliver  over  on  consignment,  there  is  a  manifest  of  it,  and  it  is  entered 
in  the  customs? — A.  it  is  supposed  to  be.  I  would  not  like  to  vouch 
that  it  is  always  so. 

Q.  I^ow  you  say,  without,  of  course,  undertaking  to  sum  up  exactly, 
what  ought  to  be  paid  by  Americans  as  a  rule  with  reference  to  these 
small  fisb.  You  have  given  us  the  gross  total  of  sales  of  these  fish,  and 
argaed  that  being  a  pure  gain,  this  is  something  that  the  American 
should  pay  for  in  justice.  Is  that  what  you  hold? — A.  I  think  they  re- 
ceive a  great  benefit,  and  that  there  should  be  some  compensation  for 
that. 

Q.  Well,  a  fair  compensation  would  be  the  gross  sales,  would  't  not, 
if  it  IS  all  clear  gain  ? — A.  Tbat  Newfoundlaml  should  get  the  whole  ! 
That  would  be  most  unfair. 

Q.  I  do  not  mean  to  speak  of  the  subdivision,  but  of  what  the  Ameri- 
cans should  pay.     Should  it  not  be  the  gross  value  ? 

Mr.  WiiiTEWAY.  Is  not  that  for  the  Commission  ? 

Q.  I  am  not  asking  what  the  result  would  be,  but  merely  as  to  the 
criterion  by  which  the  amount  should  be  estimated.  My  purpose  in 
asking  would  be  to  know  exactly  how  much  value  is  to  be  attached  to 
your  judgment  on  certain  points.  On  this  point  your  judgment  is  that 
it  would  be  fair  for  the  Americans  to  pay  for  the  right  substantially  the 
amount  of  the  gross  receipts  from  the  small  fish  ? — A.  I  think  it  would 
be  right  for  the  gross  amount  to  be  estimated  as  part  of  the  benefits 


542 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


rec'ived  by  the  Americans,  aud  on  that  basts  that  the  cotnpensaKoD 
;hould  be  fixed ;  that  is,  on  the  basis  of  the  value  of  the  benefits  re- 
ceived by  the  Americans. 

Q.  And  that  you  say  is  all  clear  gain  ? — A.  Well,  I  would  not  say  it  is 
all  clear  gain,  because  there  must  be  a  trifling  sum  allowed  for  labor. 
There  is  no  additional  time,  except  for  landing  the  fish,  but  this  would 
be  trifling. 

Q.  Otherwise  it  would  be  the  whole  value  of  the  fish  ?  Now,  would 
yon  think  that,  in  addition — that  the  duties  they  don't  pay  should  be 
added  ? — A.  I  think  the  duties  should  be  placed  as  a  setoff  to  the  duties 
remitted  by  the  United  States. 

Q.  But  the  United  States  are  not  making  any  demand.  I  wish  to 
know  whether  you  said  that  on  account  of  this  change  from  throwing 
over  these  fish  to  selling  them  in  your  market  free  of  duty,  that  the 
value  of  the  fish  and  the  amount  of  the  duties  that  would  be  paid  on  them, 
if  payable,  should  be  the  amount  of  the  compensation  1 — A.  The  duties, 
I  think,  should  meet  that  point  in  the  American  case  which  claims  that 
they  have  given  us  the  privilege  of  sending  merchandise  in  there  free 
of  duty.  I  think  when  the  United  Stateia  say  that  this  concession  is  a 
fair  compensation  for  the  use  of  our  fisheries,  they  are  fairly  met  bv  the 
argument  that  they  have  the  right  of  sending  fish  into  Newfound taaa 
and  benefit  by  a  remission  of  duty  which  would  amount  to  $78,000, 
which  enables  them  to  sell  $120,00()  worth  of  fish  that  they  would  other- 
wise have  to  throw  away.  I  do  not  know  how  I  would  make  it  any 
plainer  than  that. 

Q.  I  hoped  you  might  be  able  to  make  a  different  statement.  I  see 
that  is  the  only  one  we  are  likely  to  receive.  Now,  you  consider  it  cer- 
tain that  but  for  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  the  Americans  would  uot 
have  sent  into  Newfoundland  any  of  those  fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  quite  certain. 

Q.  And  your  view  is  that  the  treaty  requires  the  United  States  to  pay 
for  the  facilities  of  trading  in  Newfoundland? — A.  I  think  uot;  bat 
that  the  facilities  of  trade  which  are  set  up  on  the  part  of  the  United 
States  as  an  equivalent  for  the  fishing  privileges  may  be  fairly  met  by 
this  trade  privilege. 

Q.  In  the  case  of  this  small  fish,  you  take  the  gross  total? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  only  by  the  remission  of  the  duty  that  they  get  them  iu  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Still  you  think  that  one  should  be  balanced  against  another.  Don't 
you  think  that  would  put  a  stop  to  that  mode  of  trade,  if  they  were 
bound  to  pay  for  the  whole  twelve  years  ? — A.  No ;  the  American  Got- 
ernment  would  have  to  pay  for  it.    It  is  not  the  American  fishermen. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  buy  codfish  in  Newfoundland  ? — A.  To  a  very 
small  extent. 

Q.  Well,  you  have  in  Newfoundland  command  of  the  markets  of  the 
Mediterranean,  Portugal,  Brazil.  Do  you  send  to  the  West  Indies,  nr 
is  it  from  Halifax  that  the  fish  are  sent  there? — A.  We  send  there  infe- 
rior grades  of  fish. 

Q.  You  make  more  money  by  these  markets  than  you  could  get  by 
sending  to  the  United  States? — A.  Yes,  I  think  so. 

Q.  Is  not  that  reason  enough  for  your  not  sending  to  the  United 
States? — A.  Yes,  I  think  so. 

Q.  Well,  if  the  American  demand  on  your  fishery  from  every  quarter 
increased,  is  it  not  a  benefit  to  your  people,  whether  for  bait  or  for  con- 
sumption; is  not  that  a  benefit? — A.  It  would  be,  but  as  a  matter  of 
fact  it  has  not  increased,  but  decreased.     Undoubtedly  it  would  be  a 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


543 


benefit,  as  the  greater  the  consumption  the  greater  the  benefit  to  the 
producer. 

Q.  Your  people  catch  codfish,  don't  they,  by  seines? — A.  Seines,  nets, 
bnltows,  hook  and  line. 

Q.  Your  own  people  catch  in  these  ways? — A.  All  these,  yes. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  your  own  people  are  injuring  your  own  fish- 
eries f — A.  My  own  individual  opinion  is  that  they  are  not  injuring 
them.  But  I  know  many  fishermen  consider  that  the  large  seines  are 
injarious  to  certain  localities. 

Q.  On  what  is  your  opinion  founded  that  they  do  not  injure  them  1 — 
A.  Perhaps  it  may  be  theory  more  than  anything  else.  I  formed  my 
opinion  first  of  all  on  a  report  of  a  British  Fishery  Commission,  com- 
posed of  very  eminent  gentlemen  who  took  evidence  throughout  tho 
whole  coast  of  England,  Ireland,  and  Scotland.  After  taking  volumin- 
ous evidence,  they  reported  very  carefully  on  the  question,  and  tliey  de- 
cided that  the  fisheries  around  the  British  Islands  were  increasing,  and 
were  not  apparently  injured  by  all  the  different  modes  in  which  they 
were  taken  on  those  coasts.  I  must  say  that  after  reading  that  evidence 
I  became  rather  more  liberal  in  my  opinions,  and  1  have  not  been  preju- 
diced by  any  narrow  views  since. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  interfere  to  protect  the  fish- 
ery?—A.  I  think  not.  My  opinion  is  decidedly  against  interfering,  ex- 
cept to  keep  good  order,  and  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  bait.  I 
thiui{  it  should  be  left  as  free  as  the  means  of  the  fishermen  are  to  en- 
able til  em  to  catch. 

Q.  Now,  with  reference  to  the  banks,  there  are  numerous  banks  before 
you  come  to  the  Great  Banks? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  told  us  how  many  miles  from  Cape  Race  you  touched 
the  northwestern  extremity  of  the  Grand  Bank.  It  was  thirty-five  miles, 
I  thiuk? — A.  Yes ;  that  extends  a  long  distance. 

Q.  How  many  miles  ? — A.  It  covers  on  the  map  nearly  three  degrees. 

Q.  Now,  on  that  vast  extent  of  ocean,  with  various  depths  and  sub- 
ject to  all  sorts  of  influences  unknown  to  science,  which  may  call  the 
fish  at  one  time  and  send  them  away  at  another,  may  make  them  i>lenty 
at  tiroes  and  scarce  at  other  times,  reasons  which  we  cannot  understand, 
do  you  think  that  the  fishing  going  on  on  the  Great  Banks  does  directly 
diminish  the  codfish  that  come  to  your  coast? — A.  I  think  that  the 
immense  quantity  of  fresh  bait  laid  on  the  banks  tends  to  keep  the  fish 
there.  I  tell  you  why  I  think  so :  Some  years  ago,  say  ten  years  ago, 
the  Americans  were  not  prosecuting  the  fishing  so  fully  as  they  now  do. 
I  know  that  the  French  were  in  the  habit  of  purchasing  bait  at  a  very 
low  price,  and  they  had  signals  whereby  they  informed  one  another 
when  the  fish  were  rising  after  the  floating  bait,  and  they  made  it  a  rule 
to  throw  overboard  certain  quantities  of  bait  to  carry  them  to  bottom 
again.  I  have  been  told  that  they  succeeded  in  doing  so.  I  assume 
that  if  the  French  kept  the  fish  there  with  salt  bait,  that  the  Americans, 
who  are  more  ingenious  and  use  fresh  bait,  would  likely  have  a  greater 
effect. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  throwing  over  the  bait  sends  the  fish  to  bottom  ? 
—A.  Yes,  I  think  there  is  no  doubt  about  that.  They  will  follow  the 
bait  down. 

Q.  Don't  they  intercept  it? — A.  They  would  intercept  some,  but  they 
follow  the  rest  to  the  bottom. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  the  fishermen  throw  it  overboard  for  that  pur- 
pose?—A.  Yes;  they  fish  from  the  bottom;  they  have  trawls  set,  and 


544 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


they  see  the  fish  rising  for  the  bait  to  the  top,  and  that  is  then  thrown 
over  and  takes  the  fish  down ;  they  believe  it  has  that  effi'Ct. 

Q.  Was  not  the  bait  thrown  overboard  supposed  to  enable  them  to 
catch  with  the  hook  ? — A.  No,  there  was  none  thrown  overboard  except 
what  was  on  the  hook.  You  are  thinking  of  mackerel  fishing,  when 
they  grind  the  menhaden  and  throw  it  over  to  induce  the  mackerel  to 
come  around. 

Q.  Then  you  mean  to  say  that  the  bait  used  for  mackerel  does  uot 
sink? — A.  I  do  not  know  au>^ thing  about  the  mackerel  fishery,  but  I 
understand  that  they  grind  the  bait:  up  and  throw  tt  overboard  iu  a  very 
fine  fat  state  that  attracts  the  mackerel  around  the  vessels.  Then  they 
don't  use  any  bait  on  the  hooks,  but  have  some  colored  substance  and 
catch  them  without  bait ;  but  I  don't  pretend  to  speak  of  that  subject. 

Q.  Do  they  still  catch  codfish  with  the  line? — A.  Inshore  they  do; 
but  not  on  the  banks. 

i).  They  do  it  entirely  by  sending  bait  to  the  bottom  ? — A.  They  catch 
them  with  bultows. 

Q.  Then  they  throw  overboard  bait  ? — A.  They  throw  none  over  but 
what  they  throw  on  each  fathom  of  line. 

Q.  Then  when  you  speak  of  throwing  over  bait  you  mean  the  bait 
fastened  to  the  hooks? — A.  I  do  uot  know  that  1  should  speak  of  that 
as  throwing  it  over. 

Q.  You  refer  to  the  French  aud  Americans  throwing  it  over? — A.  I 
did  not  say  the  Americans ;  I  said  the  French. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  can  trace  to  the  French  doing  that,  a  diminutiou 
in  the  cod  of  your  island? — A.  I  think  the  cod  does  not  strike  iu  as 
freely  now  as  it  did  a  few  years  ago. 

Q.  Does  not  a  great  quantity  of  cod  come  from  the  northward  ?— A. 
The  fish  go  north. 

Q.  Codfish? — A.  Yes;  mainly. 

Q.  But  does  it  not  come  southward  for  spawning? — A.  No.  I  think 
it  must  be  the  same  fish  which  is  found  on  the  coast  of  Norway.  I  don't 
mean  that  it  goes  <lue  north.  Tuey  are  almost  always  fouud  traveling 
northerly.  You  will  find,  from  week  to  week,  that  they  have  got  a  little 
farther  north  from  point  to  point.  It  is,  of  course,  speculation,  but  as 
far  as  I  know  I  think  it  is  a  fact. 

Q.  Has  there  been  a  marked  diminution  in  the  cod  off  your  banks  ?— 
A.  There  has  been  iu  the  last  two  years,  in  some  parts  of  the  country, 
1  mean  to  say. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  fisheries  are  failing  ? — A.  Except 
in  the  northern  part,  where  there  have  been  no  American  fishermen. 
The  Americans  don't  generally  come  within  a  very  close  distance  of  our 
shores. 

Q.  You  have  mentioned  one  case.  Is  it  very  rare  ? — A.  Yes ;  very 
rare ;  at  least  I  think  so. 

Q.  And  so  far  as  the  diminution  has  been  owing  to  causes  within 
your  knowledge,  seeing  that  you  do  not  think  the  seine-fishing  hurts 
them,  the  only  reason  is  the  one  which  you  have  given,  founded  on  the 
French  trawl-fishing  on  the  banks?— A.  Yes;  1  think,  from  that  fact, 
that  probably  the  laying  of  so  much  bait  on  the  banks  may  have  the 
effect  of  keeping  the  fish  there  instead  of  allowing  them  to  strike 
inshore. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 
Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  only  cause  of  the  injuries  sus- 
tained by  our  fishermen  from  the  Americans  fishing  upon  our  coast  is 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


545 


it  over  ? — A.  I 


orthward  ?— A. 


e-tisliiiig  hurts 


the  distribation  of  bait  upon  the  banks  t — A.  I  did  not  say  that ;  I  was 
merely  speaking  of  the  effect  of  that  upon  the  bank-fishery  on  our  own 
coast.  I  was  not  speaking,  for  iustance,  with  reference  to  taking  the 
men  away  for  bait  and  depriving  our  merchants  of  their  services.  I 
was  speaking  entirely  of  iind  bank  fishery. 

Q.  Supposing  two  or  three  American  vessels  had  baited  in  a  cove  and 
driveu  the  caplin  off,  what  would  be  the  effect  on  the  codfish  ? — A.  I 
think,  in  some  instances,  where  the  caplin  were  hauled  out  of  the  coves, 
the  codfish  would  strike  off.  I  would  not  say  they  would  leave  alto- 
gether. 

Q.  Then,  supposing  the  fish  were  driven  off  the  shore,  the  cod-seines 
would  not  be  able  to  fish  with  as  great  success  as  in  the  coves  ? — A. 
The  cod-seine  would  not  be  able  to  work  with  as  great  facility  as  it 
would  while  the  fish  remained  quietly  in  the  cove.  Some  of  the  ledges 
near  the  land,  but  not  exactly  on  the  land,  are  fished  by  cod-seines  to  a 
certain  extent;  but  they  cannot  fish  with  as  great  facility  as  they  can 
CD  the  shore.  If  the  fish  are  driven  off  the  shore  to  these  shoals  they 
might  get  some,  but  not  nearly  as  much  as  while  they  are  quietly  in 
the  coves. 

Q.  Well,  is  not  the  locality  where  the  cod-seine  is  used  the  same  as 
where  the  caplin  are  taken  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  the  codfish  have  been  disturbed  much,  the  seine  is  not  used  ? — 
A.  Xo. 

Q.  Then  the  effect  of  disturbing  the  fish  while  in  the  coves  would  be 
to  prevent  the  cod-seines  to  be  used  to  advantage ;  and  this  would  be 
the  effect  upon  a  considerable  extent  of  the  coast  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  spoke  of  the  cod  seines  just  now,  and  if  the  use  of 
them  are  not,  in  your  opinion,  injuring  the  fishery,  you  referred  entirely 
to  the  cod  fl-shery,  not  the  mackerel  ? — A.  Certainly  not  to  the  mackerel. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  a  large  quantity  of  codfish  that  were  heretofore 
thrown  away,  but  which  are  now  sold  in  Newfoundland.  You  did  not 
mean  to  say  that  the  Americans  should  pay  us  the  full  value  of  that 
tish !— A.  I  never  said  so.  I  studiously  avoided  saying  anything  of  the 
kind. 

Q.  It  was  pressed  upon  you  ? — A.  It  was. 

Q.  But  you  simply  stated  it  was  a  very  great  advantage  and  source 
of  wealth  to  the  Americans  that  now  they  can  sell  what  heretofore  was 
thrown  away  ? — A.  Precisely. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  American  vessels  heretofore  not  entering  at  our  cas- 
tomhouses ! — A.  Such  is  the  effect. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  as  to  whether  they  have  paid  light-dues  or  not 
upon  the  coast  up  to  the  present  time  ? — A.  As  a  general  rule  I  am  told 
by  the  ofiicials  that  they  have  not ;  not  more  than  one-third,  and  this 
year  not  one- fourth. 

Q.  They  go  into  places  where  there  is  no  custom-house  officer  and 
avoid  the  light-dues  thereby? — A.  They  do.  We  have  no  revenue 
cruisers,  and  no  vessels  of  any  class  around  the  coast.  An  American 
vessel  would  outsail  any  boat  we  have. 

Q.  Well,  now,  a  good  deal  was  said  about  the  percentage  for  credit 
upon  the  supplies  to  fishermen,  and  you  stated  that  in  the  fall  of  the 
year  the  percentage  charged  for  winter  8upi)lies  was  much  larger  than 
in  the  H\)r'mg  ?— A.  It  is  so. 

Q.  Now  don't  you  know  that  the  amount  of  winter  supplies  sold  on 
credit  is  very  small  ? — A.  I  stated  that  three-fourths  of  the  supplies  in 
the  autumn  were  paid  for  by  the  people,  and  not  more  than  one-fourth 
remained  unpaid. 
35  F 


546 


AWARD   OP   THE   FI8HBRY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  These  advances  made  upon  credit  are,  of  course,  to  those  uiinble 
to  liquidate  their  accounts  for  the  past  summer  and  pay  for  supplies  for 
the  winter? — A.  Certainly,  that  is  the  case. 

Q.  And  when  you  8i)eak  of  the  percentage  charged  in  the  spring,  it 
would  be  impossible  for  you  to  give  the  average  merely  upon  the  statis- 
tics mentioned  by  you  I — A.  I  have  said  so,  and  1  have  shown  that  it 
would  be  a  most  unfair  calculation  to  attempt  to  strike  an  average  be- 
tween the  two  cases.  When  it  was  put  to  me  that  the  15  per  cent,  in 
the  spring,  with  the  25  per  cent,  in  the  autumn,  would  make  an  average 
of  20  per  cent,  I  especially  repudiated  that. 

Q.  Now,  your  attention  has  been  called  to  the  dispatch  of  Earl  Kiin- 
berley,  dated  17th  June,  1871,  relative  to  fish-oil.  Are  you  aware  that 
at  that  time  there  was  a  minute  of  council  in  Newfoundland  by  which 
the  Americans  were  conceded  the  privileges  of  the  treaty,  to  operate 
from  that  time  or  about  that  time  ? — A.  I  am  aware  of  that. 

Q.  And  was  it  not  then  the  understanding  that  the  privileges  on  the 
other  side  should  be  enjoyed  by  the  Newfoundlanders? — A.  I  think  so; 
I  have  understood  that. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  from  July,  1871,  up  to  the  promulgation  of 
the  treaty  in  Newfoundland  in  June,  1874,  did  the  Americans  enjoy  the 
full  privilege  of  the  coast  of  Newfoundland? — A.  They  did,  absolutely 
and  without  trammel. 

Q.  And  on  the  other  baud,  did  the  Newfoundlanders  enjoy  the  advan 
tage  of  free  trade  with  the  United  States,  with  regard  to  the  sending  of 
their  fish  and  flsh-oil  into  the  United  States  free  of  duty  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  They  did  not  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  made  an  estimate  as  to  what  that  would  amount  to,  from 
July,  1871,  until  the  first  of  June,  1874  ? — A.  No,  I  cannot  give  you  au 
estimate  in  this  regard  ;  but  the  amount  of  duties  saved  under  the 
Washington  Treaty  for  tbe  last  three  years  has  averaged  $49,00U  a  year. 
The  amount  that  was  exported  to  the  United  States  before  the  ratifi- 
cation of  the  Washington  Treaty  was  a  little  larger  than  that;  there- 
fore you  may  assume  that  $49,000  a  year  is  a  very  fair  calculation  re- 
specting the  amount  paid  by  Newtouudlaud  merchants  in  duties  for 
each  year  from  1871  until  1874. 

Q.  Whilst  on  the  one  hand  the  Americans  enjoyed  the  privileges  of 
the  Washington  Treaty  as  regards  Newfoundland — Newfoundland  mer- 
chants— until  the  first  of  June  1874,  did  what  ? — A.  They  paid  from 
$50,000  to  $70,000  in  duties  on  fish  and  other  exports,  which  were,  or 
ought  to  have  been,  exempted  from  duty. 

Q.  The  merchants  paid  duties  ou  merchandise  which  ought  to  have 
been  exempted  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  a  fair  claim  against  the  American  Govern- 
ment ? — A.  I  do  not  know.  If  I  was  one  of  the  Commissioners  I  would 
settle  that  point. 

Q.  At  all  events,  the  fact  is  there,  that  the  Americans  enjoyed  the 
privileges  of  the  treaty  on  the  one  side,  and  that  on  the  other  hand 
Newfoundland  had  to  pay  duties? — A.  That  fact  is  unquestionable. 

Q.  And  the  average  of  the  duties  which  are  now  remitted,  but  then 
imposed,  amounts  to  something  like  $40,000  or  $50,000?— A.  It  would 
beabout  $50,000.  Certainly  from  1871  until  the  treaty  was  promulgated 
the  average  of  the  duties  paid  by  Newfoundlanders  was  not  less  than 
that  amount,  and  I  believe  they  would  reach  as  high  a  figure  as  $70,000 
a  year. 

Q.  Did  you  say  that  the  people  of  Newfoundland  were  ignorant  |)eo 
pie? — A.  I  said  nothing  of  the  sort. 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   C0MMI8SI0N. 


547 


Q.  Aa  I  uDderstatid  it,  you  said  that  you  were  ro  if^norant  that  you 
did  not  know  a  seal  from  a  fish  ? — A.  I  said  that  we  were  so  ignorant 
that  we  did  not  discriminate  between  a  seal  and  a  flsb. 

Q.  Or,  in  other  words,  you  meant  that  you  look  oa  seal-oil  as  being 
fisboilf— A.  1  remember  that  one  of  our  learned  judges  wrote  an  able 
article  to  show  that  the  seal  was  a  fish,  and  mentioned  that  this  was 
always  spoken  of  as  the  seal  fishery. 

Q.  You  have  referred  to  the  fact  of  the  Bank  fisheries — the  deep-sea 
fisheries — not  being  carried  on  by  Newfoundlanders,  except  <luring  the 
last  three  or  four  years  to  the  extent  of  fitting  out  four  or  six  vessels  to 
eugage  in  it,  this  being  done  in  consequence  of  the  bounty  offered  by 
the  government.  Now,  will  you  tell  us  whether  a  certain  amount  of 
experience  is  not  required  for  the  Bank  fisheries?  Is  not  a  difi'erent 
mode  of  fishing  practiced  there  from  that  employed  in  connection  with 
the  iushore  fisheries? — A.  It  is  very  different  from  the  inshore  fishing, 
and  it  requires  a  great  deal  of  experience  and  the  risking  of  a  very  large 
capital. 

Q.  In  other  words,  the  people  engaged  in  it  require  to  be  trained  to 
it?— A.  Precisely.  This  fishery  is,  no  doubt,  most  valuable  and  re- 
munerative also,  but  the  men  must  be  trained  for  it.  Our  fishermen 
have  lost  the  art  of  fishing  on  the  Banks,  and  this  is  the  cause  of  its  not 
having  been  pursued  by  them  now  for  at  least  thirty-five  years. 

Q,  And  the  Newfoundland  government  is  very  desirous  that  they 
should  be  trained  to  it  ? — A.  Yes.  It  is  for  that  purpose  alone,  I  under- 
stand, that  the  bounty  is  offered.  It  is  given  simply  to  help  the  mer- 
chants to  carry  it  on,  during  the  first  three  or  four  years,  until  the  men 
are  trained  to  it.  The  same  course  was  pursued  by  the  United  States 
Government  in  giving  a  handsome  bounty  to  their  cod-fishers  many  years 
ago;  it  is  now  perhaps  about  twenty  or  twenty-five  years  since  the 
bounty  ceased.  I  remember  very  well  that  a  handsome  tonnage  bounty 
was  given  by  that  government  to  their  cod-fishers. 

Q.  And  now  the  Americans  have  a  trained  body  of  men  conducting 
the  deep-sea  fishery  ? — A.  Y'es.  The  French,  too,  give  a  handsome 
bounty  to  their  cod-fishers ;  they  grant  a  bounty  of  9  francs  a  quintal 
on  ail  fish  shipped  to  the  Mediterranean,  and  10  francs  on  all  shipped  to 
British  and  other  foreign  ports  outside  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  11 
francs  un  all  shipped  to  Isle  Bourbon  and  to  ports  in  the  Eastern  seas, 
while  they  protect  home  codfish  by  a  duty  of — I  think  I  am  right  in  say- 
ing 80 — 12^  francs.  I  am  told  that  in  addition  that  they  give  a  bounty 
of  40  francs  for  each  gravier  or  boy  brought  to  Saint  Pierre,  and  80 
francs,  I  think,  for  each  fisherman  shipped  on  board  a  French  banker  to 
fish  on  the  Banks;  and  this  is  the  style  of  fishing  with  which  we  in 
Newfoundland  have  had  to  compete. 

Q.  The  French  Government  subsidize  to  a  considerable  extent  f — A. 
Yes;  largely. 

Q.  Yon  were  referring  just  now  to  the  fact  that  there  were  two  kinds 
of  b(iats,  one  manned  by  four  and  the  other  by  two  men,  and  you  gave 
the  average  profit  for  the  one  a  little  different  from  that  of  the  other  ? — 
A.  There  was  only  one-half  per  cent,  of  difference,  I  think. 

Q.  The  four-hand  boat,  I  think,  fishes  generally  over  a  larger  area  of 
ground  than  the  smaller  boat  ? — A.  There  are  larger  boats  employed  to 
carry  the  fishermen  from  place  to  place,  but  they  fish  in  the  same 
description  of  l)oat  as  the  small  one,  which  they  take  with  them. 

Q.  With  the  larger  boat  they  will  carry  a  smaller  one;  that  makes 
two  punts  ? — A.  They  fish  over  an  area  of  many  miles,  and  move  from 
harbor  to  harbor  until  they  find  the  fish  plentiful. 


648 


AWARD   OF   THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  When  you  speak  of  large  boats  as  being  used  in  the  spring  of  the 
year  to  carry  bait  to  the  French,  you  refer  evidently  to  Fortune  Bay,  I 
believe  f — A.  I  refer  also  to  Placentia  Bay. 

Q.  But  to  no  other  part  of  the  island  ? — A.  No ;  in  no  other  part  of 
the  island  are  the  people  engaged  in  that  business. 

Q.  In  no  other  part  do  they  supply  the  French  with  bait !— A.  No  • 
excepting  Hermitage  Bay,  which  may  be  called  a  portion  of  Fortuue 
Bay.    It  is  large,  but  still  it  is  entered  practically  inside  of  Fortune  Bay, 

Q.  Your  attention  has  been  called  to  the  time  when  this  treaty  passed 
the  legislature.  Was  there  any  doubt  entertained  at  the  time  as  to  the 
result  of  the  negotiations  being  that  seal-oil  would  be  admitted  into  the 
United  States  free  of  duty?  Was  this  thegeneral  opinion  at  the  time  of  the 
adoption  of  the  treaty,  notwithstanding  all  this  correspondence,  formed 
from  statements  made  by  the  premier  at  the  time,  in  the  house  and  outside 
of  it  ?  Was  it  not  generally  entertained  as  an  opinion  that  the  conces- 
sion of  admitting  seal-oil  free  of  duty  would  be  made  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  sup- 
pose you  c^uld  find  very  few  persons  in  Saint  John's  who  did  not  believe 
that  such  would  eventually  be  the  result ;  that  the  negotiations  which 
were  going  on  between  the  British  ministry  and  the  American  Govern- 
ment would  result  in  that  permission  being  given. 

Q.  And  has  not  the  refusal  to  admit  seal-oil  duty  free  caused  a  great 
deal  of  annoyance  in  the  island  of  Newfoundland  with  respect  to  this 
treaty  ? — A.  I  think  that  it  has  created  a  feeling  of  soreness  among 
our  people. 

Q.  And  they  really  feel  that  they  have  not  been  as  generously  treated 
as  they  intended  to  treat  the  Americans,  or  as  they  expected  to  be 
treated  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  think  that  they  feel  pretty  sore  about  it.  This  is 
the  feeling  throughout  the  whole  island. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Will  you  be  good  enough  to  tell  the  Commissioners  what  privi- 
leges there  were  which  the  American  fishermen  were  deprived  of  before 
this  minute  of  council  was  entered  into,  and  which  they  began  to  enjoy 
immediately  afterwards,  in  consequence  of  it  ?  Enumerate  the  privi- 
leges of  which  they  had  been  deprived. — A.  They  had  no  privileges  on 
that  part  of  the  coast. 

Q.  I  am  not  speaking  about  the  privileges  granted  by  the  treaty,  but 
the  privileges  practically  enjoyed.  What  was  it  that,  after  the  minute 
of  council  was  entered  into,  the  American  fishermen  were  allowed  to  do 
which  immediately  previously  they  had  been  prevented  from  doing  ?— 
A.  They  never  did  take  bait  for  fishing  on  the  Banks,  to  my  knowledge, 
until  that  minute  of  council  was  published  in  July,  1871. 

Q.  And  how  soon  afterward  did  they  begin  to  procure  it  ? — A.  That 
summer. 

Q.  And  you  think  that  this  was  in  consequence  of  the  issue  of  that 
minute  of  council  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  else  was  there?— A.  They  prosecuted  the  halibut  fishing. 

Q.  What  else  ? — ^A.  They  fished,  to  a  limited  extent,  for  herring  iu 
the  winter. 

Q.  Had  they  previously  been  prevented  from  fishing  for  herring  I— 
A.  I  am  not  sure  that  they  had  been  prevented,  but  I  remember  that 
the  government  had  determined  to  prevent  them  from  doing  so. 

Q.  Your  recollection  that  they  had  determined  to  do  so  is  pretty 
strong,  but  they  had  not  yet  begun  to  prevent  them  doing  so ;  is  not 
this  the  case  ? — A.  I  think  that  this  determination  had  been  taken  the 
year  previous.    At  that  time  I  think  that  the  steamer  Monteceilo  came 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


549 


there  and  caaght  a  load  of  herring,  and  I  think  that  the  people  thought 
this  was  carrying  it  a  little  too  far,  as  Newfoandlanders  were  excluded 
from  sending  herring  in  their  own  vessels  to  the  Boston  market,  while 
the  American  steamer  Montecello  was  allowed  to  come  and  catch  a 
cargo  and  carry  them  into  the  American  market  duty  free.  It  was  con- 
sidered tbat  this  was  carrying  the  privilege  a  little  too  far. 

Q.  Had  the  government  actually  begun  to  prevent  the  Americans 
from  doing  so  f — A.  I  think  that  they  intended  to  do  so. 

Q.  Intended  or  begun  ? — A.  They  had  not  done  so,  as  far  as  I  know, 
but  I  believe  that  they  wouhl  have  done  so  that  winter. 

Q.  This  did  not  make  any  actual  change  in  the  practical  operation  of 
affairs?— A.  I  think  that  tlie  minute  of  council  resulted  in  preventing 
any  official  under  the  government  from  carrying  out  any  previous  iu- 
strnctions  such  officials  had  received. 

Q.  Tliey  continued  to  do  as  they  had  always  done;  that  is  the  amount 
of  it, is  it  not  ? — A.  They  granted  them  freedom  by  that  minute  of  coun- 
cil, but  I  do  not  know  that  the  Americans  had  any  legal  freedom  in  this 
relation  previously. 

Q.  But  they  had  actual  freedom.  Had  the  Americans  also  been  pre- 
vented from  carrying  on  the  halibut  fishing? — A.  Yes;  they  had  been 
interfered  with. 

Q.  How  ? — A.  In  1870,  I  think  that  there  were  several  American  ves- 
sels fisbing  off  Puss  Island,  and  men  at  Hermitage  Bay  telegraphed  to 
the  admiral  at  Halifax,  informing  him  tbat  a  number  of  American  fish- 
ermen were  fishing  there,  depriving  our  flsherraen  of  halibut  and  of  the 
chance  of  catching  cod.  The  admiral  sent  a  vessel  direct  from  Halifax 
down  to  tbat  locality,  but  intimation  of  this  had,  however,  been  given, 
and  the  American  fisherman  were  very  snug  under  sail  and  sailing  to- 
ward Briinet  Island  when  the  man-of-war  arrived,  so  that  nothing  really 
was  done  to  them,  although  the  man-of-war  left  boats  at  the  place. 

Q.  How  many  of  them  were  there  ? — A.  There  were  six  American 
fishermen. 

Q.  These  were  the  same  six  which  you  noticed  fishing  there  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Have  they  been  back  since  ? — A.  They  have  been  there  every  year, 
I  am  told,  until  within  the  last  two  or  three  years. 

Q.  There  was  a  considerable  number  of  them  until  within  the  last  two 
or  three  years  I — A.  Yes ;  until  the  last  two  years. 

Q.  What  has  become  of  them  ? — A.  I  am  told  that  they  have  pretty 
nearly  exhausted  that  fishery.  It  has  been  pretty  well  cleaned  out  by 
tbein. 

Q.  So  that  privilege  was  disposed  of  in  about  two  years  of  the 
twelve? — A.  With  what  the  Americans  took  fairly  under  the  treaty 
and  unfairly  before  the  treaty,  they  managed  to  dispose  of  it  in  about 
ten  years. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  I  could  seethe  minute  of  council  entered  into 
iu  1871?  Do  you  by  chance  remember  whether  it  admitted  American 
fish  free  of  duty  into  Newfoundland  ? — A.  I  do  not  remember  that. 

Q.  Was  it  not  simply  limited  to  the  other  things  you  have  enumer- 
ated?—A.  I  would  not  like  to  speak  on  that  point,  because  it  is  a  mat- 
ter of  too  much  importiMice  to  trust  to  memory  about. 

Q.  Under  the  treaty,  American  fish  was  admitted  free  of  duty  into 
Newfoundland  a  year  after  this  was  the  case  with  all  the  rest  of  British 
North  America? — A.  Yes,  I  believe  that  the  treaty  was  proclaimed 
there  one  year  afterward. 

Q>  And  that  delay  was  caused  by  the  inhabitants  of  Newfoundland 


650 


AWABD  OP  THE  FI8HEBY  COMMISSION. 


themselves,  who  had  the  option  of  oomiDg  in  or  staying  out,  in  tliJH  re- 
gard f — A.  O,  no;  it  was  oaased  simply  by  the  proviso  in  the  ori(rjtiiil 
act  put  in,  providing  that  the  American  fishermen  should  be  compelled 
to  abide  by  the  local  laws,  which  prevented  seining  and  other  thin^rHot 
that  kind. 

Q.  It  was  due  to  your  declining  to  accept  the  treaty  unconditioimlly 
and  annexing  an  addition  to  it  which  was  not  permisnible  ? — A.  The 
addition  was  understood. 

Q.  It  was,  then,  your  own  acts  and  adi.  issions  which  prevented  your 
coming  in  at  the  same  time  with  the  rest,  was  it  not  ? — A.  Wo  were  no 
prevented  by  that  addition  to  the  treaty  from  coming  in  until  one  year 
after. 

Mr.  Whiteway.  I  think  that  the  following  extract,  taken  from  Gov- 
ernor Hill's  dispiitch  to  the  Earl  of  Kiraberly,  gives  the  purport  of  this 
minute  of  council : 

My  iiiiiiistpra,  however,  to  wlioni  I  have  conimunicaied  the  whole  of  the  important 
documents  rcspectiiiK  the  Washington  Treaty,  are  willini;  to  consider  tins  oiiiJNNioii 
as  unintentional,  ana  althoiigii  anxious  to  obtain  information  on  this  point,  haviTe- 
solved  to  comply  with  the  wishes  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  as  regards  Mim  adiiiJ!*- 
sion,  during  the  present  season,  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  the  proviNional  usu 
of  the  privileges  granted  to  tlmm  by  the  treaty,  so  far  as  lies  within  the  jiiristlittioii  of 
the  Government  of  Newfoundland  to  bestow. 

Q.  Is  there  a  dispensing  power  over  the  laws  of  Newfoundland  vested 
in  the  governor  in  council  ? — A.  There  is  no  dispensing  power  vested 
either  in  the  Queen  or  governor. 

Q.  Then,  until  Newfoundland  accepted  the  treaty,  there  was  no  legal 
way  of  preventing  the  Americans  from  paying  duty,  was  there  /—A. 
Yes,  it  is  considered  legal  in  the  same  way,  or  on  the  same  ground,  that 
the  bank  charter  in  England  is  suspended  in  case  of  necessity.  There 
is  a  way,  but  not  a  legal  one  ;  still  it  may  be  done,  and  remedied  by  post- 
facto  legislation. 

Q.  Do  you  really  mean  to  tell  the  Commission  that  regarding  a  mat- 
ter of  revenue  the  enforcement  of  a  revenue  law  could  be  suspended,  or 
was  ever  suspended,  by  a  minute  of  council  in  your  island  ? — A.  I  would 
not  say  that  this  was  ever  done. 

Q.  What  would  your  liberties  l)e  worth  if  it  was  done? — A.  I  think 
that  people  who  are  sturdy  are  well  able  to  take  care  of  their  liberties. 

Q.  And  they  would  do  it  pretty  quickly  if  these  were  invaded  like 
that  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  think  so. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  would  be  willing  to  state  that  there  was  no  legal  way 
of  preventing  the  Americans  from  paying  duty  for  their  exports  of  fish 
to  Newfoun<lland  until  you  accepted  the  treaty  ? — A.  I  think  that  there 
was  no  such  way,  but  1  do  not  know  it  to  be  the  case.  1  would  not  be 
positive  on  that  point. 

Q.  What  is  your  doubt  regarding  it  ?  What  conceivable  legal  way 
is  there  of  removing  duties  on  American  tish  until  the  treaty  was  finally 
accepted  ? — A.  I  do  not  remember  that  Newfoundland  did  make  any 
exception  in  its  revenue  laws. 

Q.  Of  course  it  did  not.  Honor  bright ;  did  you  ever  know  of  a  pound 
of  American  fish  being  imported  into  Newfoundland  free  of  duty  before 
the  treaty  was  adopted  ? — A.  O,  certainly  not. 

Q.  Then  we  did  not  at  that  time  get  our  fish  in  there  free  of  duty  ?— 
A.  O,  certainly  not. 

Q.  You  have  told  us,  I  think,  earlier  in  your  testimony,  that  you  con- 
sidered the  remission  of  duties  on  American  fish  imported  into  New- 
foundland fully  equal  in  value  to  the  remission  of  duties  on  Newfound- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


561 


vaa  iiu  legal 


land  flail  Hud  flab-oil  comiug  into  the  Uuited  States? — A..  That  is,  fo 
the  pant  three  .years. 

Q,  Wan  it  not  for  four  years T — A.  No;  because  the  Americans  had 
not  then  l)rought  tlieir  lish  in  •*  sell,  nor  had  we  benefited  by  the  re- 
misHiuu  of  duties  in  the  United  States. 

Q.  You  liave  expressed  the  oiiiniou,  have  you  not,  that  the  remiasiou 
of  duties  WHS  an  equal  affair  on  each  side  ? — A.  1  did  not  say  that  this 
was  an  f<iual  affair;  but  I  said  that  the  remission  of  duties  on  each  side 
should  be  set  against  each  other. 

(}.  Don't  you  think  that  the  one  is  fully  equivalent  to  the  other? — A. 
IsliuuUl  say  not.    Equivalent  means  balance — pound  for  pound. 

Q.  Which  way  do  you  think  the  balance  incliuHS  f — A.  I. can  only  tell 
you  M  fiir  as  our  returns  show,  that  we  saved  about  $50,000  of  duty  on 
);uod8»ent  to  the  United  States,  and  that  the  Ameriuans  have  saved 
$78,000  a  year  in  duties  on  tish  now  sold  in  Newfoun(llau<l. 

Q.  So  much  the  better  foi  my  pur|)ose? — A.  So  much  the  better  for 
the  American  tishermen. 

Q.  It  turns  out  then  that  you  collected  duties  on  or  prevente<l  the 
importiition  of  our  tish,  because  the  duties  stopped  such  importation 
until  the  treaty  was  furniiilly  adopted,  and  that  up  to  the  same  date  we 
collected  duties  in  your  tish  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  that  such  was  the 
case. 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  to  say  that  tlio  B  ink  flsliery  was  built  up  between 
1871  and  1874? — A.  O,  no ;  it  has  been  built  up  for  msany  years,  and 
it  is  now  largely  carried  on,  as  far  as  my  information  goes. 

Q.  How  much  has  it  increased,  and  in  what  years  ? — A.  During  the 
last  five  or  six  years,  I  am  told  that  this  tishe'"'  as  increased  very 
much;  and  that  the  number  of  vessels  engaged  in  is  very,  very  much 
greater  than  it  was  previously. 

Q.  What  number  would  you  give  for  1870  ? — A.  About  500  sail.  I 
think  that  there  are  now  about  1,000  vessels  on  the  Banks. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  it  is  in  consequence  of  a  considerable  fail- 
ure in  the  American  fisheries  that  some  of  our  fishermen  have  gone 
there  ?— A.  Yes.  I  have  found  that  such  is  the  fact,  and  it  has  proved 
a  very  prosperous  fishery  for  them,  I  am  informed. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  the  Moiitecello  prosecuted  the  seal  fishery 
from  Newfoundland  prior  to  the  Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  She  did. 

Q.  They  came  in  and  fitted  out  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  No  objection  was  raised  to  this  by  the  Newfoun'lland  Govern- 
meut? — A.  They  permitted  it.  She  brought  the  seals  in  and  sold  them 
in  St.  John's,  without  paying  any  duty,  I  believe. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Do  yon  know  who  owned  her  ? — A.  I  have  forgotten,  but  it  was  a 
New  York  house. 

Q.  Where  was  it  located  ? — A.  It  was  not  located  iu  Nevvfoiindland 
at  all.    A  New  York  house  sent  her  to  Newfoundland. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  How  do  you  look  upon  the  cod  cured  in  Newfoundland  ? — A.  They 
are  the  best  cured  to  be  found  iu  the  world. 

Q.  You  consider  that  they  are  the  best  iu  the  world  ? — A.  The  fish 
that  I  think  ranks  as  high  are  cured  by  Robins  &  Co.,  at  Gasp6.  I 
know  of  no  other  cod  fishery  that  can  equal  those  cared  in  Newfound- 


652 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


I 


I 


land ;  bat  they  do  uot  sell  much  more  than  40,000  or  50,000  quintals  of 
fish  a  .year. 

Q.  What  I  want  (o  ask  you  is,  whether  the  claim  that  Qmp6  furnished 
the  best  codfish  in  tbe  world  was  acknowledged  by  yon  ? — A.  Not  by 
any  means.  Our  fish,  I  think,  has  the  monopoly  of  the  Brazilian  market. 
Oasp^  fish  are  also  sent  in  there  to  a  small  extent,  and  they  compete 
favorably  with  ours. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  Are  not  the  Norwegian  fish  considered  of  superior  quality  ?— A.  It 
is  equal  to  our  Labrador  fish,  but  not  to  our  shore  fish.    It  is  not  a  supe- 
rior fish,  but  great  care  is  exercised  in  curing  it.    They  clip  the  tins  and 
take  a  great  deal  of  care  of  them. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway  : 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  the  produce  of  the  seal  fishery  carried  on 
by  the  Montecello,  was  rendered  in  St.  John's,  and  imported  into  the 
United  States  free  of  duty  If  Was  the  oil  rendered  at  St.  John's,  an,' 
so  shipped  I — A.  It  was.  I  remember  that  it  was  rendered  by  Hurvt V 
&Co. 

Q.  In  what  year  was  she  there? — A.  I  would  uot  like  to  speak  posi- 
tively on  that  point,  but  1  think  it  was  in  1872. 

No.  16. 

William  Killigrew,  sixty-three  years  of  age,  merchant,  of  St. 
John's,  Newfoundland,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Uer 
Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  INIr.  Whiteway : 

Question.  Where  do  you  carry  on  business? — Answer.  At  Renews, 
and  hIso  on  the  southern  shore. 

Q.  Renews  is  a  little  to  the  north  of  Cape  Kace  ? — A.  Yes,  it  is  about 
30  miles  to  the  north  of  that  point. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  carry  on  the  Bank  or  deep-sea  fishing  f — A.  Yes ;  I 
did. 

Q.  When  II — A.  From  1831i  to  18.'35.  I  was  at  the  time  acting  for  uiy 
father. 

Q.  Tlio  business  was  done  in  your  father's  name? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  had  he  ? — A.  Only  one. 

Q.  In  order  to  prosecute  that  fishery  you  consider  that  the  coast  ot 
Newfoundland  is  absolutely  necessary  as  a  basis  of  operation? — A.  Yes, 
I  should  say  that  it  is  one  of  the  best  possible  places  for  the  purpose. 
The  Banks  are  pretty  near  the  coast,  and  the  island  offers  very  favor- 
able facilities  for  obtaining  bait. 

Q.  What  bait  is  used  in  the  cod  fishery  ? — A.  We  used  to  use  capliu 
during  the  first  part  ot  the  season. 

Q.  For  the  Bank  fishing?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  subsequently  ? — A.  We  afterwards  used  squid. 

Q.  Both  these  fishes  are  found  in,  about,  and  on  the  coast  of  Newtouud- 
land?— A.  Yos. 

Q.  You  have  a  most  intimate  knowledge  of  the  fishery  prosecuted 
between  Cape  liace  and  Conceptitm  Bay?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  also  a  general  knowledge  ef  the  fishery  carried  on  at  other 
parts  of  the  island  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  bait  first  makes  its  appearance  in  the  8i)ring  of  the  year  f— 
A.  Herring. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


553 


Q.  At  what  time  f — A.  About  the  middle  of  April,  on  the  coast  from 
Cape  Race  uorth  wards. 

Q.  How  long  do  tbey  remain  T — A.  All  the  season,  until  the  end  of 
November,  or  some  time  in  December.  They  are  found  at  all  times  up 
to  November. 

Q.  How  long  are  herring  used  for  bait  in  the  cod  fishery  ? — A.  Until 
the  capliu  make  their  appearance. 

Q.  When  is  that? — A.  Generally  about  the  middle  of  June. 

Q.  And  how  long  do  they  remain  f — A.  For  five  or  six  weeks,  and 
sometimes  longer.    The  general  average  is  about  six  weeks. 

Q.  Wbat  bait  follows  f — A.  Squid. 

Q.  /Vout  what  timet— A.  It  comes  in  generally  about  the  loth  or 
the  midiile  of  July. 

Q.  Anti  bow  long  does  it  remain  f — A.  Until  the  end  of  November. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainte<l  with,  or  have  yon  been  informed  about,  the 
operations  of  the  American  bankers  on  the  coast  to  which  you  have  just 
referred  ? — A.  Yes ;  for  the  past  two  years. 

Q.  Have  they  resorted  to  the  harbors  along  tbat  coast  in  any  consid- 
erable numbers  .' — A.  Tbey  have;  in  large  numbers. 

Q.  In  all  the  coves  and  harbors  or  only  iu  a  few  of  them  ? — A.  They 
have  resorte  I  to  those  all  along  the  coast  as  far  as  Conception  Bay. 

Q.  For  viirtt  purpose! — A.  To  obtain  bait;  capliu  first  and  squid 
afterwards. 

Q.  And  ice  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  do  tbey  generally  remain  in  for  bait  aCter  tbey  have  ar- 
rived ? — A.  For  caplin  tbey  very  seldou)  have  to  stay  more  than  12  or 
IG  hours.  If  the  caplin  have  struck  tbe  land  at  the  time,  tbey  have  no 
diftieulty  in  getting  them,  and  tbey  generally  know  when  tbe  caplin  will 
be  there. 

Q.  How  long  do  tbey  stay  to  obtain  squid  ? — A.  Sometimes  not  longer 
than  the  time  I  have  mentioned  :  but  squid  are  sometimes  a  little  more 
uncertain.  Tbey  have  to  jig  them  ;  tbey  are  not  hauled  in  seines  like 
caplin.    Tbey  may  have  to  remain  two  days  for  squid. 

Q.  How  do  tbey  obtain  caplin  and  squid  f  Do  tbey  take  this  bait 
themselves  or  purchase  it  from  tbe  people? — A.  It  is  done  in  this  wav: 
They 

can  vessel  goes  with  him. 
seine  and  for  his  services. 

Q.  This  has  reference  to  caplin  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  tbey  obtain  s«piid  i — A.  Tbey  purchase  it  if  tbey  can  ; 
otherwise  tbey  catch  it  themselves. 

Q.  How  long  does  it  take  American  bankers  fishing  on  tbe  Banks  to 
come  iu  and  obtain  their  bait  from  the  coast  and  reach  their  tisbing- 
groiinds  again  ? — A.  Under  favorable  circumstances  tbey  could  io  tbis 
in  sixty  hours. 

Q.  They  could  return  to  the  Banks  in  sixty  hours  after  tbey  bad  left 
the  {jroniids  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  received  that  inforniatioti  regarding  tbe  time  from  any 
Aiiitrican  captain  t — A.  1  have — indirectly.  I  have  heard  it  from  my 
son,  who  has  conversed  with  them  on  tbe  subject. 

Q.  And  you  also  know  it  from  ycnir  own  knowledge? — A.  I  know 
from  my  own  knowledge  that  they  <!ould  do  so. 

Q.  Have  you  received  any  information  from  American  captains  re- 
garding tbe  practice  of  throwing  small  fish  overboard  from  the  vessels? — 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  What  information  did  you  receive  f — V.  In  1875  I  met  a  O.iptaia 


generally  hire  a  man  who  owns  a  seine,  and  the  crew  of  tbe  Ameri- 

Tbis  man  receives  so  much  for  the  use  of  his 


554 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Price  and  another  American  captain  on  bo^rd  aco^istal  steamer,  and  he 
told  me  that  they  threw  awav  more  ftnh  every  year  than  we  caught. 
He  referred  to  half  a  dozen  American  bankers. 

Q.  He  was  speaking  of  whatyonr  firm  got? — A.  Yes ;  he  knew  where 
my  place  of  business  was.  I  asked  him  what  wr>s  the  size  of  the  M\ 
they  threw  away,  and  he  answered,  "Anything  that  won't  make  22 
inches  after  being  split  we  throw  away." 

Q.  That  is  after  the  bead  has  been  taken  off  and  I'ae  Qsh  snlil  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Are  yon  aware  that  any  other  practice  in  this  connection  has  beeu 
adopted  since  the  Washington  Treaty  has  come  into  operation  ?— A. 
Yes ;  they  do  not  throw  away  these  fish  at  all  now ;  they  sell  them. 

Q.  To  whom  ? — A.  To  different  parties. 

Q.  Where  ? — A.  On  tho  coast. 

Q.  To  Newfoundlanders? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Your  firm  has  bought  some  of  these  flsh,  I  believe? — A.  A  little, 
but  not  much. 

Q.  In  what  way  are  they  prepared  ? — A.  They  are  just  salted  lightly, 
as  we  would  salt  them  ourselves.  Their  own  fish  are  salted  very  dif- 
ferently. I  now  allude  to  the  lai^e  lish  which  they  take  t »  market. 
They  salt  these  fish,  however,  lightly,  bring  them  in  and  sell  them  to 
Newfoundlanders,  keeping  them  separate  from  the  others. 

Q.  Do  they  sell  fish-oil  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Prom  your  knowledge  of  the  fishery,  would  the  oil  extracted  from 
these  small  codfish  pay  for  the  labor  and  the  salt? — A.  Yes,  I  should 
say  that  it  would,  fully;  more  oil  is  obtained  from  the  small  fish  than 
from  the  large  by  a  good  deal  in  proportion. 

Q.  Then  the  result  of  the  sale  of  the  fish  themselves  is  clear  profit  to 
the  Americans? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  These  are  what  they  previously  threw  overboard ;  and  the  labor 
and  salt  is  paid  for  by  their  oil,  while  the  value  of  the  fish  is  clear  profit 
to  them? — A.  Yes;  otherwise  they  would  have  to  throw  them  over- 
board. 

Q.  How  is  the  cod  fishery  carried  on  by  Newfoundlanders?— A.  Priii 
cipally  with  the  hook  and  line. 

Q.  Where  is  it  carried  on  ? — A.  All  along  the  coast. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore? — A.  From  one  mile  to  two  miles, 
and  sometimes  within  a  mile. 

Q.  It  is  carried  on  at  not  more  than  half  a  mile  from  the  shore  in  some 
places? — A.  Yes.  It  is  jtrosecuted  almost  entirely  within  three  miles 
of  the  shore.    This  is  the  case  with  one  or  two  exceptions. 

Q.  On  (Jape  Ballard  Bank,  it  is  carried  on  at  a  certain  season?— A. 
Yes.  Cape  Ballard  Bank  is  about  seven  miles  from  the  coast.  A  larger 
class  of  boats  fish  there  late  in  the  season.  Wlien  the  fishing  fails  along 
the  shore  the  large  boats  go  out  to  this  bank. 

Q.  In  one  or  two  other  places  the  fishermen  go  out  to  fish  in  the  same 
way  at  a  greater  distance  than  three  miles  from  tlie  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Judging  from  your  knowledge  of  the  fisheries,  how  many  quintals 
would  you  say  were  uaught  by  Newfoundlanders  outside  of  the  three-mile 
limit? — A.  The  greater  portion  is  caught  inshore.  1  should  say  tliat 
nine-tenths  of  the  flsh  are  caught  within  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  How  many  quintals  would  you  say,  in  round  numbers,  are  caught 
outside  of  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  For  the  season  it  would  be  from 
8,(K)0'to  10,000  quintals.    This  would  be  very  near  the  thing. 

Q.  What  are  the  principal  Newfoundland  markets  for  flsh  ?— A.  Spain 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


555 


;  fails  iilong 


Portugal,  the  Mediterranean,  the  West  Indies,  and  Brazil;  some  are 
also  shipped  to  Great  Britain  and  Ireland. 

Q.  Would  you  describe  Uow^  the  fish  is  prepared  and  cured  for  these 
markets? — A.  The  sonner  the  fish  are  gutted  and  split,  after  being 
caught,  the  better.  If  this  is  not  done  within  12  or  14  hours  ot  their 
being  taken,  particularly  iu  warm  weather,  it  has  a  bad  effect  on  their 
flavor.  The  oil  from  their  liver  then  runs,  and  that  is  the  consequence 
of  it.  The  fish  is  never  as  merchantable  after  that  as  it  would  otherwise 
be.  They  are  not  then  fit  to  be  classed  as  number  one ;  aud  they  also 
do  not  take  the  salt  as  well  under  these  circumstances. 

Q.  The  flsli  should  be  split  within  twelve  hours  of  being  taken  ? — A. 
Yes;  if  possible.    They  should  be  washed  and  put  under  salt. 

Q.  How  long  do  they  remain  under  salt  t — A.  About  6  or  8  days. 
They  are  then  washed,  and  after  laying  for  24  hours  in  what  we  call  a 
water-horse — this  is  the  name  given  to  it  by  fishermen  in  this  part  of  the 
country — the  pickle  is  pressed  out.  They  are  placed  in  a  large  boat. 
The  pressing  out  of  the  pickle  renders  the  fish  less  liable  to  be  touched 
by  the  sun  on  a  warm  day.  It  requires  a  good  deal  of  care  to  prevent 
their  being  sun-burned.  This  is  particularly  tiie  case  witli  the  large 
fish;  after  half  a  dozen  spreadings  they  are  piled.  Altogether  it  will 
take  some  five  weeks  iu  suitable  weather  to  make  them  reaiy  for  the 
markets  which  I  have  mentioned. 

Q.  Is  very  hot  weather  suitable  for  the  curing  of  the  fish  ? — A.  Not 
at  all.  A  cold,  dry,  westerly  wind  with  some  sun,  but  not  too  mucli  of 
it,  is  most  suitable  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect  of  a  very  hot  sun  and  a  humid  atmos- 
phere on  the  fish  1 — A.  A  hot  day  would  very  likely  have  the  effect  of 
burning  the  fish. 

Q.  The  population  of  Newfoundland  is  about  150,000,  I  believe! — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  How  are  the  people  located  along  the  coast? — A,  They  live  along 
the  creeks  and  inlets  and  all  along  the  coast,  in  almost  every  locality, 
within  every  mile  or  two. 

Q  Every  cove  or  creek  is  settled  on  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  these  families  wholly  and  solelv  dependent  on  this  fishery  ? — 
A.  Yes ;  jierhaps  a  few  farm,  but  very  few  (io. 

Q.  They  do  very  little  in  the  way  of  agricultural  operations  ? — A. 
They  do  s(5arcely  anything  in  that  dirnction.  In  some  I'^calities  they  do 
nothing  at  all  in  that  way.  Others  do  a  little.  One  in  every  hundred 
families,  perhaps. 

Q.  WluMi  does  their  fishing  season  commence? — A.  On  the  southeast 
coast  it  begins  between  the  5th  and  20th  of  May. 

Q.  And  continues  until  when  ? — A.  In  some  localities  it  is  prosecuted 
until  the  end  of  November. 

Q.  Wliiit  are  the  people  0(!cupied  in  doing  during  the  winter  sea- 
son ?— A.  Very  little  is  to  be  done  in  winter. 

Q.  They  then  mend  nets  and  build  boats  ? — A.  Yes.  Some  of  them 
go  to  the  seal-fishery. 

Q.  What  do  these  people  principally  use  in  the  way  of  animal  food  ? — 
A.  Fish. 

Q.  They  themselves  consume  a  large  quantity  of  fish? — A.  Yes;  a 
very  large  quantity. 

Q.  Have  you  made  up  an  estimate  in  this  regard  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  result  of  your  calculation  ? — A.  I  assume,  on  the 
most  moderate  calculation,  that  each  family  consumes  yearly  about  six 


556 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


quintals,  and  that  there  are  30,000  families  on  the  island ;  couseqiientlv 
they  would  consume  about  180,000  quintals  of  fish  annually. 

Q.  How  many  are  there  in  each  family  ! — A.  I  put  down  the  average 
number  at  five.  I  value  this  fish  at  $4  a  quintal.  I  put  down  five  bar- 
rels of  herring  to  each  family,  and  this  would  be  worth  $150,UU0.  I 
estimate  that  36,000  acres  of  land  are  manured  with  fish  worth  oU  cents 
a  barrel.    Six  barrels  are  used  to  the  acre. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  To  what  kind  of  fish  do  you  refer  f — A.  Herring,  caplin,  and  other 
kinds  are  used  for  manure. 

Q.  How  many  acres  are  utilized  for  agriculture  ? — A.  Thirty-six  thou- 
sand. Caplin  are  principally  used  for  this  purpose,  but  a  few  lierriu>; 
are  so  employed. 

Q.  And  you  value  these  fish  at  half  a  dollar  a  barrel  ? — A.  Yes, 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  At  what  do  you  estimate  the  sum  total  ? — A.  At  $978,000. 

Q.  This  is  for  the  population  residing  on  the  coast  from  Katnea 
Islands  to  Cape  Race,  and  northward  to  Quirpon,  at  the  uorllieru 
extremity  of  the  island  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  According  to  the  census,  there  are,  I  believe,  ouly  from  8,000  to 
10,000  people  living  on  what  is  commonly  called  the  French  sliore  on 
that  part  of  the  coast,  along  which  the  French  have  a  right  to  tish  ?— 
A.  That  is  about  the  number,  I  think. 

Q.  The  whole  population  of  the  island  numbers  about  1GO,000  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  any  American  vessels  having  beeu  engaged 
in  fishing  within  the  three-mile  limit  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  ?— 
A.  I  cannot  speak  directly  in  this  connection,  but  I  have  heard  of 
two  or  three  American  vessels  having  fished  within  the  three-uuie  limit. 

Q.  Where? — A.  One  at  Cape  Pine;  another  at  Mistaken  Point ;  aud 
a  third  at  Cape  Saint  Mary. 

>Q.  What  fish  were  they  seeking  ? — A.  Cod.  I  cannot  apeak  posi- 
tively on  the  point,  but  I  believe  that  such  was  the  case. 

Q.  Judging  from  what  you  have  seen  with  respect  to  the  seoiiriiig  of 
bait  by  the  Americans,  what  effect  has  it  on  tlie  bait  fishery;  I  refer  iu 
the  first  pla(5e  to  caplin. — A.  It  has  a  very  bad  effect. 

Q.  In  what  way  f — A.  The  hauling  of  seines  iu  the  bait  coves  disturbs 
the  bait  and  has  the  effect  of  driving  it  away  from  our  sliorea,  and  iu  all 
probability  the  fish  will  follow  the  bait;  thus  both  fish  aud  bait  will  be 
drivtMi  away  from  the  shore  after  a  time. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact  in  your  experience  of  the  fishery,  do  the  fish 
leave  when  the  bait  goes  away  ? — A.  Most  certainly  they  do. 

Q.  In  what  way  is  the  fishery  carried  on  by  Newfoundlanders  ?— A. 
With  the  hook  and  line,  bultows,  cod  seines  aud  cod  nets. 

Q.  When  are  the  cod  seines  used  ? — A.  After  the  caplin  strike  the 
shore.    About  the  middle  of  June. 

Q.  And  at  that  time  are  the  <?od  to  be  found  along  the  shores  iu  very 
large  schools  ? — A.  Yes,  generally. 

Q.  Under  what  circumstances  is  cod  seining  most  productive  ?  Is 
this  the  case  when  the  bait  are  undisturbed  on  the  coast  ? — A.  Certainly. 
Where  there  is  no  bait  there  are  no  fish  on  the  coast. 

Q.  In  order  to  prosecute  the  cod  fishery  here  successfully  by  seiuiug, 
it  is  desirable  that  the  caplin  should  be  allowed  to  remain  quietly  ou  the 
coast  f — A.  Certainly. 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


557 


Q.  They  should  be  disturbed  as  little  as  possible  ? — A.  Yes.  Where 
there  are  no  caplin,  fishermeu  never  expect  to  flud  cod. 

Q.  Do  they  ever  thr'^w  a  seine  where  there  are  no  caplin  ? — A.  No. 
Sometimes  after  the  caplin  have  left  ^  have  seen  the  cod  in  for  spawn, 
but  never  otherwise. 

Q.  For  the  caplin  spawn  I — A.  Yes.  This  would  happen  once  in  seven 
years  perhaps. 

'  Q.  The  cod  come  in  after  caplin  spawn,  after  the  caplin  have  been 
there  and  spawned  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  then  cod  seines  are  used  to  advantage? — A.  Yes;  but  that 
very  seldom  occurs.  I  have,  however,  known  instances  of  it  during  my 
time. 

Q.  It  is  only  when  the  cod  are  in  after  caplin  or  caplin  spawn  that 
cod-seines  can  be  used  advantageously  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Does  the  procuring  of  bait  by  the  Americans  on  shore  tend  to  dis- 
turb the  caplin  in  these  coves,  and  consequently  atfect  cod-seining  f — A. 
Well,  I  do  not  think  that  any  damage  has  as  yet  thus  been  done,  because 
we  have  always  had  sufficient  bait  on  our  shores ;  but  I  am  afraid  that 
it  will  have  a  very  injurious  effect  in  this  relation  in  a  short  time.  It  is 
imposaible  for  the  bait-coves  to  stand  the  dragging  to  which  they  are 
jaat  now  continually  subjected.  I  have  heard  of  one  or  two  instances 
in  which  an  injurious  result  has  followed  this  practice. 

Q.  If  this  fishery  on  the  coast  is  in  any  way  injured  it  means  almost 
starvation  to  the  people,  I  suppose  ? — A.  It  does,  indeed. 

Q.  Depending  wholly  on  the  fishery  as  they  do  for  sustenance  ? — A. 
Yes;  they  have  nothing  else  on  which  to  fall  back. 

Q.  They  have  nothing  to  fall  back  on  if  the  fishery  fails  I — A.  Nothing 
whatever. 

Q.  When  you  carried  on  the  Bank  fishery,  did  any  practice  with  regard 
to  the  throwing  of  offal  overboard  exist  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  it  ? — A.  The  vessels  always  used  to  remove  to  a  distance 
from  where  they  were  fishing  and  throw  it  overboard.    They  generally 
went  away  to  a  distance  of  12  or  14  mile".    This  was  the  custom  in  my 
early  days.    Afterward,  they  returned  to  the  fishing-grounds. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  opinion  as  to  throwing  over  of  offal  affecting 
the  tishing grounds  injuriously,  or  otherwise? — A.  My  impression  is 
thiit  it  does  them  great  injury. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  opinion  regarding  the  effect  which  the  large 
number  of  Bank  fishing  vessels,  in  being  upon  the  outer  Banks  and  ttsh- 
iugoff  the  coast  of  Newfoundland,  will  have  on  the  inshore  fisheries? — 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  What  is  it  ? — A.  I  consider,  judging  from  the  number  of  bankers 
that  are  now  on  the  Banks,  and  the  number  of  lines  and  hooks  which 
they  have  out,  that  this,  with  the  use  of  fresh  bait,  will  have  a  very 
bad  effect  on  our  shore-fishery  ;  it  must  to  some  extent  stop  the  fish  com- 
ing ou  our  shores. 

Q.  Thjit  is  your  opinion  I — A.  Yes,  because  they  employ  fresh  bait. 
The  French  fish  with  salt  bait  altogether.  They  never  take  fresh  bait 
with  them. 

Q.  You  think  that  a  large  quantity  of  fresh  bait  distributed  on  the 
liauks,  on  the  hooks  of  these  bultows,  attracts  the  fish  there  and  pre- 
sents tliem  from  coming  into  the  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Upon  what  basis  is  that  opinion  formed  ? — A.  It  is  founded  on 
tuis  basis :  The  very  small  fish  that  I  hav'e  seen  the  banker's  bring  in  ; 
these  are  like  the  fish  that  are  caught  on  our  own  shore. 

Q-  Then  your  opinion  is  that  the  Bank  fishing  of  Americans  will  keep 


668 


AWARD   OF   TH£   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


away  from  yoar  own  shore  the  tinh  that  have  beeu  accustomed  to  come 
there  f — A.  Yes.  The  preseut  Bank  fishing  is  not  at  all  like  the  Bank 
fishing  which  used  to  be  prosecuted  in  my  early  days. 

Q.  What  is  the  difference  ? — A.  It  relates  to  the  size  and  color  of  the 
fish  caught. 

Q.  These  are  now  smaller  ? — A.  Yes ;  35  fish  used  to  be  cousi<lered  a 
large  average  for  a  quintal  of  fish;  but  now  I  think  it  will  take  of  the 
fish  I  have  seen  on  board  of  the  American  bankers  from  4U  to  45  fish 
to  make  a  quintal.    The  fish  are  of  a  very  small  description. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Do  you  mean  in  the  cured  state  1 — A.  Yes. 
By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  What  about  the  color  ? — A.  There  is  also  a  difference  in  the  color 
of  the  flsh.  Regarding  this  matter,  I  speak  from  experience.  Two 
hundred  quintals  of  fish  taken  from  a  vessel  which  was  lost,  were  left 
on  ray  premises  at  Kenewes,  and  I  saw  the  flsh,  and  it  struck  me  at  the 
time  how  small  they  were  compared  with  what  their  size  used  to  be. 
These  flsh  were  caught  on  the  Banks.  I  ppoke  to  the  captain  about  it, 
and  he  said  that  this  was  tlie  general  run  of  the  flsh  that  were  now 
caught  <m  the  Ranks.  The  underwriters  placed  these  200  quintals  on 
my  premises. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average  live  weight  of  these  fish? — A.  1  sup- 
p-^se  that  some  would  weigh  from  30  to  40  pounds. 

^.  There  must  be  a  great  many  small  ones? — A.  So  there  is.  I  have 
seen  a  great  many  which  weighed  50  or  56  pounds. 

Q.  How  much  would  they  weigh  when  cured  ? — A.  Sometimes,  if  very 
large,  from  10  to  12  pounds.  1  have  seen  fish  which  weighed  17  pounds 
when  cured. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  bankers  came  on  the  portion  of  the  coast 
to  which  you  have  referred  to  obtain  bait  during  the  last  summer  ?— A. 
Judging  from  what  1  have  myself  seen,  and  from  what  I  have  heard  my 
son  say,  a  great  many  must  have  come  there.  I  have,  of  course,  seen  a 
great  number  myself  in  different  localities. 

Q.  How  many? — A.  I  have  seen  in  different  localities  from  100  to  150 
at  a  time. 

Q.  Have  you  made  any  estimate  regarding  the  number  of  American 
vessels  ? — A.  No,  save  from  what  I  have  gathered  from  hearsay. 

Q.  At  what  do  you  thus  estimate  the  number? — A.  Between  400 and 
500  vessels.    That  is  the  best  information  I  have  beeu  able  to  obtain. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  pievious  to  the  last  two  years,  what  has  been 
the  condition  of  the  fishery  on  that  portion  of  the  coast  to  whicli  yon 
have  just  referred  ? — A.  It  was  then  very  much  in  advance  of  what  it  is 
now. 

Q.  Then  it  has  diminished  in  productiveness  during  the  last  two 
years? — A.  Yes;  and  very  much  so,  indied. 

Q.  That  is  within  the  limits  I  have  just  mentioned  ? — A.  Yes 

Q.  From  Cape  Race  to  Conception  Bay? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  these  arw  the  limits  between  which  the  Auierioans  have  been 
securing  their  bait? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  As  regards  the  fishery  to  the  north  of  this — along  Trinity,  Boua- 
vista,  and  Notre  Dame  Bays — what  has  been  its  characterduring  the  last 


AWARD    OP   THE    FISHERY   OOMMI88ION. 


55V> 


1  100  to  150 


two  years;  has  it  been  aflfected? — A.  No;  the  fi.sbing  in  that  qaarter 
has  been  capital  during  the  last  two  years. 

Wednesday,  Axujmt  15,  1877. 

The  coufereuce  met. 

The  examination  of  Mr.  Killigrew  was  resumed. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway: 

Q.  Judging  from  your  Icnowledge  of  the  deep-sea  fishery,  what  eflfect, 
in  your  opinion,  would  the  privilege  enjoyed  by  the  Americans  in  being 
euabled  to  obtain  bait  on  the  Newtbiuidland  coast  have  on  the  prosecu- 
tion of  that  fishery  by  them,  as  regards  the  number  of  cod-fishing  voya- 
ges which  they  could  makef — A.  It  would  be  a  very  great  advantage 
iutieed.  I  believe  that  from  l»eing  enabled  to  procure  bait  on  the  New- 
foundland shore,  they  wouhl  make  three  voyages  or  trips,  when  perhaps 
they  otherwise  could  only  make  one. 

Q.  They  thus  could  make  three  cod-fishing  trips f — A.  Yes;  where 
otherwise  they  could  only  make  one. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  the  privilege  of  transshipping  fish  on  the 
const  of  Newfoundlaiul,  or  in  the  harbors  of  Newfoundland,  woidil  be  an 
advantage  1? — A.  I  believe  that  it  would  be  a  very  great  advantage. 
They  would,  with  this  privilege,  be  able  to  almost  double  their  trips,  or 
nearly  so,  I  fancy.  They  are  then  subjected  to  no  delay ;  and  besides 
less  risk  would  be  incurred  after  the  |»roperty  was  transshipped  on 
board  ships,  because  they  could  in  this  case  insure  it,  and  it  would  then 
reach  its  destination  without  any  risk  to  the  owners.  In  addition,  it 
would  enable  the  fishing-vessels  to  prosecute  their  voyages  very  much 
better,  they  being  light  and  buoyant  under  such  circumstances ;  they 
would  not  be  so  much  encumbered  with  material  on  deck  as  they  are 
when  they  make  a  long  trip. 

Q.  A  question  was  asked  yesterday  regarding  the  amount  of  bounty 
given  by  the  Newfoundland  government  to  their  people  to  encourage 
the  Bank  or  deep-sea  fishery ;  do  you  know  what  this  bounty  is  ? — A. 
YevS,  it  is  30  shillings  a  ton  ;  one-half  goes  to  the  owner  and  the  other 
half  to  the  crew. 

Q.  That  would  be  $6  a  ton  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  is  this  bounty  to  be  continued  according  to  the  act  f — 
A.  1  believe  for  two  or  three  years. 

Q.  It  is  thus  granted  yearly  to  eaeh  vessel  prosecuting  the  Bank 
fishery  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  As  one  well  acquainted  with  the  curing  of  codfish,  what  in  your 
opinion  would  you  say  is  the  best-cured  fish  ?^-A.  I  believe  that  the 
best  cured  codfish  is  cured  in  the  way  we  ourselves  do  it. 

Q.  Do  you  now  allude  to  the  shore  fishery  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I'lie  fish  are  prepared  and  cured  as  speedily  after  being  caught  as 
possible  ? — A.  Yes.  I  believe  that  our  fish  takes  precedence  in  almost 
every  market. 

Q.  The  Grand  Bank  of  Newfoundland,  I  believe,  covers  a  very  large 
area  ?— A.  It  does. 

Q.  (Jan  you  form  an  opinion  as  to  the  area  of  fishing  ground  that  is 
at  present  used  H — A.   Yes. 

Q.  lam  now  speaking  of  the  deep-sea  fishery;  give  an  approximate 
idea  regarding  its  extent.  These  Banks  are  fished  on  by  the  Americans 
and  French,  and,  in  fact,  they  are  open  to  the  world.  There  is  the  Grand 
Bank,  as  it  is  termed,  is  there  notf    Will  you  name  the  banks  f — A. 


660 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


Tbere  is  the  Grand  Bank,  and  St.  Peter's  Bank,  and  what  they  call  the 
Flemish  Cap,  which  is  situated  beyond  the  Grand  Bank. 

Q.  Don't  they  fish  out  as  far  as  the  Virgin  Rocks  ? — A.  This  is  one 
of  the  nearest  places  from  Gape  Race  ;  it  is  nearly  200  miles  from  that 
part  of  the  coast. 

Q.  This  is  on  the  Grand  Bank  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  is  also  St.  Peter's  Bank  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  a  small  bank  is  sit- 
uated off  Gape  Ballard,  within  seven  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Are  there  any  other  Banks  ? — A.  There  are  no  other  that  I  am 
aware  of!. 

Q.  Is  there  not  the  George's  Bank? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  From  having  carried  on  the  fishery  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundlaud 
for  such  a  length  of  time,  can  you  give  us  the  result  of  your  experience 
regarding  the  profits  made  in  connection  with  the  different  modes  of 
prosecuting  the  fishery  ?  In  the  first  place  take  up  the  fishing  with 
punts  manned  by  two  hands.  Have  you  made  any  calculation  as  to 
what  would  be  the  profit  obtained  from  this  mode  of  fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Bead  the  paper  you  have  prepared. — A.  It  is  as  follows : 

PHUt—two  hands — tix  montlui. 


2  bags  bread,  at  308.  a  bag £3     0  0 

1  barrel  flour,  at  50«.  a  barrel 2    10  0 

5  gallons  molasBes,  at  3«.  6d.  a  galloo 17  6 

6  pounds  tea,  at  38.  a  pound 18  0 

6  pounds  butter,  at  l8.  4(2.  a  ponnd 8  0 

Cooking  utensils 15  6 

Bait  money,  40s 2     0  0 

Hire  of  wbaleboat  and  gear 5     0  0 

Hire  of  1  herring-net 15  0 

12  shore-lines 18  0 

1  gross  N.  hooks 2  6 

Lead,  twine,  and  corkwood 10  0 

Hire  of  fishing  room 2    10  0 

Servant  girl's  wages 6     0  0 

Servant  girl's  diet 6     0  0 

32    4   () 

2  men's  wages 50    0  0 

82    4    0 
Ck. 

By  90  quintals  fish,  as  a  fair  average  catch,  at  258.1 £112    10  0 

EqiDil  to  26  per  cent. 

Q.  You  mean  equal  to  a  profit  of  26  per  cent  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  take  a  western  boat  manned  by  six  men  for  six  months,  and 
a  cod-seining  boat  manned  by  seven  men  for  six  weeks.  In  the  first 
place,  what  do  you  mea^  b^  a  western  boat  H — A.  It  is  one  of  our  largest 
description  of  boats ;  they  have  a  tonnage  varying  from  22  to  28  tons. 
Some  of  them  are  probably  a  little  larger,  but  very  few  of  them  are  so. 

Q.  The  western  boats  follow  the  fish  to  different  parts  of  the  coast  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  Do  they  stay  out  at  sea  ? — A.  Yes ;  perhaps  for  three  or  four  weekc, 
They  are  something  similar  to  bankers;  but  they  only  fish  about  a 
couple  of  miles  from  the  shore.  They  scarcely  ever  go  farther  than  that 
from  the  coast.  The  following  is  what  would  be  the  outfittings  of  a  book- 
ajad-line  western  boat  with  six  men  for  six  months : 


AWARD  OP   THE   FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


561 


ey  call  the 

rbi8  is  one 
s  from  that 


bank  is  sit- 
that  I  am 


(^foundlaud 
experience 
t  modes  of 
lisbing  with 
ation  as  to 
:?— A.  Yes. 
s: 


£3 
2 


0  0 

10  0 

17  6 

18  0 


8 
15 


0  0 

0  0 

15  0 

18  0 

2  () 

10  0 

10  0 


6 

0 

0 

6 

0 

0 

32 

4 

ti 

50 

0 

0 

82  4  t) 


..£112  10  0 


lODtbs,  and 
Iq  the  first 
our  largest 
to  28  tons. 
liem  are  so. 
le  coast  ?— 


four  weekfi. 
ih  about  a 
ir  than  that 
}  of  a  hook- 


.i  hook-and-line  weatem  boat  with  6  men  for  6  monthg. 

91  bags  bread,  at  30« £14  12  6 

4  barrels  pork,  at  100* 20  0  0 

Ljti  ]>ouDils  butter,  at  1«.  4d 10  8  0 

3  barrels  flour,  at  50a 7  10  0 

;IU  gallons  molasses,  3«.  6d 6  16  6 

14  pouuUs  tea,  at  3« 2  2  0 

12  dozen  St.  Peter's  lines,  at  20« 12  0  0 

20  gross  M  4  books,  at  48 4  0  0 

12  raiis  (od-seine  twine,  at  48 2  8  0 

Hire  of  boat  and  craft,  witb  2  seines  and  2  herring-nets 35  0  0 

Skipiier's  wages,  balf  a  man's  share 41  13  4 

5  uieu's  wages 15U  0  0 

Curing  400  quintals  flsh,  at  28 40  0  0 

34(3    10    4 
Cb. 

By  400  quintals  fish,  as  a  fair  average  voyage,  at  258 £500    0    0 

Kqual  tu  30  per  cent,  prolit 

And  the  following  list  gives  the  ontfittingsfur  a  cod  seiner  with  seven 

men  for  six  wee  lis : 

Cod-aeine-with  7  men  for  6  weeks. 

4  bags  bread,  at  308 £6    0  0 

li  barrels  pork,  at  lOOs 7  10  0 

14  gallons  molasses,  at  38.  6({ 2    9  0 

42  pounds  butter,  at  l8.  4d 2  16  0 

lU  pounds  tea,  at  38 1  10  0 

li  barrels  Hour,  at  508 3  15  0 

t)  men's  wages,  at  £  15 90    0  0 

Shipper's  wages 20    0  0 

Curing  250  quintals  fish,  at  28 25    0  0 

Hire  of  cod-seine,  skiff,  and  gear  per  year  (the  seine  will  require  to  be  re- 
placed in  7  y«;ars),  with  expenses  and  repairs 25    0  0 

1H4    0    (» 
Cu. 

I)y  '4^)0  quintal.s  (ish,  as  u  fair  average  voyage,  at  258 £312  10    0 

Kqual  to  :il>  per  cent.  gain. 

Dy  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  At  what  figure  do  you  sot  the  wages? — A.  £15. 
Q.  For  how  many  men  ?— A.  For  seven  men.    This  is  for  a  voyage  of 
six  weeks. 

My  Mr.  "Whiteway : 

Q.  Of  course,  the  men  are  also  fed  during  that  time? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  these  charges  and  expenses  taken  from  your  books  as  actually 
being  the  charges  connected  with  such  cases  ? — A.  They  are. 

Q.  And  this  return  shows  a  fair  average  respecting  the  returns  usually 
made ! -A.  Yes ;  the  estimate  is  rather  under  the  mark,  if  anything. 

Q.  Then  you  have  no  objection  to  pledging  your  oath  that  the  esti- 
mates of  profits  so  set  down  by  you  are  fair? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  conversations  with  American  captains  relative 
to  the  Bank  fishery  ?— A.  Yes ;  I  have. 

Q.  Will  you  state  what  those  conversations  related  to,  and  what  the 
opinion  of  the  American  captains  has  been  ? — A.  I  will.  My  memoranda 
run  as  follows : 

Bay  Bi  i,l8,  2Sth  July,  1877.— Chanticleer,  American  banker,  of  Provincetown,  60 
touH,  11  nici),  W.  K.  Mathesun,  master.  Anchored  on  the  Banks  the  5th  May,  with  sa.t 
clams  for  bait.  Was  in  once  before  there  for  caplin,  which  he  got  at  Cape  Rough. 
Has  about  3.'i0  barrels  of  titth  on  board  when  cured.    Came  in  now  for  ice  and  squid. 


562 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Would  not  take  any  bait  bat  sqnid.  Has  plenty  of  clams  on  board,  but  captain  savit 
they  are  no  good  now  for  bait.  Considers  it  a  great  advantage  to  their  Banic  fishery 
to  be  able  to  get  ice  and  bait  here.    Only  makes  one  trip. 

Weenoth,  American  banker,  of  Provinoetown,  66  tons,  11  men,  Christopher  McCrny 
master,  left  Provincetown  for  the  Banks  on  the  4th  May,  with  salt  clams  for  bait.  Was 
in  once  before  this,  and  obtained  caplin  and  ice  at  Cape  Broyle.  Rsqulres  ice  and 
squids  now  for  bait.  Only  makes  one  trip.  Has  about  350  quintals  fish  on  boanl 
when  cured.  Considers  it  a  great  advantage  to  their  Bank  fishery  to  be  able  to  get  ice 
and  bait  here.  Considers  the  s<iuid  the  best  bait.  Would  wait  a  fortnight  for  the 
sqnid  rather  than  go  with  any  other  bait. 

Helen,  of  Beverly,  American  banker,  63  tons,  11  men,  Archibald  Campbell,  master. 
Has  been  about  three  months  on  the  voyage.  Left  United  States  with  clams  for  tirst 
bait.  Has  about  500  barrels  codfiah  on  board  when  cured.  Came  in  here  for  ice  and  bait. 
Must  get  the  squid  bait,  if  possible.  Would  witit  soma  time  for  theaquid  rather  than 
go  with  any  other  bait  at  this  season.  Thinks  it  of  great  advantage  to  their  Bank 
nshery  to  be  able  to  get  ice  and  bait  here. 

William  A.  Jewel,  American  banker,  70  tons,  10  men,  Alexander  McDonald,  master, 
of  Provincetown.  Left  there  for  the  Banks  on  2d  May  liut.  Has  about  1,100  quintals 
offish,  green.  Came  here  for  ice  and  bait.  First  bait,  clams.  Found  fish  plenty  on  the 
Banks.  Wishes  to  get  the  squid  bait,  considering  it  preferable  to  any  other  at  thi^t 
season.    AIho  thinks  it  a  great  advantage  to  them  to  be  able  to  obtain  bait  here. 

Frksii  Wateu  Uxy.— Saint  John's,  Monday,  23d  July,  1877.— Went  on  board  of  tlin 
American  banking  schooner  Speed  well,  65  tons,  of  Hyannis,  Henry  Corf  t,  master.  The 
master  not  being  on  board,  the  mate,  Mr.  Degan,  informed  me  that  they  had  been 
about  12  weeks  on  the  voyage.  Had  about  450  qtls.  of  codfish  on  board  when  cured 
Left  the  United  States  with  clams  for  first  bait.  Came  here  more  for  the  piirpoi^e  nf 
procuring  ice  and  fresh  bait.  Fish  can  be  caught  with  the  squid  when  it  cannot  with 
any  other  bait.  Considers  it  a  great  advantage  in  the  prosecution  of  their  Bank  fishiii;; 
to  be  able  to  come  here  and  obtain  ice  and  bait.  Was  in  once  before  and  obtained 
fresh  caplin. 

Hattie  S.  Clark,  65  tons,  Johnson,  master,  of  Gloucester,  informed  me  that  he  came 
in  here  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  ice  and  bait.  Had  been  over  two  mouths  on  the 
voyage.  Had  about  4S0  qtls.  codfish  when  cured ;  considers  it  of  great  advantage  to 
them  to  be  able  to  get  ice  and  bait  here.  Considers  the  squid  at  this  season  of  the  year 
the  best  that  could  oe  procured.  Was  in  once  before  in  June  and  obtained  fresh  caplin, 

Went  on  board  of  American  banking  schooner  Wave,  of  Plymouth,  United  States, 
53  tons,  J.  S.  Kelly,  master.  Came  in  here  for  ice  and  bait.  Has  been  about  2  months  on 
the  voyage,  and  has  on  board  about  350  qtls.  codfish  for  10  men.  Took  his  first  bait, 
herring,  from  St.  Pierre.  He  requires  squids  for  bait  now;  considers  it  the  best  bait. 
Would  wait  a  fortnight  to  get  squids  rather  than  go  with  any  other  bait.  Also  can- 
siders  it  a  great  advantage  to  their  Bank  fishery  to  ue  enabled  to  procure  ice  and  bait 
on  this  coast.    Was  in  once  before  and  obtained  fresh  caplin. 

Ella  May,  of  Provincetown,  American  banker,  of  96  tons,  Edward  C.  Mayo,  master. 
Came  in  here  for  ice  and  bait.  Has  been  nearly  three  months  on  the  voyaj^e  with  14 
men.  Has  on  board  about  800  qtls.  codfish,  when  cured,  for  their  market.  Left  United 
States  with  clams  fur  first  bait.  Considers  it  of  great  advantage  to  them  to  be  able  to 
come  on  this  coast  and  procure  bait.  Considers  the  squid  the  most  desirable  bait  at 
this  season.    Was  in  once  before  this  and  obtained  fresh  oaplin. 

Went  on  board  of  the  American  banking  schooner  S.  R.  Lane,  of  72  tons,  12  men. 
Left  the  United  States  on  the  13th  April  with  clams  for  first  bait.  Has  now  on  board 
400  tubs  codfish,  equal  to  1,200  qtls.,  green.  Came  in  here  for  ice  and  bait.  Must  get 
the  squid,  if  possible ;  considers  no  other  bait  so  good.  Also  considers  it  the  greate.st 
advantage  to  their  fishery  to  be  able  to  procure  ice  and  bait  here  instead  of  going  back 
to  the  States. 

Oleander,  American  banking  schooner,  64  tons,  11  men,  of  Beverly,  United  States, 
Richard  C.  Heilar,  master.  Left  for  the  Banks  on  the  25th  April  with  clams  for  tiritt 
bait.  Has  on  board  about  450  quintals  codfish  when  dried.  Came  in  here  'or  a  suppl.r 
of  ice  and  bait.  Considers  that  the  American  banking  fleet  derive  grei,  .  advantage 
from  being  able  to  procure  ice  and  bait  here. 

Leading  Breeze,  of  Provincetown,  a  banker,  69  tons,  A.  F.  Brian,  master ;  requires 
ice  and  bait ;  something  over  two  months  on  voyage  with  a  crew  of  11  hands.  Left  tiie 
States  with  clams  for  first  bait.  Considisrs  squid  the  best  bait  to  catch  fish  with.  Also 
considers  it  a  great  advantage  to  them  to  be  able  to  procure  Ice  and  bait  here.  Ha) 
about  650  quintals  fish  on  board  when  cured  for  their  market. 

Q.  When  did  you  see  the  master  of  the  Leading  Breeze  ?— A.  Ou  the 
23d  of  last  July. 

Q,  And  when  did  you  see  the  master  of  the  Speedwell  ?— A.  On  tbe 
23d  of  last  July. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


563 


rei-  .  advantage 


Q.  Did  yoa  hear  any  of  the  American  captains  say  what  number  of 
American  vessels  frequents  the  Banks  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  have  been  there  during  the  present  summer? — A. 
There  bas  been  a  considerable  difference  in  the  number  given.  Some 
say  it  is  400,  and  others  600. 

Q.  Yoa  have  heard  the  number  of  American  vessels  that  were  fishing 
on  the  Banks  during  the  present  summer  given  as  400  and  600  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Do  any  of  the  Newfoundland  vessels  ever  go  down  to  the  I'nited 
States  waters  to  fish  ? — A.  I  never  heard  of  any  going  there  for  that 
purpose. 

Q.  They  have  plenty  of  fish  at  home,  close  to  their  own  doors,  and 
they  do  not  require  to  go  farther  away  for  them  f — A.  No. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q,  I  want,  in  the  first  place,  to  understand  the  bait  question  a  little 
more  perfectly.  You  can  use4ierring  as  bait  earlier  in  the  year  than 
any  other  bait,  I  believe  ? — A.  It  is  the  only  bait  we  can  get  until  the 
caplin  comes. 

Q.  And  the  herring  lasts  all  the  year  through,  while  the  caplin  and 
squid  are  in  season,  though  then  they  are  not  good  bait  as  these  other 
fish?— A.  No. 

Q.  Do  the  Americana  procure  herring  at  Newfoundland  I — A.  Yes ; 
on  parts  of  it.  This  is  not  the  case,  I  think,  on  the  Eastern  shore,  but 
farther  west  £  believe  that  they  procure  herring  early  in  the  spring. 

Q.  Where  ? — A.  I  think  from  Fortune  Bay,  along  the  Western  coast. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  they  get  these  herring  ? — A.  I  believe  that  the 
Americans  put  a  crew  in  a  hired  skiff,  with  the  owner  of  the  skiff,  and 
then  they  haul  the  herrings. 

Q.  Then  American  sailors  get  into  a  Newfoundland  boat,  hired  of  its 
owner,  and  with  the  latter  they  haul  the  herrings  on  the  shore ;  is  not 
tliis  the  case  ? — A.  It  is  not  generally  done  on  shore,  though  I  believe 
that  this  is  done  in  some  instances.  Ou  a  beach  or  in  a  sandy  cove 
they  haul  the  herring,  but  iu  other  localities  they  are  obliged  to  take 
the  herring  directly  out  of  the  seines  on  board  the  skiff. 

Q.  Is  not  the  other  the  usual  way  ? — A.  It  is  the  best  way. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  more  common  way  ? — A.  I  believe  that  it  is. 

Q.  You  do  not  understand  that  tiie  Americans  have  any  right  to  go 
on  shore  to  catch  fish  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  How  do  they  pay  the  owner  of  the  skiff? — A.  For  the  use  of  the 
seine  and  skiff  and  his  services;  I  think  they  pay  irom£2  to  £3—  $8,  $9, 
or  $10. 

Q.  Do  not  they  pay  according  to  the  quantity  caught  ? — A.  Not  when 
the  American  crew  go  and  haul. 

Q.  How  much  do  they  pay  for  the  use  of  the  skiff? — A.  They  hire 
the  8k\%  man,  and  seine,  I  understand,  for  about  $10. 

Q.  For  what  length  of  time  ? — A.  For  a  day,  if  bait  is  plentiful. 

Q.  They  are  always  sure  of  getting  enough  bait  in  a  day  ? — A.  This 
is  generally  the  case. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  of  there  being  any  scarcity  of  bait  on  the 
sbore,  of  Newfoundland  ?— A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  When  and  where? — A.  Ou  the  southeast  part  of  the  shore.  They 
are  sometimes  in  one  day  and  out  to-morrow,  and  then  in  again. 
Changes  of  weather  may  occur  which  would  perhaps  drive  the  herring 
off  to  sea ;  a  breeze  of  wind  might  do  so. 

Q.  Is  any  difficulty  experienced  iu  securing  an  ample  supply  of  her- 


564 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ring  in  a  day,  in  the  right  place,  on  some  parts  of  the  shore  7— -A.  If  one 
is  iu  the  right  place,  there  would  be  no  difficulty  in  doing  so. 

Q.  Are  herring  found  in  great  abundance  about  your  shore  ?— A. 
This  is  not  so  much  the  case  in  the  spring  of  the  year  in  tlie  part»  witli 
which  I  am  well  acquainted  as  at  other  times.  I  am  not  so  well  ac 
quainted  with  the  Western  shore. 

Q.  Is  the  supply  of  bait  in  Newfoundland  failing  f  Won't  they  be  able 
to  supply  the  Americans  with  it  much  longer f — A.  lam  not  aware 
that  this  is  the  case. 

Q.  Is  there  not  an  inexhaustible  supply  of  herring  on  tlie  sliores  of 
Newfoundland?  Cannot  an  almost  in  "*'Ue  quantity  of  them  be  ob- 
tained there  7 — A.  This  is  the  case  on  tl  jstern  shore,  I  believe,  but  it 
is  not  so  on  the  Southeast  coast. 

Q.  What  is  the  part  of  the  shore  w'^h  which  you  are  acquainted  7— 
A.  From  Gape  Saint  Mary  to  Cape  John. 

Q.  But  yon  have  obtained  some  information  about  the  rest  of  tbe 
island  f — A.  I  have. 

Q.  What  I  want  to  know  is  whether  a  great  abundance  of  berrin<; 
cannot  always  be  procured  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  ?--A.  This 
was  the  case  up  to  this  last  year.  Last  season  there  was  a  scarcity  in 
this  relation  in  Fortune  Bay  and  other  bays,  but  up  to  that  time  I  never 
heard  of  there  being  any  scarcity. 

Q.  They  were  for  sale  last  year  in  nearly  all  the  harbors,  were  they 
not  T — A.  I  think  that  they  could  be  bought  any  season. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  tell  tlie  Commission  that  last  year  there  was  a 
scarcity  of  herring  bait  on  the  shores  of  Newfoundland  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  do  not  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  mean  to  tell  them  that  there 
on  the  coast,  and  that  this  has  been  tl 
discovered  ? — A.  Scarcely  any  one  wa 
of  which  1  speak. 

O.  What  I  want  to  know  is  whether  there  has  ever  been  a  time  wbeii 
any  difficulty  was  experiened  in  getting  an  ample  supply  of  herriug  for 
bait  somewhere  on  the  shores  of  Newfoundland  ? — A.  I  do  not  tbiiiii 
that  there  ever  has  been  such  a  time. 

Q.  Never  t — A.  Not  to  the  westward  ;  but  I  do  not  think  thattliey 
are  to  be  obtained  during  the  early  part  of  the  season  on  the  southeast 
coast. 

Q.  They  are  not  everywhere  every  day,  but  they  are  somewhere  ?- 
A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  In  accessible  places,  they  are  always  procurable  ? — A.  Yes,  as  far 
as  my  information  goes. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  great  abundance  of  caplin  on  the  coast  f— A.  Yes ; 
a  very  great  abundance. 

Q.  How  are  they  taken  ? — A.  With  seines  and  in  cast-nets. 

Q.  What  is  the  cast-net? — A.  It  is  used  by  the  fishermen  in  small 
boats  and  punts.  It  is  small  and  weighted  with  lead,  atid  it  mki 
pretty  quickly. 

Q.  Will  you  describe  to  the  Commission  what  kind  of  fish  the  caplin 
are — their  size,  &c.  ?— A.  It  is  a  very  small  fish. 

Q.  Does  it  not  grow  to  be  pretty  nearly  as  large  as  au  average 
mackerel  t — A.  No,  never ;  it  is  very  small. 

Q.  Would  you  say  that  it  would  be  about  six  inches  in  length  ?— A. 
About  that.  I  dare  say  a  good  run  of  caplin  would  be  about  six  incbes 
in  length. 

Q.  Is  it  salted  for  bait  f — A.  O,  yes ;  but  not  for  our  fisheries. 


?  plenty  of  this  bait  last  year 
se  ever  since  the  island  was 
^ing  for  herring  iu  the  part 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


565 


Q.  But  there  are  people  who  take  it  for  bait,  and  salt  it  *. — A.  Yes ; 
the  French  particularly. 

(I.  The  French  never  use  it  fresh  ? — A.  Not  that  I  am  awaie  of. 

Q.  Is  it  not  salted  first  in  barrels,  and  taken  over  to  the  French 
islands?— A.  Not  that  I  am  aware  of. 

Q.  Is  it  not  salted  there  ? — A.  Not  that  I  am  aware  of.  It  is  not  put 
in  barrels. 

Q.  They  do  not  salt  it? — A.  They,  perhaps,  put  a  little  salt  on  it, 
iftbey  are  going  for  a  long  trip;  but  otherwise  they  take  it  in  the  fresh 
Htate.    The  French  salt  it  themselves. 

Q.  How  do  they  take  it  to  St.  Pierre  and  Miqnelon  from  your  shore? — 
A.  In  boats. 

Q.  They  salt  it,  and  the  French  fishermen  put  on  more  salt  f — A.  The 
latter  salt  it  according  to  their  own  liking.  Sometimes,  if  they  think 
they  are  going  to  make  a  quick  run,  they  do  not  put  salt  on  it. 

Q.  But  they  do  salt  it  ? — A.  This  would  lessen  the  price  of  the  fish. 

Q.  Don't  they  salt  it  sometimes  ? — A.  I  am  not  aware  that  they  do. 

Q.  If  this  is  not  the  case,  how  do  you  think  that  salting  deteriorates 
the  price? — A.  Because  the  French  would  rather  salt  their  own  bait. 

Q.  When  the  French  of  St.  Pierre  buy  of  your  people  this  caplin,  do 
not  the  French  salt  the  caplin  themselves? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  do  they  not  salt  it  so  that  it  will  keep  a  number  of  weeks? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Will  it  not  keep,  when  so  salted,  as  long  as  ten  or  twelve  weeks? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  it  is  with  this  biit  that  the  French  pursue  their  fisheries? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  believe  that  these  boats  which  carry  four  men  are  for  a  part  of 
their  time  engaged  in  the  business  of  carrying  these  caplin  and  squid  to 
St.  Pierre,  and  selling  them  there  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Do  they  thus  carry  on  a  considerable  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  boats  should  you  think  were  engaged  in  taking  caplin 
and  squid  across  to  St.  Pierre  and  selling  them  to  the  French  fisher- 
men ?— A.  I  am  not  at  all  aware  what  their  number  is. 

Q.  But  you  know  that  quite  a  number  do  so  ? — A.  I  have  heard  that 
the  number  is  large. 

Q.  This  is  an  important  business  to  your  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes;  but  it 
is  quite  a  lottery. 

Q.  What  do  you  meaa  by  that  expression  1 — A.  That  only  one  out  of 
twenty  makes  something  at  it. 

Q.  Why  do  they  then  continue  the  business? — A.  Every  one  hopes 
that  be  will  secure  the  grand  haul  and  the  first  prize. 

Q.  What  else  could  they  do  with  these  caplin,  if  they  did  not  carry 
them  over  and  sell  them  to  the  French  fishermen  ? — A.  I  believe  that 
they  could  be  betide  employed. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  the  people  on  your  island  have  a  right  to 
choose  their  own  employment  ? — A.  I  do  not  dispute  that. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  the  caplin  besides  selling  them  to  the 
French?— A.  Nothing,  that  I  am  aware  of,  save  use  them  for  bait. 

Q.  Do  they  not  use  large  quantities  of  them  for  manure  ?  There  is  a 
part  of  Newfoundland  where  this  is  done  very  extensively,  is  there 
not?- A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  I  mistaken  in  thinking  you  said  that  they  manured  30,000 
acres  with  caplin  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  And  they  use  six  barrels  to  the  acre  ?  I  suppose  that  would  be  a 
fair  average  ?— A.  Yes. 


566 


AWABD    OF   THE   FISHEBT   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Is  this  not  the  cheapest  manure  that  they  can  get  for  their  land!— 
A.  I  suppose  that  it  is. 

Q.  And  what  do  you  think  that  it  is  worth  a  barrel?— A.  Half  a 
dollar. 

Q.  There  is  no  scarcity  of  capiius  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  For  six  weeks  it  is  found  in  immense  quantities  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  is  it  procured ;  by  seining  ! — A.  Yes ;  the  fishermen  use  cast- 
nets  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  Do  they  usually  go  ashore  and  seine  them  like  herring  7— A.  No. 

Q.  They  use  the  seine  from  their  boats? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  caplin  is  taken  by  your  own  people,  in  your  own  boats, 
with  the  assistance  of  Americans? — A.  Yes;  in  some  cases.  That  is 
what  I  have  always  understood.  The  man  who  owns  the  seine  is  hired 
for  the  occasion,  and  he  is  assisted  by  the  American  crew. 

Q.  The  supply  of  caplin  is  so  great  that  in  twelve  or  sixteen  hours  a 
vessel  can  obtain  all  she  requires  for  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Partly  in  the  way  you  have  mentioned,  and  partly  by  purchase  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  caplin  good  to  eat  ? — A,  Yes ;  they  are  very  nice  indeed. 

Q.  But  they  do  not  keep  ? — A.  They  do  not  keep  long.  The  sooner 
they  are  cooked  the  better. 

Q.  It  would  be  a  very  valuable  fish  if  it  did  not  deteriorate  so  very 
fast?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  will  explain  what  kind  of  a  fish  the  squid  is  ?— A.  It 
is  a  rather  large  fish  with  horns.  The  horns  are  some  eight  or  nine  in 
number. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  How  many  inches  is  it  in  length? — A.  Nine  or  ten  perhaps.  It  is 
a  very  dirty  fish. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  It  is  not  fit  to  eat  ? — A.  Some  people  eat  it.  Spainiards  do,  and 
like  it  very  much,  but  we  do  not  eat  it.    I  have  never  tasted  a  squid. 

Q.  It  is  a  kind  of  cuttle-fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  has  hardly  any  bones  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  It  is  soft?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Your  people  sometimes  use  it  whole  or  cut  it  up  for  bait !— A. 
They  cut  it  up  for  bait. 

Q.  Is  it  also  salted  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  how  long  can  it  be  preserved  when  salted  ? — A.  For  two 
years,  if  desired. 

Q.  And  would  it  then  be  good  bait? — A.  I  do  not  say  that  it  would 
be  good  bait,  but  it  would  be  just  as  good  as  when  a  mouth  old. 

Q.  You  do  not  agree  with  the  Frenchmen,  who  consider  that  they  are 
as  well  off  with  salt  as  with  fresh  bait? — A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  Squid  can  only  be  taken  by  jigging  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  can  they  not  be  seined  ? — A.  Seines  are  not  allowed  to  be 
used  by  our  legislature  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  Gould  you  seiue  squid  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  this  is  forbidden  in  your  island  waters  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 
Q.  Is  the  squid  covered  with  scales  or  a  skin  ? — A.  It  is  covered  vith 
a  skin. 


By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Are  squid  abundant  when 
indeed. 


in 


season?— A.  Yes;  very  abundant 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


567 


Q.  Are  tbcy  found  all  around  the  islanu !— A.  They  are  found  all 
around  the  southern  part  of  it. 

Q.  On  what  extent  of  it  f — A.  They  are  found  in  large  quantities  from 
Cape  John  to  Placentia  Bay. 

Q.  Is  it  not  found  on  what  I  call  the  western  shore  of  the  island? — A. 

Yes. 

Q.  And  all  around  the  island  ? — A.  I  believe  so. 

Q.  Aud  if  you  are  not  very  well  acquainted  with  distant  parts  of  the 
island  it  is,  perhaps,  because  they  are  not  resorted  to  ? — A.  I  Icnow  the 
coast  as  fur  as  Placentia  Bay,  aud  they  are  taken  in  large  quantities 
from  Cape  John  to  this  point. 

Q.  The  boats  which  ply  between  your  island  and  St.  Pierre,  and  fur- 
nish the  French  flshermeu  with  bait,  take  squid  as  well  as  caplin  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q,  And  do  you  know  what  the  fair  average  price  of  squid  is  when 
caught? — A.  It  is  regulated  somewhat  according  to  the  demand.  If  a 
person  reaches  St.  Pierre  with  it  when  two  or  three  bankers  are  waiting 
for  bait,  he  can  get  almost  what  he  chooses  for  it.  Others  may  not 
receive  a  quarter  as  much. 

Q.  Give  us  the  highest  and  lowest  prices  you  have  ever  heard  were 
given  for  squid. — A.  I  think  that  as  much  as  30  francs  a  barrel  have 
been  given  for  it. 

Q.  That  would  be  about  $G  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  what  is  the  lowest  price  ? — A.  This  would  bo  about  2  francs. 
Some  fishermen  are  not  able  to  sell  them  at  all. 

Q.  How  about  ciipling,  if  it  is  not  salted  ? — A.  It  would  not  then  keep 
ill  large  quantities,  I  suppose,  for  more  than  three  days. 

Q.  Do  they  sell  squid  by  the  hundred,  as  well  as  by  the  barrel? — A. 
I  have  only  heard  that  this  is  done. 

Q.  Newfoundlanders  have  establishments  where  they  keep  herring 
and  squid  and  capling  for  sale ;  is  not  this  the  case  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  No  ? — A.  I  have  never  heard  of  it. 

Q.  Are  there  not  people  on  the  island  who  make  it  a  busin  ess  to  sell 
these  various  kinds  of  bait  to  the  fishing- vessels  of  all  nations  ? — A. 
No;  there  are  some  persons  who  assist  in  furnishing  them  with  bait, 
bat  it  is  not  done  otherwise  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Is  not  what  I  mention  a  considerable  business  t  Here  is  an  ad- 
rertisement  which  I  picked  up  down  at  Gloucester.  Did  you  ever  hear  of 
such  a  business  as  this  being  prosecuted  on  the  island  ?  Bead  it. — A. 
The  notice  runs  as  follows : 

Notice.— Fisbing-vessels  comiug  on  Newfoandland  coast  for  bait  will  find  Concep- 
tion Bay  the  best  place  from  April  to  October  for  herring,  caplin,  and  squid.  Also,  a 
large  supply  of  ice.    By  James  Tucker,  Broad  Cove,  south  shore . 

(Mr.  Whiteway  objected  to  this  examiuittion,  on  the  ground  th.it  it 
could  not  be  perceived  on  examination  wL  ther  this  notice  came  from 
Newfoundland. 

Mr.  Foster  stated  that  he  was  ucting  wholly  within  his  right.  He 
understood  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  Commissioners  to  receive  all 
evidence  that  the  representatives  of  either  government  saw  lit  to  lay 
before  them.) 

Witness.  No  person  would  rely  on  such  a  thing  us  that  notitie. 

Q.  llave  you  ever  heard  of  Broad  Cove,  ou  the  south  sliore  ? — A.  Yes, 
it  is  in  Conception  Bay. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  a  man  named  Jam  es  Tucker  ? — A.  I  have 
heard  hus  name  mentioned. 

Q.  What  is  his  business? — A.  I  do  not  know. 


568 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Who  is  he? — A.  I  know  nothing  at  all  about  him,  save  that  I 
have  heard  his  name  mentioned. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  the  "  Morning  Chronicle  "  printing  oflicc— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Where  is  it  situated  f — A.  At  St.  John-s. 

Q.  Newfoundland? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yon  have  seen  matter  that  has  come  from  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Does  this  notice  look  as  if  it  had  been  printed  there  ?— A.  1  could 
not  say.  I  see  the  words  "Morning  Chronicle"  printed  at  the  bottom 
of  it. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  of  Boyd  &  McDougal,  commission  merchants, 
Newfoundland? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Their  advertisement  runs  in  this  way : 

ICE!  ICE!  ICEI^Summer,  1877. — Boyd  &  McDongal,  commission  merchants,  St. 
John's,  Newfonndland. — In  store  a  quantity  of  ice,  which  they  are  prepared  to  supply 
at  a  low  price ;  also  all  kinds  of  ships'  stores  and  tisbing  gear. 

Q.  Do  they  sell  ice? — A.  They  have  sold  it  for  the  first  time  this 
year. 

Q.  Have  they  an  ice-house  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  have  just  started  in  this  business  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  whom  do  they  sell  ice  ? — A.  To  American  bankers,  I  am  told. 

Q.  A.nd  to  anybody  ? — A.  To  anybody  that  will  give  their  price. 

Q.  fhey  are  men  engaged  in  business  to  sell  ice,  and  they  invite  cus 
tomers  from  all  the  world ;  no  law  exists  prohibiting  them  from  engag- 
ing in  this  business  ? — A.  Not  that  I  have  heard  of. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  George  F.  Christian,  of  Grand  Bank,  Fortune 
Bay?— A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  James  H.  Feltmate  &  Sous  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  The  following  advertisement  also  appears : 

Notice  !  Ice  and  Bait.— The  undersigned  begs  to  inform  all  interested  in  the  liank 
fisheries  that  he  has  for  sale  1,000  tons  heavy  clear  ice,  at  very  low  prices,  particularly 
to  halibut-catchers.  He  is  also  prepared  to  bar  in  herring  during  the  montlis  of  April, 
May,  and  June,  in  order  to  deliver  at  a  moment's  notice.  Drafts  taken.  All  necessary 
supplies  obtainable  upon  reasonable  terms. — C.  S.  Fowler,  Placentia  Bay,  Newfuund- 
land. 

Did  you  ever  hear  of  C.  S.  Fowler  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  he  engaged  in  the  business  of  furnishing  ice  and  bait  ?— A.  1 
have  heard  so.    He  is  established  about  eighty  miles  from  where  I  live. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  that  he  furnished  bait  ? — A.  No ;  1  Lave  ouly 
heard  that  he  supplied  ice.    He  is  a  telegraph -operator. 

Q.  Did  yoa  ever  hear  of  the  Heart's  Content  Ice  Company,  Trinity 
Bay,  Newfoundland  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Are  you  not  familiar  with  Trinity  Bay  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  John  Moore,  of  Heart's  Content  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Jillard  Brothers,  of  Harbor  Grace  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  never  hear  of  them  ? — A.  Yes,  I  have. 

Q.  What  did  you  ever  hear  of  them  ?^A.  I  have  heard  that  they 
were  engaged  in  keeping  a  shop ;  nothing  more  than  that. 

Q.  They  do  business  at  Harbor  Grace  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  Heart's  Content  is? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  a  good  harbor  for  bait  f— A.  I  do  not  know  that.  I  was  never 
there. 

Q.  Has  there  ever  been  a  time  when  you  have  known  that  your  people 
were  forbidden  to  sell  bait  and  ice  to  the  French  or  Americans  ?— A.  ^o. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  when  either  the  French  or  the  Americans 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


569 


1  was  uever 


nere  forbidilen  to  come  to  your  island  and  buy  of  your  mercbauts  ? — 
A.  No. 

Q.  Do  the  French  in  fact  ever  come  to  Newfoundland  and  buy  bait  T — 
A.  They  do,  occasionally. 

Q.  But  very  rarely  ? — A.  Very  rarely,  indeed. 

Q.  Your  people  usually  carry  it  to  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  do  you  agree  with  the  statement  which  we  have  beard,  that 
it  is  ouly  within  the  last  four  or  five  years  that  the  Americans  have  be- 
gun to  come  to  your  island  for  bait  and  ice  1 — A.  I  do. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  to  St.  Pierre  ? — A.  Never. 

Q,  You  told  Mr.  Whiteway,  I  think,  yesterday,  that  a  large  propor- 
tion of  your  people  depended  for  their  living  on  what  they  got  out  of 
the  sea  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  if  the  fisheries  failed  their  all  would  be  gone  ? — A.  They 
have  no  other  resource. 

Q.  Have  they  any  means  to  obtain  money  to  buy  what  they  re^iuire 
to  purchase  save  by  the  sale  of  fish  ? — A.  That  is  their  principal  means 
for  so  doing. 

Q.  Do  they  raise  sufficient  agricultural  products  for  their  own  use? — 
A.  They  scarcely  do. 

Q.  Then  to  secure  all  those  things  which  a  family  need,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  fish  and  some  potatoes,  and  oats,  perhaps,  they  must  sell 
tisli?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  is  it  true  that  the  price  which  the  merchants  of  Newfound- 
laud  will  pay  for  fish  is  fixed  at  the  beginning  of  the  season  by  an  agree- 
ment made  among  them  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Is  it  so  fixed  at  some  time  in  the  season  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  (hat 
sucli  an  understanding  exists,  but  at  the  same  time  an  understanding 
may  exist  at  a  late  period  of  the  year  as  to  what  they  think  would  be  a 
fair  and  reasonable  price  at  which  to  credit  their  dealers  for  fish ;  but 
the  price  is  not  guided  by  this.  A  person  who  wants  fish  will  buy  them 
at  any  price  he  thinks  he  can  afford  to  give.  As  a  general  rule  there  is 
uo  price  fixed. 

Q.  Is  there  not  an  agreement  entered  into  between  merchants  as  to 
the  price  at  which  they  will  credit  the  boat- fishermen  for  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 
There  is  a  fixed  price,  but  it  is  not  a  price  agreed  on.  The  fishermen 
may  get  an  advance  on  it. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  price  agreed  on  by  the  merchants ;  do  they  not  fix 
the  price  i — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  not  say  that  they  had  an  understanding  with  each  other? — 
A.  I  think  this  might  be  the  case  at  a  later  period  in  the  season,  but 
still  the  merchants  might  be  obliged  to  give  something  more  for  the  fish 
and  allow  the  persons  who  supply  them  with  fish  the  benefit  of  such  an 
advance. 

Q.  The  boat- fishermen  are  debtors  for  their  outfitting^  to  the  mer- 
chants from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  the  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  estimate  was  made  that  one  quarter  of  the  number  of  boat- 
tishermen  at  the  end  of  the  season  would  still  be  indebted  to  the  mer- 
chants, so  that  the  latter  would  have  to  credit  them  for  what  they  lived 
on  during  the  winter;  do  you  agree  with  that  statement? — A.  There  is 
always  a  good  deal  of  business  done  in  that  kind  of  way,  but  there  are  a 
great  many  exceptions  to  that  rule.  Some  of  the  fishermen  are  quite 
iudependent  and  able  to  make  bargains  for  themselves. 

Q<  Is  not  a  large  proportion  of  these  men  who  fish  in  boats  constantly 
'n  debt  to  the  merchants  ?— A.  No. 


570 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


I     ^ 


Q.  With  what  proportion  do  you  think  that  this  is  the  case  ?— A.  I 
should  say,  perhaps,  one-third. 

Q.  And  these  fishermen  bring  in  their  fish  and  deliver  them  to  the 
merchants  to  whom  they  are  indebted  at  the  time,  and  to  whom  one- 
third  of  their  number  are  indebted  all  the  year  round,  and  those  mer- 
chants agree  upon  the  price  at  which  they  will  credit  the  fish  to  their 
debtors ;  is  not  this  the  case  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Has  not  this  been  the  fact  from  the  earliest  history  of  the  island  ?— 
A.  A  man  may  be  so  indebted  this  year,  and  next  year  he  may  be  in 
perfectly  iudependent  circumstances.  Because  a  man  is  in  debt  this 
year  it  does  not  follow  that  they  will  be  in  debt  next  year.  If  he  has  a 
favorable  season  he  pays  it  off,  while,  perhaps,  in  another  locality 
another  man  may  not  be  successful  and  get  into  debt. 

Q.  Is  this  not  an  old  practice  of  the  merchants,  and  is  it  not  an  old 
grievance,  which  has  been  complained  of  and  remonstrated  against  by 
the  boat  fishermen  of  Newfoundland  from  the  earliest  settlement  of  tbe 
island?— A.  What! 

Q.  That  they  were  in  debt  to  the  traders,  and  that  the  traders  took 
all  their  fish  and  paid  them  what  they  chose  for  it? — A.  I  do  not  think 
that  this  is  true. 

Q.  We  will  go  back  to  the  year  1800,  and  in  this  relation  I  will  read 
the  following  from  a  memorial  presented  by  the  fishermen  to  the  sur- 
rogate in  Placentia  Bay : 

Yonr  memorialists  beg  leave  to  inform  your  worship  that  tbe  merchants  of  this 
place  are  long  in  tbe  habit  of  charging  sucb  itrices  as  best  suits  themselves  on  tbe 
boatkeepers,  and  likewise  aflSxing  prices  to  their  fisb  and  oil,  without  allowing  them, 
tbe  boatkeepers,  tbe  common  right  of  mankind ,  tbey  being  considered  as  persons  hav- 
ing no  will  of  their  own.  Yonr  memorialists  only  wish  to  have  an  equitable  price  set 
on  goods,  and  also  in  tbe  produce  of  their  fishery,  and  to  be  regulated  in  an  equal 
manner  with  the  boatkeepers  in  John's  and  its  neighborhood,  and  not  considered  as 
slaves.  Yonr  memorialiuts  most  humbly  crave  your  worship's  particular  attention  to 
this  their  complaint,  and,  as  in  duty  bound,  will  forever  pray. — Placentia,  August  19, 
1800. 

Did  you  ever  hear  of  that? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  the  governor  of  Newfoundland  referring  to 
it  in  an  ofQcial  communication  ? — A.  No. 
Q.  I  will  read  the  following  from  such  a  communication : 

To  remedy  tbis  evil  will  be  no  easy  matter  to  devise,  but  one  point  seems  clear,  and 
this  is,  that  unless  these  poor  wretches  emigrate  they  must  starve,  for  how  can  it  be 
otherwise  while  the  merchant  has  the  power  of  setting  his  own  price  on  the  supplies 
issued  to  tbe  fishermen  and  on  the  fisb  which  these  people  catch  for  him  f  Thus  we 
see  a  set  of  unfortunate  beings  working  like  slaves  and  hazarding  their  lives,  when, 
at  the  expiration  of  their  term,  however  successful  their  exertions,  they  find  them- 
selves not  only  without  gain,  but  so  deeply  in  debt  as  forces  them  to  emigrate  of  drives 
them  to  despair. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  that  document  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  enough  about  the  history  of  Newfoundland  to  be 
aware  whether  it  used  to  be  true  or  not  ? — A.  It  never  came  within  my 
experience,  never.    I  never  knew  anything  of  the  sort  to  exist. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  it  would  be  any  advantage  to  the  poor  fishermen 
who  are  in  debt  for  their  supplies  to  have  an  opportunity  to  sell  for  cash 
to  all  comers,  instead  of  having  only  half  a  dozen  merchants  to  deal 
with  ? — A.  I  know  as  far  as  my  experience  goes,  since  I  have  been  con- 
nected with  the  issue  of  fishery  supplies,  that  whether  the  season  was 
good  or  bad,  the  fisherman  always  received  his  winter  supply,  niul 
cient  to  live  on. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


571 


Q,  Did  yoa  hear  of  a  proclamation  by  Governor  Gower  on  that  sub- 
ject, as  follows : 

Whereas  I  am  informed  that  a  practice  has  prevailed  in  some  of  the  outports  of  this 
island  among  the  merchants,  of  not  informing  their  dealers  of  the  prices  of  the  sap- 
plies  atlvaneed  for  the  season,  or  the  prices  they  will  allow  for  the  produce,  until  they 
are  in  possession  of  the  planter's  voyage,  whereby  the  latter  are  exposed  to  great  im- 
noaitioDs ;  the  merchants  aifl  hereby  required  to  make  known  to  their  dealers  before 
the  15th  day  of  Angust,  in  every  vear,  or  at  the  time  of  delivery,  the  prices  of  provisions 
aad  other  commodities  sold  by  toem,  and  the  prices  they  will  give  for  tish  and  oil,  and 
to  fix  a  schedule  thereof  in  some  conspicuous  part  of  their  respective  stores;  and  in 
case  any  merchant  shall  neglect  to  comply  with  this  useful  injunction,  and  a  dispute 
shall  arise  between  him  and  any  dealer  respecting  the  prices  charged  on  such  mer- 
chant's arconnt,  and  such  dispute  sh  ill  be  brought  into  a  court  of  justice,  the  same 
shall  be  determined  according  to  the  lowest  price  charged  for  such  goods  and  the  highest 
price  given  for  fish  and  oil  by  any  other  merchant  in  that  district.  And  the  judge  of 
the  supreme  court,  the  surrogates  and  magistrates,  are  hereby  strictly  enjoined  in  all 
»uch  cases  to  govern  themselves  by  this  regulation. 

Given  under  my  hand,  September  12, 1805. 

E.  GOWER. 

A.  I  never  heard  of  such  a  thing. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  whether  you  are  prepared  to  tell  the  Commission 
that  it  is  not  a  benefit  to  the  fishermen  of  the  Island  of  Newfoundland 
to  have  an  opportunity  to  sell  for  cash  to  all  the  world  ! — A.  Well,  of 
coarse,  trade  is  considered  to  be  mutually  beneficial,  but  in  this  case  it 
is  not. 

Q.  Explain,  i)lea8e. — A.  I  will  explain  it  in  this  way.  If  a  man  is 
supplying  and  catching  bait,  he  may  lose  more  than  double  what  he 
makes  by  doing  so ;  while  if  he  was  catching  fish  ho  would  put  very 
mach  more  money  in  his  pocket. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  In  whose  pocket  ? — A.  If  he  was  catching  fish  it  would  go  to  the 
merchant  to  his  credit,  but  if  he  gets  cash  he  generally  puts  it  in  his 
pociiet  and  makes  a  very  bad  use  of  it. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  You  are  a  merchant  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  of  you  are  there  in  St.  John's  that  have  such  large 
amouDts  of  capital  ?  Name  the  chief  houses. — A.  I  cannot  boast  of 
being  very  rich  myself.  Job  Brothers  &  Go.  is  a  large  and  exten- 
sive house ;  there  are  also  Walter  Grieve  &  Co.,  J.  &  W.  Stewart,  Baine, 
Johnstone  &  Co.,  P.  &  L.  Tessier,  and  Bowring  Brothers.  There  are 
several  others,  but  I  cannot  recollect  the  number  exactly.  A  great 
maDy  wealthy  houses  are  there  established. 

Q.  And  you  think  it  an  evil  and  misfortune  that,  under  the  Treaty  of 
Washington,  these  poor  fellows  have  an  opportunity  to  sell  their  fish 
where  they  please,  for  money  ?— A.  I  do. 

Q.  They  had  better  be  under  the  paternal  care  of  the  merchants  of 
St.  John's?— A.  I  think  so. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  You  have  been  asked  respecting  the  mercantile  establishments  of 
St.  John's ;  are  thera  not  merchants  also  established  at  Toulinguet,  Tilt 
Cove,  Fogo,  Green's  Pond,  and  King's  Cove  and  Bonavista  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  at  Trinity  and  Catalenaf— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  Harbor  Grace  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  at  Brigus,  Carbonear,  St.  John's,  Renews,  Ferry  land,  and 
Fermusef— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  on  Placeutia  Ba>  and  Fortune  Bay ;  there  are  large  estab- 
lishments  on  Fortune  Bay  I— A.  Yes. 


672 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEUY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  away  between  that  and  Cape  Bay  ? — A.  Yes.  At  Hermitage 
Bay,  Burgeo  Channel,  and  other  places. 

Q.  Then,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  mercantile  establishments  are  dis- 
tribated  along  the  coast  between  Cape  Bay,  proceeding  eastward,  and 
Cape  Bace,  and  thence  northward  until  you  come  to  Cape  John  ?_a 
Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  combination  among  all  these  merchants 
to  fix  the  price  of  fish  and  oil,  or  any  of  the  produce  of  the  country  ?— 
A.  I  never  did. 

Q.  Never  in  your  life  t — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  any  such  combination  ever  took  place  ?— A.  I 
do  not. 

Q.  Could  there  possibly  be  such  a  combination  ? — A.  Xo.  It  could 
not  be  accomplished. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  combination  between  the  merchants  of 
two  adjacent  towns  to  fix  the  price  of  fish  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Nor  of  produce  I — A.  No ;  never. 

Q.  Harbor  Grace  and  St.  John's  arc,  I  believe,  the  two  principal 
towns  on  the  island  ? — A.  Yes. 

^.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  a  combination  existing  between  the  merchants 
of  thsse  two  towns  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Are  there  as  large  mercantile  establishments  in  Harbor  Grace  as 
there  are  in  St.  John's  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Speaking  on  your  oath,  does  any  such  combination  as  a  matter  of 
fact  exist  ? — A.  No  such  thing  has  any  existence  as  far  as  I  am  aware. 
There  has  never  been  anything  of  the  sort  in  my  time,  during  the  last 
forty-five  years,  as  far  as  my  knowledge  goes.  1  have  never  heard  of 
such  a  thing. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  in  St.  John's,  as  in  all  other  places,  mercantile  men 
talk  over  the  state  of  the  markets  in  foreign  parts,  and  its  effect  on  the 
price  of  fish  and  other  things  in  foreign  markets,  and  name  their  prices, 
and  that  it  is  generally  understood  what  amount  will  be  credited  to  the 
dealers  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  dealers  do  sell  their  fish  to  others  for 
cash  notwithstanding  the  circumstances  that  they  are  indebted  to  tlic 
merchant  who  furnishes  their  supplies  ? — A.  It  is. 

Q.  Is  not  that  transaction  one  of  daily  occurrence  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  is  it  not  frequently  the  case  that  the  merchants  say  to  the 
dealers,  "  I  will  credit  you  so  mnch  for  your  fish,  and  if  you  can  get  more 
for  it  go  elsewhere  and  obtain  it'"? — A.  Yes. 

Q<  And  do  they  not  frequently  go  elsewhere  and  get  it  ? — A.  They  do; 
I  have  known  several  such  instances  occur  within  the  last  year. 

Q.  And  does  there  exist  on  the  island  in  any  way  such  a  serfdom  as 
has  been  attempted  to  be  set  up  here  ? — A.  No ;  such  a  thing  could  cot 
be  done. 

Q.  Is  it  not  frequently  the  case  that  actions  are  taken  between  mer- 
chants and  dealers,  and  that  the  accounts  are  then  submitted  to  juries? 
Is  not  this  the  regular  mode  of  settling  disputes  between  the  merchants 
and  the  dealers  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1805  I  believe,  from  what  we  learn  from  history,  that  those 
matters  were  settled  by  what  was  termed  surrogates  instead  of  juries  !— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  believe  that  before  your  time  these  surrogates  were  done  away 
with  ? — A.  Most  certainly.  There  were  no  surrogates  when  I  came  to 
this  country. 

Q.  And  during  your  knowledge  of  Newfoundland  for  over  forty-five 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


573 


years  the  jury  system  has  been  in  existence? — A.  Yes;  this  has  been 
the  case  since  I  came  to  the  country. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  case  that  juries,  as  a  general  rule,  are  composed  of 
these  very  fishermen  and  dealers  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  it  not  be  impossible  with  our  present  jury  system  to  get  a 
jury  of  merchants  together? — A.  It  could  not  be  done. 

Q.  Your  attention  has  been  called  to  an  advertisement  or  notice — you 
have  never  seen  it  before  ? — A.  Never. 

Mr.  Whiteway.  I  wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood,  and  by  me  ad- 
mitted before  this  Commission, your  hooor,  that  as  regards  auy  newspaper 
from  Newfoundland,  I  am  ready  and  willing  to  admit  and  desirous  of 
admitting  it  here.  Any  notice  appearing  in  auy  newspaper  of  Newfound- 
laud,  I  am  perfectly  ready  to  admit. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact  I  believe  that  a  number  of  persous  living 
along  the  coast  of  Newfoundland  have  built  icehouses  for  the  purpose 
of  selling  ice  to  the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes;  I  have  heard  of  it. 

Q.  This  has  been  the  case  since  the  Washington  Treaty  came  into 
operation? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  sell  this  ice  in  order  to  realize  a  profit  on  the  transac- 
tion ?— A.  They  do. 

Q.  And  these  persons  who  have  ice-houses  are  not  the  persons  who 
take  the  bait?— A.  No. 

Q.  Then  you  can  easily  understand  how  Mr.  James  Tucker  could  ad- 
vertise that  there  was  a  quantity  of  bait  in  Conception  Bay  when  he  has 
an  icehouse  at  Broad  Cove  and  he  desires  to  dispose  of  ice  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  far  as  the  sale  of  ice  is  concerned,  it  is  a  profitable  trade — a 
limited  profitable  trade  to  Newfoundland  ? — A.  So  far  as  that  goes,  I 
shonld  say  it  is. 

Q.  A  question  was  put  to  you  to  the  efifect  that  American  fishermen 
had  no  right  to  land  upon  the  shore  to  haul  in  the  seines  for  herring  or 
caplin?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  have  such  rights,  I  believe,  by  the  treaty  now ;  they  do  it  at 
all  events  ? — A.  I  understood  that  the  treaty  did  not  go  as  far  as  that — 
that  they  had  not  the  privilege  of  hauling  seines  on  land. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  do  ?-^A.  They  work  on  shore. 

Q.  Hauling  in  the  seines  on  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Sometimes  they  haul  the  seines  in  on  shore,  and  at  other  times  they 
surround  the  fish  with  the  seines  and  take  out  the  fish  with  boats  ? — A. 
Yes.  1  understand  they  have  not  the  right  to  land  for  that  purpose ; 
I  don't  know  whether  I  am  right  or  not. 

Q.  An  impression  was  endeavored  to  bo  made  with  regard  to  36,000 
acres  of  land  said  to  be  under  cultivation,  that  it  was  entirely  manured 
by  caplin?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  believe  there  is  herring  also  used  with  caplin  ? — A.  Yes ;  princi- 
pally caplin,  I  think. 

Q.  But  herring  also  ? — A.  Herring  also;  besides  there  are  other  ma- 
uures  as  well. 

Q.  Lobsters  are  sometimes  used  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  squids. 

Q.  Your  calculation  was  based  upon  the  principle  of  there  being  six 
barrels  of  fish  of  some  description  used  upon  the  land  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Not  altogether  caplin  ? — A.  No;  principally  caplin,  I  think. 

Q.  You  stated  that  occasionally  Newfoundlanders  lightly  salted  their 
bait  if  they  anticipated  a  long  trip  ? — A.  Yes ;  when  taking  bait  to  the 
French. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  very  rare  occurrence  ? — A.  Very  rare  indeed. 

Q.  The  usual  course  of  practice  is  to  take  the  bait  fresh,  convey  it  to 


574 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Saint  Pierre,  sell  it  to  the  French,  who  salt  it  and  use  it  ou  the  New- 
foundland Coast  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  were  asked  as  to  the  abundance  of  bait  upon  the  coast ;  sach 
is  the  case,  is  it  not,  that  bait  is  abundant  on  the  coast  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  what  is  the  effect,  supposing  in  any  particular  part  of  the 
coast  the  coves  are  swept  and  thrashed  of  a  large  quantity  of  bait,  upon 
the  fishery  in  that  immediate  neighborhood  ? — A.  A  bad  effiect,  I  should 
say ;  it  would  have  a  bad  effect. 

Q.  In  what  way  ?— A.  Of  course,  by  driving  the  bait  out  of  the  coves 
you  drive  the  fish  out,  and  the  fish  would  leave.  It  is  the  bait  which 
attracts  the  fish  and  brings  it  to  our  shores. 

Q.  As  described  by  you  f — A.  Yes ;  there  cannot  be  a  question  about 
that. 

Q.  Between  Cape  Mary's,  you  say,  and  Fortune  Bay,  inclusive,  there 
is  always  an  abundance  of  herring  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  from  Cape  Race  northward  there  is  always  an  abundance  of 
herring  Y — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  not  so  abundant  as  within  the  former  limits  ?— A.  Not  for  a 
portion  of  the  ground.  From  Cape  Bace  to  Cape  Spear  they  may  not 
be  so  plenty.  But  go  north  from  that  again,  and  there  is  generally 
plenty  in  the  bays.  There  is  plenty  in  Conception,  Trinity,  Bonavista 
Bays.  Bay  of  Notre  Dame  is  always  full  of  herring  at  the  time  I  have 
named. 

Q.  As  I  understand  it,  between  Cape  St.  Mary  and  Fortune  Bay, 
inclusive,  there  is  herring  in  abundance  all  the  year  round  f — A.  Tea. 

Q.  But  between  Cape  Bace  and  northward  from  that  as  far  as  Gape 
John,  there  is  an  abundance  during  the  summer  season,  between  May 
and  December ;  that  is  the  case  f — A.  That  is  the  case. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  will  read  some  questions  and  answers  that  have  been  made  to 
them,  and  I  will  ask  you  whether  you  understand  them  to  be  true  or 
not: 

Q.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  sappose  a  case  where  both  the  rival  houses  behave  dis- 
honestly, and  the  man  too.  I  am  supposing  that  all  behave  honestly.  Each  merchant 
must  make  all  the  profit  he  can,  and  must  hold  out  such  inducements  as  are  proper. 
The  fisherman  does  not  want  to  cheat  anybody,  but  only  to  pay  a  reasonable  price,  and 
no  more  than  that  f — A.  I  do  no  see  that  it  would  be  an  advantage  to  the  nsbenuan, 
for  the  reason  that  the  prices  are  generally  fixed  for  the  whole  season,  and  every  mer- 
chant charges  about  the  same  price. 

Q.  Is  that  true  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  pretty  near  the  thing. 

Q.  So  that  if  there  are  two  houses  in  the  same  place  rivals,  they  would  cbar);e  tlie 
same  price  f — A.  They  would  not  compete  by  underselliug.  Their  only  coniputition 
would  be  in  securing  the  best  and  most  reliable  men. 

Q.  Is  that  true  f — A.  I  don't  think  they  consult  each  other,  but  there 
is  an  understanding. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  saying  an  "understanding"? — A.  That  is 
as  to  the  price  of  fish  ;  it  is  never  binding  on  the  others.  You  fliid  the 
merchants  in  St.  John's  and  other  places  have  d'fferent  prices. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  that  the  principle  or  practice  which  pr>  luils  pretty  largely  else- 
where, or  trying  to  nndersell,  does  not  apply  to  Newfouuiiland  f— A.  Not  to  any  great 
extent.  Neither  does  it  in  the  purchase  of  the  produce,  for  they  all  meet  and  decide 
what  they  will  give.    They  fix  the  price. 

Q.  Is  that  true?— A.  I  don't  think  it  is. 

Q.  Then  the  merchants,  as  a  body,  act  upon  the  fishermen,  do  they  f— A.  They  decide 
what  prices  will  be  given. 


AWARD   OB'   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


575 


it,  but  there 


Q.  Is  that  true  ?— A.  It  is  not  true. 

Q.  They  expect  all  the  merchants  to  come  up  to  that  f — A.  Well,  they  generally  do. 

Q,  Yoa  talked  aboat  this  particular  subject  with  Judge  Bennett, 
giDce  be  testified  t— A.  Not  since  he  testified.  We  have  talked  over 
matters  because  we  have  been  living  at  the  hotel  together,  but  nothing 
more.  I  have  said  nothing  more  than  any  man  in  Newfoundland  would 
tell  you. 

Q.  You  contradict  the  answers  I  have  read  to  you  7 — A.  In  some 
particulars.  I  could  not  say  what  is  the  practice  in  some  parts  of  the 
island,  but  what  I  have  stated  is  so  far  as  my  experience  goes. 

Q.  What  is  the  distance  from  Saint  Johu^s  to  Harbor  Grace  ? — A. 
Forty-five  miles. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 
Q.  I  want  to  ask  if  any  part  of  Libnidir  belong:*  to  Newfoua  Ihiad  !— 
A.  I  believe  so. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  You  referred  to  quantities  of  fish  when  cured,  taken  by  certain 
Americans ;  will  you  tell  me  what  is  the  difference  between  the  mode  of 
coring  with  you  and  their  mode  of  curing? — A.  Yes.  Our  mode  of  cur- 
ing is  thoroughly  drying  the  fish ;  it  requires  four  or  five  weeks ;  it 
depends  a  good  deal  on  the  weather,  but  not  less  than  four  weeks.  The 
American  fish  is  cured  in  two  or  three  days.  Their  fish  is  more  heavily 
salted  than  ours. 

Q.  Will  their  fish  keep  longer  than  yours  ? — A.  It  will  not  keep  so 
long;  it  will  not  keep  in  a  warm  climate  at  all.  It  is  sent  away,  packed 
in  boxes,  into  the  interior  of  America,  whereas  we  pack  it  for  long  voy- 
ages, and  it  has  to  be  dry  and  hard. 

No.  17. 

James  Oliphant  Frasgb,  50  years  of  age,  residing  at  Saint  John's, 
Newfoundland,  an  official  in  the  board  of  works  department,  Newfound- 
land, called  on  behalf  of  the  government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Question.  Have  you  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  fisheries  of 
Newfoundland  ? — A.  I  have  a  practical  knowledge. 

Q.  Whence  is  that  knowledge  derived  ! — A.  From  having  served  my 
time  as  clerk  in  shop  and  office  in  my  early  years,  from  having  been  en- 
gaged in  the  supplying  and  fishery  business  upward  of  twelve  years, 
and  from  general  observation. 

Q.  Did  your  connection  with  the  fishery  business  in  Newfoundland 
entail  on  you  frequent  visits  to  various  parts  of  the  Island  ! — A.  Yes,  it 
did,  particularly  between  Placentia  and  Trinity  Bays,  and  of  late  years 
to  poriions  of  the  coast  between  Cape  Ray  and  Bay  of  Notre  Dame. 

Q.  That  is  from  Cape  Bay  to  Gape  Bace,  thence  to  Notre  Dame  Bay  ? — 
A.  Yea. 

Q.  Where  '^o  the  parties  reside  who  prosecute  the  fishing  on  the  coast 
of  Newfoundland  ? — A.  They  reside  all  along  the  coast  in  the  various 
inlets  and  harbors  and  coves,  in  small  communities,  small  settlements. 

Q.  Within  what  distance  from  the  shore  is  the  fishery  prosecuted  t — 
A.  It  is  prosecuted  generally  within  a  mile  and  a  half  of  the  shore ; 
never  over  three  miles,  excepting  in  very  rare  instances,  where  a  small 


576 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


fishery  is  carried  ou  oa  banks  off  Gape  Ballard,  near  Gape  Race,  and 
Mistaken  Point,  in  the  same  neighborhood,  and  in  the  neighborhood  of 
Saint  Pierre.    I  forget  the  name  of  the  bank. 

Q.  What  is  your  estimate  of  the  quantity  of  fish  taken  by  the  people 
of  Newfonndlaud  between  Ramea  Islands  and  Quirpon  outside  what  may 
be  termed  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  A  very  small  fractional  part  is 
taken— I  am  certain  not  more  than  6,000  to  8,000  quintals — outside  the 
three  miles,  as  far  as  I  am  informed  or  ever  heard. 

Q.  Then  the  fishery  of  Newfoundland,  as  practiced  by  Newfoandland- 
ers,  is  an  inshore  fishery  f — A.  It  is  to  all  intents  and  purposes. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  bank  or  deep-sea  fishery  ?— a. 
Not  a  practical  knowledge. 

Q.  It  has  not  been  prosecuted  since  your  day  in  Newfoundland  ?— A. 
It  has  not  been  prosecuted  by  Newfoundlanders  for  upwards  of  35 
years  I  know,  except  this  year,  when  six  vessels  were  fitted  out,  aud 
last  year  when  four  were  fitted  out.  That  fishery  has  been  eotirely  in 
the  hands  of  the  Americans  and  French,  and  a  very  small  number  from 
Nova  Scotia.  It  was  formerly  prosecuted  extensively  by  Newfound- 
landers. 

Q.  Upwards  of  35 years  ago? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  previous  to  that  from  the  west  coast  of  England  ? — A.  Yes, 
so  I  believe. 

Q.  Now,  as  to  the  inshore  fishery  of  which  you  have  spoken  as  being 
prosecuted  by  Newfoundlanders,  with  what  appliances  and  in  what  way 
is  it  carried  on  ? — A.  It  is  prosecuted  with  jigs,  hook  aud  Hue,  cod 
seines,  bultows,  and  cod  nets.    I  think  that  embraces  the  appliances. 

Q.  I  speak  of  the  cod  fishery. — A.  Yes,  the  cod  fishery. 

Q.  The  nets  are  set  off  from  the  shore  ? — A.  The  cod  seine  is  also  a 
net.  The  cod  net  is  set  in  and  out  from  the  shore.  The  fish  mesh  in  it 
as  they  traverse  the  shore. 

Q.  At  what  season  of  the  year  is  the  cod  seine  used  ? — A.  The  cod 
seine  is  used  during  the  presence  of  caplin  on  the  coast — during  what  we 
call  the  caplin  school — when  the  fish  are  attracted  to  the  shore,  aud  are 
very  abundant.  The  cod  seine  is  used  to  inclose  them,  and  they  are 
taken  from  such  seines  into  skiffs. 

Q.  Supposing  caplin  to  have  been  much  disturbed  on  the  coast,  coald 
the  cod  seine  be  much  used  to  advantage,  or  are  the  codfish  disturbed 
also? — A.  The  cod  seine  is  not  used  then.  The  fish  go  into  deep  water. 
There  is  no  way  in  which  the  cod  seine  can  then  be  used. 

Q.  The  cod  seine  is  only  used  during  the  presence  of  the  caplin 
school,  and  is  a  great  advantage  when  caplin  is  quite  close  in  along  the 
shore  ? — A.  Yes,  and  the  fish  attracted  to  it. 

Q.  We  have  heard  that  herring,  caplin,  and  squid  are  the  bait  used  by 
Newfoundlanders  ? — A.  Yes,  they  are. 

Q.  When  does  herring  come  in  to  the  eastern  coast  ? — A.  It  strilies 
in  between  Gape  Kuce  and  northward.  We  count  upon  it  coming  in 
April  and  it  continues  there  till  well  on  in  December. 

Q.  That  is  on  the  eastern  coast? — A.  On  the  coast  between  St.  Mary's 
Bay  and  from  that  north. 

ii,.  From  Gape  Kace  north  to  Quirpon  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  strikes  in  in  April  and  continues  to  December? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  all  that  time  there  is  abundance  of  herring  ? — A.  Abundance 
of  herring.  In  Placentia  and  St.  Mark's  Bays  it  is  to  be  had  in  great 
abundance  in  the  spring,  but  the  great  home  of  the  herring  is  certuiuly 
Fortune  Bay,  where  it  is  to  be  had  in  immense  quantities  during  the 
whole  winter. 


AWARD   OF    JHE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


577 


Q,  Herring  is  the  bait  first  used  by  the  fishermen  in  the  spring  f — A. 

It  is. 

Q.  Autl  then  caplin  come  in  about  when? — A.  From  5th  to  15th  June. 

Q.  Continuing  till  when  ? — A.  During  five  or  six  weeks,  sometimes 
longer:  but  that  is  the  caplin  season. 

Q.  Squid  come  about  when  ? — A.  About  15th  to  20th  July. 

Q.  And  continue  till  when? — A.  Sometimes  till  November — the  squid 
season  lasts  till  November — but  generally  to  the  end  of  October. 

Q.  So  there  is  always  a  sufficiency  of  bait  on  the  coast  ? — A.  There  is 
dimys  sutticient  bait  on  the  coast. 

Q.  In  what  craft  is  the  cod  fishery  carried  on  by  the  Newfoundlanders  f 
—A.  It  is  carried  on  in  small  punts  with  two  hands,  in  cod  seine  skiffs, 
which  attend  on  cod-seiners,  in  small  jacks  carrying  from  5  to  10  quin- 
tals, partially  decked ;  and  in  large  boats,  decked,  of  from  15  to  35  tons. 

Q.  Will  you  describe  where  these  several  classes  of  craft  respectively 
fish !— A.  The  smaller  class  fish  near  the  shore.  The  cod-seiners  very 
ofteu  fish  among  the  small  craft.  The  small  description  of  jacks  fish 
pretty  much  on  the  same  ground,  but  sometimes  start  a  little  out.  The 
largo  craft  are  enabled  to  follow  the  fish  from  place  to  place,  wherever 
it  may  be  most  abundant.    They  all  fish  pretty  much  on  the  same  ground. 

Q.  Conid  you  give  the  Commissioners  an  approximate  idea  of  the 
nnraber  of  the  different  classes  of  boats — the  number  in  each  class! — A. 
It  would  be  impossible  for  me  to  do  so,  because  a  very  large  proportion 
ofthe  smaller  boats  assist  the  larger  boats,  and  enable  them  to  work 
the  voyage,  by  setting  out  nets,  ])rocuring  bait,  obtaining  wood  and  wa- 
ter, transporting  stores  from  the  shore  to  the  vessels,  and  so  on.  1  could 
not  give  you  an  estimate. 

Q.  Do  the  large  craft  you  have  spoken  of  go  down  to  the  Labrador 
coast  to  fish  ? — A.  A  considerable  portion  of  them  do. 

Q.  They  prosecute  the  fishery  for  a  short  time  in  Newfoundland  and 
then  go  down  to  Labrador? — A.  They  do.  They  catch  a  portion  of  the 
early  fish  on  the  Newfoundland  coast,  in  which  case  they  land  the  New- 
fouiidland-caught  fish,  and  leave  them  to  be  made  during  their  absence 
on  Labrador. 

Q.  By  the  census  return,  which  has  been  put  in,  I  see  there  are  14,653 
termed  large  boats,  from  4  to  15  quintals;  are  these  what  you  term 
puDts?— A.  They  are  punts,  cod-seine  skiffs,  and  the  small  description 
of  jacks. 

Q.  These  are  all  engaged  in  the  cod-fishing  ? — A.  They  are,  as  I  have 
stated. 

Q.  Some  in  attendance  upon  other  boats  ? — A.  Yes ;  a  large  portion 
of  them  are  in  attendance  upon  larger  boats. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  as  to  whether  United  States  codfish  have  been  im- 
ported into  the  island  of  Newfoundland  ? — A.  I  am  aware  that  they  have 
been.  I  learn  it  from  personal  observation.  I  have  seen  fish  landed, 
and  been  informed  generally  by  American  captains  that  they  do  now 
sell  their  small  fish  in  ports  of  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Are  you  aware,  from  your  own  knowledge  or  information,  as  to 
what  has  been  obtained  by  them  for  the  small  fish  ? — A.  The  prices,  as 
stated  to  me  by  American  captains  and  purchasers  in  Newfoundland, 
range  from  7s.  to  lis.  per  quintal  of  112  pounds. 

Q.  Those  small  fish  heretofore  were  thrown  overboard  ? — A.  So  Ameri- 
can captains  informed  me.  They  threw  overboard  all  fish  under  28 
inches  in  length  as  taken  from  the  water,  and  22  inches  as  split. 

Q'  Have  any  American  captains  informed  you  as  to  the  quantity  of 
small  fish  heretofore  thrown  overboard  by  them  ?— A.  Yes. 
37  F 


678 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  have  they  said  to  you  t — A.  A  number  of  American  captains 
gave  me  their  ideas  and  sentiments.  I  think  an  average  of  about  250 
quintiils  for  every  two  trips  made  by  bankers  would  be  about  tlie  quan- 
tity they  gave  me  to  understand  would  be  thrown  overboard.  An  aver- 
age of  25U  quintals  for  every  two  schooner  loads. 
Q.  Two  cod  fishing  voyages  T — A.  Yes,  two  loads. 
Q.  That  would  be  125  quintals  a  voyage  f — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Have  you  from  any  source  whatever,  and,  if  so,  from  what  source, 
any  knowledge  as  to  the  number  of  American  bankers  this  year  engaged 
in  prosecuting  the  deep  sea  fishing  on  the  Banks  of  Newfoundland !— A. 
The  only  knowledge  I  have  on  that  question  is  that  I  derive  frou)  two 
sources — from  our  own  i)eople  resident  on  the  coast  and  from  Amt>ricuit 
captains.  I  am  quite  sure  in  my  own  mind,  from  the  information  obtained 
from  our  people,  that  there  are  500  of  these  vessels  baiting  on  our  shore. 
I  assert  on  the  information  of  American  captains,  one  particularly ;  I 
will  only  quote  him. 

Q.  Who  is  that? — A.  Gaptain  Campbell,  of  the  Caroline,  belonging 
to  Gloucester. 

Q.  What  did  he  state  to  you  ? — A.  He  gave  me  particulars  of  the 
places  where  the  vessels  were  fitted  out,  American  bankers. 

Q.  State,  if  you  please,  what  information  he  gave  you  on  tins  sub 
ject. — A.  He  told  me  there  were  from  Gloucester,  700  vessels;  Beverley, 
75 ;  Marblehead,  30 ;  Plymouth  and  Kingston,  30 ;  Proviucetown,  200; 
from  Dartmouth,  Eastport,  Portland,  and  Booth  Bay  he  could  not  tell, 
The  whole  number  he  gave  was  1,035.  He  felt  sure,  he  said,  that  three 
fourths  of  those  vessels  all  fish  upon  the  Banks  off  Newfoundland,  and 
bait  on  our  coast. 

Q.  He  informed  you  that  three-fourths  of  those  vessels  fished  ou  the 
Banks  off  Newfoundland  and  in  our  bays  and  coves  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  recently,  and  during  this  summer's  fishing  season,  visited 
many  places  on  the  cojist  of  Newfoundland  other  than  St.  John's?— A. 
I  have,  recently,  between  Cape  Race,  New  Harbor,  and  Trinity  Bay,  and 
before  that  between  Bamea  Islands  and  St.  Mary's  Bay. 

Q.  Did  you  observe  American  fishing-vessels  during  the  suuinjer  ou 
our  coast  and  in  the  coves  and  harbors  ? — A.  I  did  this  summer,  almost 
everywhere  I  went,  in  great  numbers. 

Q.  What  were  they  doing  ? — A.  A  number  of  them  were  at  anchor  in 
little  coves  and  harbors,  a  number  were  under  sail  coming  in  and  going 
out,  and  obtaining  fresh  bait  and  ice. 
Q.  How  did  they  obtain  the  ice  ? — A.  They  purchased  it. 
Q.  From  the  Newfoundlanders  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  did  they  obtain  bait?— A.  They  obtained  it  partly  by  pur- 
chasing it  from  our  people  and  partly  by  catching  it  themselves. 

Q.  So  far  as  your  information  went,  in  '  v-mj.  qw  n  observation,  would 
they  obtain  an  ample  supply  nf  bn  ? — A.  o,  yes.  Captains  informed 
me  they  obtained  a  good  sut>i.  bait. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  an  on  as  regar  Is  the  effect  of  supplying 

bait  to  Americans,  as  you  e  described,  .  ,  on  the  coastal  fishery  of 
Newfoundland? — A.  Yes,  i  ive.  Its  effect  is  very  injurious;  I  have 
no  doubt  upon  that  question.  To  Irive  the  bait  away  from  the  small 
coves  resorted  to  by  our  small  fishei  mm  makes  codfish  scarce  there,  and 
they  cannot  follow  it.  When  the  bait  leaves  the  shore  is  a  matter  of 
course  the  fish  will  leave  it  also.  So  these  fishermen  are  lu  great  straits, 
very  often  waiting  day  after  day  for  a  supply  of  bait  to  renew  the  fish- 
ery. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


679 


3ulars  of  the 


Q.  Then  the  effect  would  be  that  the  driving  away  of  the  bait  or  dis- 
turbing of  tue  bait  would  cause  a  variation  in  the  fishery,  that  instead 
of  a  continuous  fishery  tliere  would  be  a  variable  fishery  f — A.  Certainly. 
The  codfish  would  leave  the  coast,  or  little  harbors  anu  ]»laces  where 
our  men  are  accustomed  to  fish,  and  would  not  return  for  a  few  days, 
not  until  the  bait  returned. 

Q.  Do  you  I'onsider  it  an  advantage  to  Newfoundlanders  to  have  the 
privilege  of  selling  bait  to  American  fishermen — a  real,  substantial  ad- 
vantage to  the  colony  ? — A.  TrafHc  is  generally  profitable  on  both  sides, 
but  in  this  case  it  is  not  so  ;  the  benefits  are  almost  wholly  on  one  side. 

Q.  How  is  that? — A.  Those  engaged  in  collecting  bait  for  the  Ameri- 
cauii  loHc  more  than  they  get  for  the  little  bait  they  sell  to  Am(>ricau 
fisberinen. 

Q.  How  is  that? — A.  If  they  were  to  follow  their  usual  vocations  of 
the  fishery  I  am  quite  certain  they  would  obtain  a  larger  amount  of 
value  by  pursuing  the  cod  fishery  than  the  little  they  get  from  their 
dealings  with  the  Americans  in  bait.  It  is  an  absolute  nonentity  to  our 
fishery,  except  for  the  injury  it  does. 

Q.  Upon  the  whole,  then,  3'ou  think  that  the  sale  of  bait  to  American 
fifhernien  and  their  taking  bait  on  the  coast  are  seriously  detrimental 
to  the  fisheries  generally? — A.  I  am  very  well  convinced  upon  that 
point.  If  it  is  detrimental  to  the  fisheries  it  is  also  detrimental  to  the 
fishermen. 

Q.  According  to  Captain  Campbell  it  would  appear  three  fourths  of 
that  1,000  American  fishing-vessels  fish  on  the  banks,  bait  on  our  shores 
and  land  codfish  there,  250  quintals  for  two  trips;  have  you  figured  up 
the  amount  that  would  make  in  a  season  of  small  fish  sold  by  Americans 
to  our  people? — A.  175,000  quintals,  say  for  700  vessels,  at  $2,  equal  to 
8350,000. 

Q.  Tliat  is  according  to  Captaiu  Campbell's  statement,  that  250 
quintals  of  small  fish  would  be  caught,  probably,  upon  every  two  bank- 
trips? — A.  It  is  upon  information  derived  from  Captain  Campbell  and 
other  American  bankers. 

Q.  You  don't  mean  to  say  that  quantity  of  fish  is  sold  on  the  coast 
now,  from  your  own  information? — A.  I  cannot  s.iy  it  is,  but  I  have 
been  informed  that  American  captains  intend  to  sell  it  hereafter  instead 
of  throwing  it  away. 

Q.  Have  you  been  informed,  also,  that  they  do  sell  it  now  ? — A.  I 
have  been  informed  they  do  sell  a  large  portion.  I  cannot  tell  what 
quantity. 

Q.  Have  you  from  American  captains  received  at  any  time  any  infor- 
mation as  to  the  advantages  or  benefits  of  their  being  able  to  bait  upon 
the  Jfewfoundland  shores  ? — A.  Yes;  masters  of  American  vessels  have 
informed  me  it  would  be  impossiule  to  prosecute  the  bank  fishery  now 
if  deprived  of  facilities  to  bait  on  the  Newfoundland  coast ;  that  formerly 
they  could  depend  on  a  limited  supply  of  fresh  squid  on  the  banks,  but 
in  later  years — latterly — it  was  unreliable,  and  it  was  not  to  be  had. 

Q.  Formerly  they  could  rely  on  getting  a  certain  quantity  of  squid  on 
the  banks,  but  not  so  in  late  years  ? — A.  Not  so  in  later  y^ars. 

Q.  Do  you  know  from  information  derived  from  American  captains 
as  to  what  substitute  they  used  upon  the  banks  for  the  bait  of  herring, 
squid,  or  caplin  ? — A.  YeS ;  American  captains  informed  me  they  used 
clams  and  pogies,  and  what  they  call  shack. 

Q.  What  is  shack  ? — A.  They  explained  further  that  shack  was  cod 
roe  and  halibut.    That  that  was  the  bait  they  formerly  used,  but  this 


580 


AWABD  OF  THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


bait  would  not  catch  fish  as  fresh  bait  woald.    We  know  that  is  trae. 
Salt  bait  will  not  catch  fish  equally  as  well  as  fresh  bait. 

Q.  Was  the  shack  salted  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  believe  you  took  a  namber  of  affidavits  from  various  parties 
along  tbe  coast  of  the  Island  of  Newfoundland  in  regard  to  this  sub- 
ject !— A.  I  did. 

Q.  You  are  duly  authorized  to  administer  an  oath  ? — A.  Yen. 

Q.  Were  your  services  retained  by  the  government  in  Newfound- 
land for  the  purpose  of  visiting  the  difterent  parts  of  t  je  island,  between 
Bamea  Islands  and  Bonavista  Bay  ? — A.  Yes,  they  were. 

Q.  For  the  purpose  of  eliciting  information  from  the  people? — A.  Yes, 
with  respect  to  this  inquiry. 

Q.  Did  you  visit  a  great  number  of  coves  and  settlements  and  parties 
between  these  two  points  to  which  you  have  referred  f — A.  A  great 
number. 

Q.  Did  you  take  a  number  of  depositions  from  them  ? — A.  A  consid- 
erable number  of  depositions. 

Q.  Some  in  each  cove? — A.  I  cannot  say  I  visited  every  settlement. 

Q.  Generally  along  the  coast? — A.  Generally  along  the  coast. 

Q.  Were  these  depositions  the  result  of  questions  put  by  you!— A. 
Yes ;  they  wt  re  answers  given  to  questions  I  put. 

Q.  Any  prompting  on  your  part  as  regards  taking  the  depositions  !— 
A.  I  did  not  prompt. 

Q.  Why? — A.  The  people  did  not  require  to  be  prompted.  They 
were  as  much  interested  in  tlie  matter  as  1  was,  and  as  ready  to  give 
information  as  I  was  to  receive  it. 

Q.  Then  these  depositions  contain  the  simple  statements  of  those  par- 
ties in  reply  to  questions  put  by  you? — A.  They  do. 

Q.  You  were  a  member  of  the  legislative  council  of  Newfoundland  ?~ 
A.  1  was, 

Q.  For  several  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  not  so  now  ? — A.  I  am  not. 

Q.  You  have  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  statistics  of  the  country 
generally? — A.  1  have  a  general  acquaintance  with  them. 

Q.  Have  you  made  an  estimate  from  the  customs  returns  and  ffcneral 
statistical  information  available  to  you  of  the  value  of  the  flsh  taken  by 
the  people  of  Newfoundland  between  Bamea  Islands,  on  the  southern 
coast,  and  Quirpon,  on  the  northeast  point? — A.  I  consider  that  the 
quantity  of  fish  taken  on  that  coast  is  from  900,000  to  1,000,000  quin- 
tals per  annum. 

Q.  Judge  Bennett  has  stat^ed  that  he  considers  about  15,000  men  are 
employed  in  taking  that  tish  ? — A.  He  h.as  come  pretty  near  the  mark, 
I  think.  I  have  gone  carefully  into  the  statistics  with  regard  to  popu- 
lation, and  I  find  15,500  odd  are  engaged  in  prosecuting  the  cod  fishery 
between  these  points. 

Q  That  is,  in  taking  fish  ? — A.  In  catching  fish ;  15,524, 1  think,  is 
pretty  nearly  the  number  engaged. 

Q.  You  have  calculated  it  most  carefully  ? — A.  I  have  taken  the  cen- 
BUS  return  and  I  find  the  number  of  fishermen  catching  codfish  iu  New- 
foundland between  Bamea  Island  and  Quirpon  as  follows : 

District  Burires  and  L.  Poile 910 

Fortune  Bay 1,134 

Burin  1,7W 

Plttcentia,  8t.  Mary's 2,956 

Ferryland lA^^ 

Twilingato  Fojfo l.l<w 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


581 


)08itiOD8  !— 


District  Bonavista 1,463 

Trinity 1,484 

Bay  de  Verde 844 

Harbor  Grace 333 

Portde  Gracfl 668 

Harbor  Main 613 

St.  John's  East 80 

St.  John's  Weat 565 

15,524 

That  is  pretty  nearly  a  reflex  of  the  men  fishing  on  the  shore  of  each 
district  in  the  island. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  Do  the  same  men  care  the  fish  f — A.  The  catchers  do  not  cure  the 

fish. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  Tliere  is  a  large  number  of  other  people  engaged  in  caring  the 
fish  T— A.  A  large  number. 

Q.  Have  you  made  an  estimate  of  what  quantity  of  fish  is  taken  on 
tbe  Labrador  coast  on  an  average  T — A.  I  believe  that  the  annual  catch 
in  Labrador,  taking  one  year  with  another,  is  about  400,000  quintals. 

Q.  Bow  many  people  are  engaged  there  in  catching  tish  f — A.  About 
8,5()0  in  catching  fish  on  the  Labrador  coast. 

Q.  Some  fish  for  a  little  time  in  Newfoundland  and  then  go  down  to 
Labrador  to  fish  during  the  rest  of  the  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  the  number  of  persons  who  leave  Nevr- 
foundland  for  the  Labrador  fishery  every  year  ? — A.  I  could  not  make 
upauy  statement,  because  it  occasionally  happens  that  whole  house- 
holds go  down  with  the  heads  of  families — shut  up  their  dwellings  on 
tbe  shore  and  go  down  to  Labrador  to  spend  tbe  summer — the  whole 
family  iu  many  cases.  In  addition  to  these  a  large  number  are  engaged 
for  the  purpose  of  making  fish — coopers  and  servants  to  work  the  fish- 
ery.   I  could  not  state  the  number. 

Q,  It  has  been  stated  that  about  $1,000,000  is  a  fair  estimate  of  what 
is  coDHumed  by  the  people  on  the  coast  of  fish  and  fish  products ;  what 
is  your  opinion! — A.  I  think  that  is  a  very  fair  estimate. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is  over  and  above  that  ? — A.  It  is  pretty  nearly  the 
amount  that  is  consumed.  I  conclude  there  are  180,000  quintals  of  cod- 
fish used,  which,  at  $4  per  quintal,  would  amount  to  $720,000.  I  con- 
clude that  150,000  barrels  of  lierring  are  used,  which,  at  f  I  per  barrel, 
would  amount  to  $150,000.  For  bait,  of  which  there  is  a  very  large 
quautity  used,  and  for  agricultural  purposes,  I  believe  there  are  $165,000 
worth  used.  That  is  a  tot:'J  of  $1,035,000.  1  think  it  is  very  correctly 
stated. 

Q.  This  estimate  is  made  up  after  careful  consideration  and  observa- 
tion, and  having  due  reganl  to  the  habits  of  tbe  people  and  surround- 
ing circumstances  t — A.  Yes;  it  has  been  so  made  up. 

Q.  When  was  it  that  the  Washington  Treaty  came  into  effect  iu  New- 
foundland, HO  far  as  a<lmitting  the  United  States  to  the  privileges  con- 
ceded to  her  by  the  treaty  f — A.  It  came  into  operation  in  July,  1871, 
by  a  proclamation  of  the  governor. 

Q.  When  was  it  accept€d  and  proclaimed  in  Newfoundland  ? — A.  I 
am  not  quite  certain ;  in  1873  or  1874. 

Q.  Then  between  July,  1871  and  1873,  or  1874,  Americans  enjoyed  the 
privileges  ooooeded  to  them  by  the  treaty,  bat  Newfoandland  did 


582 


AWARD   OF  THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


DOtT — A.  That  is  the  case;  1st  Jane,  1874,  I  think  is  the  time  the 
treaty  was  proclaimed  in  Newfonndland. 

Q.  Have  you  any  linowledge  of  the  amount  of  duties  in  that  period, 
imposed  upon  Newfoundland  imports  into  the  United  States  as  rej^ards 
articles  now  free  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington  ? — A.  1  have  prepared  a 
statement  which  shows  the  amount. 

Q.  Will  you  read  it? — A.  The  statement  is  as  follows: 

Duties  on  exports,  the  produce  of  the  fisheries,  to  the  United  States. 


1871. 

1873. 

1873. 

1874. 

Total. 

Duty. 

Am'tof 
dnty. 

Dry  codflah 

Cove  flab 

Qtlt. 
4367 

DolU. 
17470 

Qth. 
6544 

Dolli. 
34176 

Qtls. 
9544 
80 
035 

25114 

28 
108 

1848 
405 
227 

Dolli. 

43194 

30 

10795 

75343 
196 
108 

3696 

1620 

32060 

Qtli 

4500 

300 

410 

4600 

Dolli. 

21372 

510 

6154 

13800 

26965  IbH. 
160  brU. 
4345  brlH. 

65298 
680 
16680  IbH. 

86961  IbH. 
3222  brig. 
147715 

SOc.  p.  100  IbH. 
11.50  per  br). 
{3.00 

tl.OO 
13.00 
SOc.  per  100. 

.■500.  per  100. 
$1.50  per  brl. 
30  per  cent. 

DoU$. 
$13482.50 
240.  (JO 
12735.00 

65298.00 
1360.00 
208.00 

434.60 

48.'i3.00 

29540.00 

Salman  (tiitrces)  . . 
Herrings,  pickled 

(barreU) 

Mackerel 

711 

15931 

408 

3U 

11734 

47794 

3664 

30 

1074 

19653 
344 
279 

17184 

58957 
1952 
379 

Tongues,  lonndi.. 
Halibnt 

305 
369 
238 

411 

2956 
3820(1 

193 
277J 

i&44 
29575 

1885 
343 

15080 
47880 

Cod  oll(tona) 

Cod  roes  (ba:ieli). 
Refined  oi* . .  . . 

46 
5 

9200 
80 

198 
11 

39600 
176 

159 

32595 

4780 
16 

86175 
379 

40  per  cent. 
20  per  cent. 

34470  nn 

Blubber  .......  . 

54  40 

128165  50 

Q.  Now,  can  yon  give  to  this  Commission  an  approximate  estimate 
of  the  value  of  the  bait  obtained  by  the  American  Bank  tishemien  from 
the  Newfoundland  shore  ? — A.  I  estimate  that  there  are  about  500  ves- 
sels. I  would  not  say  the  700,  as  enumerated  by  some  Americiiii  caj»- 
tains,  because  that  is  speculative,  but  I  think  there  are  certainly  5(10, 
and  I  estimate  200  barrels  to  a  vessel.  The  pay  averages  $20  tor  the 
first  baiting,  and  from  $15  to  $20  for  the  subsequent  ones.  The  last  is 
perhaps  825.  Well,  on  the  average  those  vessels  pay  $80  during  the 
season  for  their  bait.  That  is  $80  for  each  vessel.  Five  hundred  ves- 
sels at  $80  give  you  $40,000. 

Q.  That  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  amount  paid  for  the  bait  for  the 
season? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  That  is  for  the  Bank  fishing?— A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  Now,  what  would  a  corresponding  quantity  of  bait  cost,  supposing 
it  was  brought  by  the  American  fishermen  from  the  United  States  ? 

Mr.  Dana.  Is  that  without  reference  to  its  value  in  the  market  or  its 
quality  ? 

Mr.  Whitewat.  I  am  assuming  the  same  quantity,  quality,  and  de- 
scription. 

Witness.  As  to  the  quantity,  I  can  speak.  The  same  quantity,  I  am 
informed  by  American  captains,  would  cost  an  average  of  $6.00  per 
barrel.  That  would  be  $600,000  it  would  cost  in  the  United  States.  It 
would  be  equal  to  $600,000  per  annum  that  they  would  pay  for  the  same 
quantity  of  bait  for  the  Bank  fishery. 

Q.  According  to  your  estimate,  it  is  $40,000  now  ?— A.  That  is  what 
I  believe. 

Q.  Now  state  the  difiereuce  between  the  quality  of  the  bait  they 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


583 


)  time  the 

lat  period, 
as  regards 
>repared  a 


Am'tof 
duty. 

Iba. 
i)rl. 

DoU$. 
$13482.50 
24U.(J0 
18735.00 

X). 

65298.00 
1360.00 
208.00 

00. 
bri. 
It. 

434.60 

4833.00 

39S4aOO 

It. 
t. 

34470.00 
54.40 

issies  50 

8  estimate 
rmen  from 
It  500  ves- 
riciiii  cap- 
;ainly  500, 
20  for  the 
Dbe  last  is 
uring  the 
idred  ves- 

lit  for  the 


jupposing 
tates  ? 
ket  or  its 

',  and  de- 

tity,  I  am 

$6.00  per 

tates.   It 

the  same 

t  is  what 

)ait  they 


would  get.    What  bait  would  they  get  on  American  coast  ? — A.  They 
would  get  8alt  bait.    In  IS^ewfoundland  they  would  get  fresh  bait. 

Q.  Now,  what  is  the  difference  between  the  two  baits  1 — A.  As  re- 
gards what  ? 

Q.  What  would  be  the  difference  between  them  as  to  carrying  on  the 
ggliery?— A.  There  would  be  a  very  wide  difference  between  the  salt 
and  the  fresh  bait.  The  codfish  will  not  eat  the  salt  bait  in  the  neigh- 
borhood of  the  fresh.  This  was  ascertained  time  after  time  by  our  peo- 
ple, and,  as  a  matter  of  course,  using  the  salt  bait,  they  would  catch 
less  fish. 

Q.  Well,  now,  are  you  aware  as  to  whether  all  those  American  ves- 
sels which  come  upon  the  coast  for  bait  enter  at  the  custom-houses  or 
not,  or  do  they  al!  pay  light  dues  or  not? — A.  I  am  well  informed  that 
they  do  not  all  enter  at  the  custom-houses.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  do 
not  do  80  where  they  can  possibly  avoid  it.    . 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  do  the  great  majority  of  them  pay  light-dues, 
or  are  you  aware  of  the  fact?— A.  I  am  aware  of  the  fact  that  the 
great  majority  of  the  Americans  that  visit  the  coast  for  bait  do  not  pay 
light-dues,  do  not  call  at  the  custom-houses,  and  do  not  enter  their  cod- 
fish, but  keep  away  from  the  custom-houses  as  far  as  they  can. 

Q.  Well,  having  been  connected  with  the  fisheries,  have  you  made  up 
any  estimates  as  regards  the  profits  of  the  business? — A.  1  have  not 
made  up  any  estimate.  I  am  pretty  well  informed  what  the  profits  have 
beeu  in  the  past.  I  kept  a  number  of  boats  and  supplied  them  in  full. 
The  result  of  those  boats'  fishing  was  generally  that  one  third  of  the 
catch  was  profits.  We  would  consider  ourselves  very  badly  off  if  opera- 
tions did  not  leave  tliirtv  three  and  one-third  per  cent,  clear  of  all  ex- 
penses. 

Q.  And  you  have  carried  on  the  fisheries  in  every  way,  with  every 
description  of  craft  ? — A.  Yes,  I  have. 

Q.  I  believe  Mr.  Munn  swore  to  an  affidavit  before  you  relative  to 
the  ti^.iery,  and  exhibiting  the  profits ! — A.  He  did. 

Q.  Well,  Mr.  Munn  is  carrying  on  a  very  large  business  in  Newfound- 
land?—A.  Yes;  in  Harbor  Grace,  one  of  the  largest  if  not  the  largest. 
I  think  the  largest. 

•    Q.  That  statement  of  his  was  sworn  to  before  you  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  my 
presence. 

Q.  And  have  you  investigated  it  thoroughly  with  him? — A.  I  have 
examined  it  very  carefully. 

Q.  Do  you  concur  with  him  in  that  statement  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  think  the 
statement  is  exactly  what  it  was  represented  in  his  books.  He  made  it 
up  from  his  books. 

Q.  He  made  it  up  from  actual  accounts  ? — A.  Y^es ;  in  my  presence. 

Q.  Well,  what  are  the  principal  markets  for  Newfoundland  codfish  f — 
A.  Brazil  is  the  principal  market.  Fully  om-fourth  of  the  whole  catch 
goes  there ;  of  our  whole  catch  of  shore  tisli,  that  is  between  the  points 
you  have  alluded  to  to-day,  between  Cape  Ray  and  Rameau. 

Q.  Would  you  say  from  Cai)e  Ray  to  (Juirpon  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  say  one  fourth  goes  to  Brazil,  tliat  is  of  your  best  cured  fish. 
What  other  markets  have  you  ? — A.  We  have  the  Mediterranean  mar- 
kets for  our  bulk  fish,  Britain  for  our  bulk  fish,  and  the  West  Indies, 
British  and  foreign,  for  our  lower  grades  of  fish. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  You  spoke  of  the  caplin  coming  in  at  certain  five  or  six  weeks  of 
the  season.    Gould  yon  inform  me  why  the  caplin  come  in  ?    Do  they 


584 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


came  there  very 
Yes,  I  went  into 


come  to  spawn  or  what  is  the  caase  f — A.  I  think  it  is  to  spawn.  I  believe 
so.  I  have  seen  their  spawn  in  great  quantities  mixed  with  sand  on 
the  sea-shore.  Generally  you  find  the  spawn  very  abundant  ou  the 
shore. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  I  forget  whether  you  told  us  you  were  a  native  ? — A.  I  did  not  tell 
you.    I  am  not  a  native. 

Q.  Where  were  you  born  f — A.  In  New  Brunswick. 

Q.  You  came  to  Newfoundland  at  what  age  ? — A.  I 
young.    I  was  about  14, 1  think. 

Q.  And  you  went  into  some  place  of  business  ? — A. 
the  office  of  a  merchant  in  Saint  John's. 

Q.  What  merchant  f — A.  John  Stuart. 

Q.  Of  what  firm  ?— A.  Of  the  firm  of  Rennie,  Stuart  &  Co. 

Q.  Is  that  firm  in  existence? — A.  Mo. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  did  you  remain  a  clerk  there  ? — A.  I  do  not 
remember  how  mutiy  years. 

Q.  Give  UH  as  nearly  as  you  can  recollect. — A.  I  think  I  was  in  the 
office  4  or  5  years. 

Q,  What  business  were  you  doing  ? — A.  I  was  keeping  the  books. 

Q.  What  business  was  the  firm  doing? — A.  It  was  largely  engaged  in 
supplying  for  the  fisheries. 

Q.  Did  they  own  boats  themselves  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  employed  men  and  supplied  stores? — A.  Yes,  they  sup- 
plied stores. 

Q.  Did  they  employ  men  themselves  ? — A.  The  men  were  shipped  in 
their  office  to  prosecute  the  fisheries.  We  had  our  regular  shipping  pa- 
pers drawn  out. 

Q.  Did  they  have  a  shipping-office  or  merely  ship  the  men  they  em- 
ployed? — A.  They  had  no  shipping-office;  it  is  all  done  in  the  merchants' 
offices. 

Q.  He  shipped  them  himself? — A.  Well,  he  did  so  for  his  large  deal- 
ers. The  large  dealers  would  represent  him  in  selecting  men,  and  be 
would  bring  them  into  the  office  and  they  would  be  shipped. 

Q.  They  would  be  engaged  to  fish  for  the  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Generally  was  it  for  the  half  year  ? — A.  It  was  for  the  season, 
>trhich  differs  in  difterent  places 

Q.  How  was  he  shipoed  ? — A.  A  man  was  generally  shipped  to  the 
master  of  the  boat,  not  naming  the  boat,  but  naming  the  master. 

Q.  And  he  was  bound  by  the  contract  to  prosecute  this  business  until 
October,  though  there  might  be  a  change  in  the  master  ? — A.  1  do  not 
know  about  that,    it  is  a  question  of  law. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  how  it  read  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  By  whom  was  he  paid  ? — A.  The  account  was  made  up  in  the 
office  and  the  balance  struck  by  the  accountant,  and  they  would  be  paid 
by  L^e  firm  of  Benuie,  Stuart  &  Co. 

(^   And  you  also  supplied  them  ?r— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  supplied  them  with  the  outfit  to  prosecute  the  fisheries,  and 
you  also  supplied  them  with  the  necessaries  of  life  for  their  families, 
didn't  you  ?— A.  Well,  that  was  optional.  They  did  not  always  get 
what  they  required  in  that  way,  but  there  were  very  liberal  advances 
made. 

Q.  You  mean  of  the  necessaries  of  life  ? — A.  Sometimes,  and  some- 
times the  men  would  be  young  men  and  would  not  require  it. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


685 


Q.  Well,  in  this  case,  who  owned  the  boats  ? — A.  The  planters  owned 
the  boats. 

Q.  That  is,  your  dealers  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  instance,  the  firm  of  Renuie,  StuarC  &  Co.  ? — A.  No ;  they 
were  the  merchants. 

Q.  Well,  the  men  that  were  hired  did  not  own  the  boats? — A.  No. 

Q.  They  were  the  middlemen  that  owned  the  boats  and  that  engaged 
the  crew  outside  and  brought  them  into  the  office  of  the  merchant  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  It  was  a  sort  of  middleman  who  owned  the  boats  and  would  en- 
gage the  crew.    Who  paid  him  for  the  boats? — A.  Whom  ? 

Q.  The  middleman. — A.  I  do  not  think  he  required  pay  for  the  boat. 
That  question  does  not  appear  to  me  to  come  up. 

Mr.  Dana.  I  beg  you  will  understand  that  you  are  not  to  determine 
whether  a  qaestion  is  proper  to  be  put  or  not. 

WiTNKSs.  I  want  merely  to  understand  the  question. 

Mr.  Dana.  If  you  will  answer  directly,  without  thinking  of  the  con- 
sequences of  the  answer,  we  will  get  along  a  great  deal  better.  Now 
you  say  tlie  boats  are  owned  by  the  middleman  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  name  he  goes  by  ?  What  do  they  call  him  on  the 
island  ? — A.  They  call  him  a  planter. 

Q.  Well,  how  does  the  planter  get  paid  for  the  use  of  his  boat  ? — A. 
He  gets  half  the  catch  of  the  fishermen. 

Q.  Does  he  go  with  them  ? — A.  Sometimes  he  does  and  sometimes  he 
does  not. 

Q.  Well,  what  is  the  difference  ? — A.  It  makes  a  great  deal  of  differ- 
BDce.  It  makes  him  a  sharesmau  if  he  goes,  to  the  extent  of  half  his 
catch. 

Q.  If  he  does  not  go  with  them  he  gets  half  the  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Who  furnishes  the  seines  f — A.  He  furnishes  them. 

Q.  And  does  half  the  catch  cover  all  he  furnishes  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  is 
supposed  to  cover  all  he  furnishes. 

Q.  That  is  the  boat  and  seine? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Does  he  furnish  provisions  ? — A.  He  does— all  the  provisions  for 
the  voyage. 

Q.  You  mean  all  the  consumable  provisions,  what  they  eat  and 
drink?— xV.  Yes. 

Q.  The  lines  and  all  that  ? — A.  Yes,  quite  so. 

Q.  Well,  did  you  sell  to  the  middleman  ?  These  planters,  did  you  and 
other  liiie  firms  sell  to  them  the  provisions  for  the  voyage  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  how  were  the  men  paid  that  came  ii>  and  shipped — the  men 
that  were  brought  in  by  the  planter  and  shipped  ?— A.  They  were  paid 
one  half  their  fish,  that  is  one-half  their  catch.  If  there  were  seven  men 
Id  the  boat,  each  man  got  one-fourteenth  of  the  produce  of  the  fish. 

Q.  Was  everything  furnished  to  them  ? — A.  Everything  for  working 
the  boat.  Their  own  wearing-gear  would  of  course  be  paid  for  by  them- 
selves. 

Q.  But  the  eatables,  the  diet,  all  that  was  furnished  by  the  middle- 
man ?— A.  It  was. 

Q.  Unehalf  of  the  catch  you  say  belonged  to  them  f — A.  One-half 
their  catch  belonged  to  them. 

Q.  Was  each  man's  catch  counted  separately  ? — A.  Well,  sometimes 
they  cut  their  tails.  In  that  case  each  man  takes  half  what  he  himself 
catches. 

Q.  Otherwise  they  throw  all  together,  or  two  or  three  do  so  ? — A.  Yes. 


586 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Bat  the  result  is  the  same,  that  the  crew  get  one-half  and  the  other 
half  goes  to  the  middleman  or  the  boat  owner? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  yon  sold  to  these  fishermen  their  provisions,  the  necessaries 
of  life  for  their  families,  while  they  were  gone,  didn't  you  T — A.  To  a 
limited  extent  that  is  true,  but  the  planter  generally  took  charge  of  that 
part. 

Q.  How  do  you  mean  ? — A.  He  superintended  it. 

Q.  That  is,  he  bought  it  from  the  firm  ? — A.  Sometimes  he  would  have 
it  himself.  There  would  be  sometimes  traders  doing  business  apart  from 
the  boats,  and  owning  tlie  boats. 

Q.  Suppose  the  planter  does  not  keep  a  shop  ? — A.  Then  it  is  bought 
from  the  merchants;  sometimes  it  is  charged  to  the  planter  and  some- 
times to  the  men. 

Q.  It  was  all  credit  ? — A.  For  the  most  part  it  was  credit. 

Q.  It  was  all  but  universally  credit,  was  it  not? — A.  No;  not  all  but 
universally. 

Q.  Among  the  fishermen  it  is? — A.  No;  there  are  a  large  number  of 
independent  fishermen  in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Well,  have  you  seen  or  heard  the  testimony  of  your  fellow-citizen. 
Judge  Bennett,  and  others? — A.  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  that. 

Q.  If  chey  should  state  that  it  was  almost  entirely  a  matter  of  credit, 
would  it  aifect  your  opinion  at  all  ? — A.  No,  it  would  not.  I  may  know 
more  of  the  coast  in  particular  localities  then  they  do.  I  suppose  I  have 
frequented  the  coast  more  than  they  have. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  fishermen,  so  far  as  you  know,  over  the 
whole  Island  are  employed  in  this  way,  that  is,  shipped  by  the  middle- 
man, who  either  himself  or  through  the  merchants  supplies  the  neces- 
saries of  fishing? — A.  I  could  not  estimate  that. 

Q.  Have  you  never  tried  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  never  been  asked  to  make  tliat  estimate  ?— A.  I  have 
never  been  asked. 

Q.  Are  you  willing  to  give  your  best  guess? — A.  I  could  not  begin  to 
work  that  out  from  memory.  A  good  many  things  enter  into  the  calcu- 
lation. Sometimes  the  owner  is  in  the  vessel  and  sometimes  he  is  not. 
Sometimes  his  sons  are  in  her  and  sometimes  they  are  not.  You  would 
have  to  calculate  the  number  of  married  and  single  men.  I  could  not 
go  into  that. 

Q.  You  say  the  planter  goes  himself  to  the  fisheries.  When  he  goes 
himself  and  fishes  with  the  other  meu,  what  above  half  does  be  get? 
Does  he  get  for  himself  half  what  he  catches,  as  all  the  rest  do?— A. 
His  share  counts  in.  He  would  take  half  the  whole  catch  as  planter  and 
his  share  of  his  own  catch. 

Q.  To  whose  employ  did  you  next  go?— A.  I  went  to  the  firm  that 
succeeded  Wm.  Grieve  &  Co.,  carried  on  under  the  name  of  David 
Steele. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  with  them  ? — A.  I  think  eight  years. 

Q.  Were  they  engaged  in  the  same  sort  of  business  ? — A.  The  same 
sort  of  business. 

Q.  With  whom  were  you  next  ? — A.  That  is  all.  I  served  no  others 
except  one  house,  where  I  staid  but  a  short  time,  waiting  for  an  open- 
ing when  I  first  came  to  the  country.  After  leaving  Steele  I  startid  for 
myself.  '^ 

Q.  How  many  years  ago  did  you  >tart  for  yourself  ?  It  is  no  matter 
about  the  exact  date. — A.  It  is  25  years  ago. 

Q.  Then  you  have  been  in  this  business  of  supplying  the  planters  and 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


587 


fighermen  in  one  capacity  or  another  about  35  years  ? — A.  Not  quite  as 
long  as  tliat.    About  30  years. 

Q.  Ton  have  not  fished  yourself? — A.  I  have  not,  except  for  pleasure. 
Sometimes  I  have  run  out  with  them. 

Q.  But  you  have  not  been  employed  fishing? — A.  No. 

Q.  Even  in  your  youth  I — A.  No,  not  as  a  fisherman. 

Q.  You  consider  yourself,  then,  well  acquainted  with  the  mercantile 
side  of  this  matter  f — A.  Yes,  I  do. 

Q.  To  that  your  attention  has  been  given.  I  hope  you  have  been  suc- 
cessful ?— A.  Just  moderately. 

Q.  We  are  told  there  is  a  good  deal  of  money  laid  up  by  the  mer- 
chnnts,  more  than  they  can  possibly  employ,  and  that  they  cannot  get 
interest  for  it.  Do  you  understand  that  to  be  so  ? — A.  There  is  more 
money  there  than  they  can  employ  there  in  the  fisheries.  The  nature 
of  the  fishing  business  is  such  that  it  ties  them  down  pretty  closely  to 
that  speculation  alone.  They  do  not  branch  out  into  outside  specula- 
tion. 

Q.  Then  they  devote  themselves  to  the  fishing  business,  and  there  is 
tio  employment  for  capital  outside  of  that  ? — A.  Not  in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Well,  it  is  not  very  far  to  other  places.  Cannot  they  get  their 
capital  employed  anywhere  else  ? — A.  Well,  they  are  largely  connected 
with  home  houses  in  Britain,  and  have  a  second  business  there,  the 
nature  of  which  I  do  not  know  anything  about. 

Q.  That  is  not  very  general,  is  it  f — A.  Yes,  it  is  very  general. 

Q.  Is  it  a  general  thing  for  them  to  have  a  good  deal  of  capital  laid 
up  here  which  they  cannot  invest  in  Newfoundland? — A.  They  do  keep 
a  good  deal  of  capital  locked  up  in  shares  in  the  Union  and  Commercial 
Banks. 

Q.  What  is  the  rate  of  interest  on  capital — that  is,  on  good  notes  ? — 
A.  Do  you  iiiean  the  discount  rate? 

Q.  I  mean  where  you  hire  money  and  pay  interest.  Take  the  case 
where  the  interest  is  paid  when  the  debt  is  paid. — A.  Well,  there  is  free- 
hold property  and  nepjotiable  notes. 

Q.  I  won't  speak  of  real  estate,  but  take  the  negotiable  notes,  sup- 
posing that  the  security  is  good,  that  the  note  is  well  backed. — A.  It  is 
at  the  rate  of  6  per  cent,  per  annum. 

Q.  We  have  been  told  it  is  three  per  cent.  Is  that  so? — A.  It  is  three 
per  cent,  in  the  savings  bank  upon  deposit. 

Q.  Nothing  was  ever  said  here  about  savings-bank  deposits. — A.  O, 
^ell,  that  is  a  mistake.  It  is 6  percent,  on  the  securities  you  have  men- 
tioned. 

Q.  Well,  if  it  is  landed  security  it  is  no  worse  ? — A.  No  lower,  no. 

Q.  So  that  on  good  security  they  get  six  per  cent,  per  annum  ? — A. 
Yes,  at  that  rate.  The  notes  are  generally  for  three  months,  1 J  per  cent. 
discount. 

Q.  Now,  this  kind  of  business  has  been  carried  on  between  the  mer- 
chants and  the  fishermen  for  a  very  long  time,  has  it  not  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  have  you  not  met  any  complaints  of  the  fishoriuen  class  that 
they  were  hardly  dealt  with  by  capitalists  and  the  mercantile  class  and 
middlemen ?— A.  No, sir. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  that  they  wanted  some  further  opening  so  that 
they  could  get  fair  wages? — A.  No ;  as  a  rule  we  are  entirely  free  from 
that  sort  of  misunderstanding.  There  is  a  mutual  sympathy  between 
the  different  classes. 

Q-  You  have  never  heard  of  any  public  documents  to  that  effect? — 
A.  Never. 


588 


AWABD   OP  THiJ   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  you  think  the  flsbermen  are  better  off  serving  the  merchants 
in  that  way  than  they  would  be  if  they  undertook  to  fish  for  them- 
selves f — A.  Well,  they  get  advances  that  enable  them  to  begin,  which 
the.v  would  be  deprived  of  otherwise.  I  don't  think  they  would  bo  as 
well  off  without  as  they  are  with  them. 

Q.  Do  you  thiuk  it  is  an  advantage  to  them  to  have  the  option  of  fish- 
ing for  the  merchants,  to  whom  they  are  indebted,  or  flsbin;;  for  8uch 
prices  as  they  can  get  and  are  willing  to  take  for  their  work  ?— A.  I 
don't  think  I  understand  that. 

Q.  That  is,  is  it  better  for  them  to  be  supplied  and  to  fish  in  tlie  man- 
ner you  have  described — to  be  employed  by  the  persons  to  whom  they 
are  indebted,  or  from  whom  they  get  advances,  and  have  no  other  em- 
ployment open  to  them — than  it  is  to  have  the  option  of  working  for 
other  persons,  foreigners  that  come  on  the  coast  fishing,  and  to  catch 
bait  and  be  paid  cash  for  it?  Do  you  think  it  is  an  advantage  to  the 
fishermen  to  have  that  option? — A.  I  don't  think  it  is  any  beueOtat 
all  to  them  to  have  the  option  of  engaging  in  the  bait  fishing.  It  is  quite 
the  opposite — it  is  injurious. 

Q.  It  is  very  bad,  is  it  ?  Suppose  you  give  us  a  specimen  of  the  bad 
qualities  of  it. — A.  When  I  was  at  Cape  Broyle  (which  is  a  little 
north  of  Cape  Race),  I  was  informed  that  21  bankers  were  at  anchor 
there  at  one  time,  in  that  little  harbor,  and  that  a  number  of  the  people 
were  lured  away  from  their  fishing  to  supply  these  people  with  bait, 
that  they  did  so  and  engaged  with  the  American  fishermen  in  catching 
squids,  and  that  the  noise  and  turmoil  and  commotion  that  they  created 
in  the  little  cove— for  it  is  a  small  place,  at  least  comparatively  small- 
drove  the  squids  away,  and  they  left  the  harbor.  It  is  very  freijuently 
done.  The  squids  are  easily  driven  off.  If  you  cast  your  capliu  seiue 
twice  in  a  cove  it  will  drive  them  away,  but  they  will  come  back  again. 
Well,  this  had  the  effect  of  driving  them  off,  and  they  did  not  come 
back  for  four  days.  During  all  this  time  those  boats  engaged  in  the 
fishery  had  no  l)ait.  There  were  three  boats  that  procured  bait  for 
themselves  while  the  others  were  supplying  the  Americans,  and  the 
result  was  that  they  had  three  quintals  of  fish  for  each  boat  during  the 
time  the  others  were  supplying  bait  to  the  Americans.  That  would  be 
£3.15  for  them,  while  the  average  of  what  the  others  would  get  would 
not  be  more  than  |2  at  the  very  outside. 

Q.  You  were  in  there  yourself  at  the  time  ! — A.  No. 

Q.  It  happened  the  year  before  you  were  there  ? — A.  It  did. 

Q.  You  heard  it  from  some  one  ? — A.  I  heard  a  number  of  instances. 

Q.  Was  any  affidavit  made  of  it  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  are  sure  it  is  all  correct  ?— A.  I  am  certain  it  is  all  correct. 

Q.  You  have  no  doubt  the  fishermen  lost  by  it  ? — A.  No  doubt. 

Q.  How  do  the  fishermen  thiuk  about  it  themselves  ? — A.  They  think 
BO  too. 

Q.  Well,  they  would  not  be  likely  to  make  such  a  bargain  again. 
Now  is  it  possible,  between  the  employer  and  the  employed,  for  the  em- 
ployed to  make  a  good  bargain  ?  He  sometimes  makes  a  good  bargain, 
does  he  not,  even  with  merchants  and  middle-men  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  may  he  not  make  a  good  bargain  with  the  Americans  ?— A. 
He  is  lured  off  to  a  pursuit  which  he  does  not  follow  for  its  real  advan- 
tages, but  for  the  little  ready  money  it  gives  him  to  buy  tobacco 
and  rum. 

Q.  Then  rum  is  at  the  bottom  of  it  ?— A.  Bum  is  at  the  bottom  of 
everything  bad. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FI8BEBT   C0MMIS8I0^. 


589 


Q,  Could  he  not  get  ram  from  the  merchants  f — A.  Nc  ;  he  oonld  not 

get  it. 

Q.  Do  yoa  mean  to  say  he  could  not  get  any  ram  or  tobacco  ?  Why, 
the  Americans  have  not  been  there  bat  two  or  three  years  for  this  pur- 
pose. Bow  did  he  get  ram  and  tobacco  before  the  Americans  came  f — 
A.  Yon  see  that  all  the  fish  that  are  caught  are  in  the  hands  of  the 
plaDterH.  The  fishermen  cannot  get  half  a  quintal  or  a  quarter  of  a 
quintal  of  this  fish  until  it  is  weighed  out  to  him  or  he  is  settled  with. 
So  be  has  not  a  copper  between  the  time  he  goes  out  in  the  spring  and 
tbesettlemeDt  in  October,  except  in  the  case  of  an  independent  fisher- 
man. Therefore  the  inducement  of  a  little  ready  money  from  the 
Ainericaus  is  very  alluring  to  him. 

Q.  Then  you  say  that  these  men  are  kept  from  rum  and  tobacco  by 
the  fact  that  they  cannot  have  any  money  or  any  fl.sh  to  sell  for  them- 
selves, between  the  time  they  begin  and  the  settlement  in  October? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Then  they  are  without  means  and  money,  and  you  think  it  is  bad 
for  tlieni  to  have  ready  money  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  bad  for  them  to  have 
ready  money  for  those  purposes. 

Q.  But  does  every  fisherman  who  helps  to  get  bait  for  the  Americans 
ffaste  his  money  in  rum  and  tobacco? — A.  I  could  not  say  that. 

Q.  Would  you  say  that  your  fellow-citizens  and  countrymen  are  so 
devoted  to  rum  and  tobacco  that  they  would  get  it  by  working  for  the 
Americans  to  their  own  ruin  ? — A.  They  are  all  seamen,  and  they  have 
the  tendencies  of  seafaring  men. 

Q.  But  take  your  day  fisherman,  with  a  wife  and  family,  who  has  a 
house  and  owes  money,  do  you  class  him  with  the  men  who  rove  around 
and  have  no  family  ? — A.  We  have  a  large  number  who  have  no  fami- 
lies. 

Q.  Do  they  live  permanently  at  one  place? — A.  Well,  the  great  ma- 
jority of  them  do. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  mean  to  say,  take  them  as  they  are,  deducting  as 
many  bachelors  as  you  choose,  do  you  mean  to  say  that  they  are  such 
a  class  that  they  are  allured  by  rum  and  tobacco  into  an  employment 
which  gives  them  a  little  read)''  money  and  takes  them  away  from  an 
employment  where  they  can  have  steady  work,  but  cannot  get  their 
money  until  the  end  of  the  year  ? — A.  I  mean  to  say  that  they  are  in- 
duced to  take  up  an  employment  that  gives  them  a  little  money  that  is 
frittered  away  uselessly. 

Q.  Then  you'*  objection  is  not  to  their  having  money,  but  to  the  use 
they  make  of  it? — A.  It  is  to  their  withdrawing  from  more  lucrative 
employment. 

Q.  They  ought  not  to  leave  the  service  of  those  who  own  them  ? — A. 
No.  not  that ;  but  in  the  interests  of  the  men  themselves. 

Q  You  have  been  all  your  life  in  one  employ — that  is,  you  have  be- 
longed to  a  class  of  men  that  bears  a  certain  relation  to  the  fishermen. 
It  would  not  be  human  nature  if  you  did  not  get  some  of  the  views  that 
belong  to  that  class.  Now,  you  are  of  opinion  that  it  is  bad  for  the 
fishermen  to  be  drawn  oflf  into  any  other  employment,  no  matter  how 
lucrative  ?— A.  No ;  I  would  not  say  that. 

Q.  Would  not  more  money  make  them  worse  ? — A.  No ;  we  have  an 
industry  at  Bett's  Cove  and  at  Tilt's  Cove  that  drains  off  a  large  num- 
ber of  men.  There  is  a  copper  mine  being  worked  at  Bett's  Cove  by 
Mr.  Ellershausen,  and  another  at  Tilt  Cove,  of  which  Charles  Fox  Ben- 
nett and  Mr.  Mackey  are  the  proprietors.  Bennett  was  a  merchant ; 
m  fact,  he  is  still. 


690 


▲WARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Now  do  you  not  think  it  is  any  disadvantage  to  the  flshernieu  to 
be  drawn  from  the  regular  fishing  business  to  work  a  co|){)eruiine  !— 
A.  It  is  no  disadvantage  if  he  is  drawn  off  to  any  equally  lucrative 
occupation. 

Q.  Well,  now,  may  not  catching  fish  for  the  Americans  bean  equally 
lucrative  employment  T — A.  I  am  well  acquainted  with  its  history,  and 
I  am  satisfied  that  it  is  not. 

Q.  Your  objection  is  that  the  employment  is  not  lucrative,  not  to  the 
nature  of  it  ? — A.  It  is  not  lucrative. 

Q.  Don't  they  make  their  own  bargain  with  the  Americans  ? — A.  No; 
the  Americans  make  the  bargain  themselves.  They  say  what  they  will 
give. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  own  them  f — A.  Whatf 

Q.  The  men! — A.  No;  they  simply  say  we  will  give  you  so  much, 
and  if  they  don't  go  with  them  they  go  further  and  find  others  who 
will. 

Q.  Well,  is  not  that  trade  all  the  world  over  ? — A.  It  is. 

Q.  Cannot  the  fishermen  refuse  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  same  thing  when  he  comes  to  deal  with  the  mer 
chants  or  planters  ?  Has  he  the  same  chance  to  go  to  another  iner 
chant,  if  he  is  not  suited,  that  he  has  to  go  to  another  vessel  bait  fish- 
ing?— A.  Certainly. 

Q.  There  are  not  so  many  of  them  ! — A.  There  are,  within  easy  ac 
cess.    They  can  always  go  to  Saint  John's. 

Q.  Can  tht^y  go  to  Saint  John's  and  make  a  better  contract  ?— A. 
Certainly ;  there  are  thousands  docking  theru  in  the  spring  to  ship, 
and  in  the  fall  to  dispose  of  their  fish. 

Q.  Take  the  persons  that  supply  them ;  are  they  not  supplied  by  the 
local  merchants  to  a  considerable  extent  ? — A.  To  some  extent. 

Q.  Now,  in  one  place  there  may  be  but  one  merchant  capable  of  fur- 
nishing supplies  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  option  have  they  there  f — A.  They  can  go  to  Saint  John's. 

Q.  It  may  be  a  very  considerable  distance  to  Saint  John's  from  some 
places.  It  is  not  in  the  center  of  the  island  ? — A.  I  was  going  to  say 
that  communication  between  all  the  ports  and  Saint  John's  in  the  spring 
is  so  continuous  that  the  fishermen  can  find  their  way  there  and  to 
Harbor  Grace  from  every  part  of  the  island. 

Q.  Then,  it  comes  to  this,  if  there  is  a  fisherman  in  a  place  where  he 
cannot  get  supplies  at  a  reasonable  price  he  has  the  privilege  of  trying 
to  find  his  way  to  Saint  John's  to  buy  them  cheaper? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  consider  that  a  greater  degree  of  freedom  than  where  he  has 
the  chance  of  refusing  the  American  altogether,  or  of  going  from  one 
American  to  another.  Do  you  mean  to  say  it  is  a  greater  degree  of 
freedom  than  where  he  can  choose  between  the  American  vessels  or  re- 
fuse altogether? — A.  Well,  the  American  vessels  are  all  on  one  ticket. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  21  ships  coming  in  at  one  time.  Now,  might  there 
not  be  such  a  rivarly  as  to  put  the  price  up  pretty  well  f — A.  Well, 
there  might  be  if  there  was  a  great  scarcity  of  bait. 

Q.  Well,  then,  the  men  would  have  their  choice  of  markets?— A. 
Looking  at  it  in  that  light,  it  is  open  to  a  benefit ;  but  as  a  matter  of 
fact  the  benefit  does  not  occur. 

Q.  How  do  you  know? — A.  I  am  satisfied. 

Q.  I  dare  say  you  are.  I  don't  expect  to  change  your  mind,  bat  I 
want  to  know  how  you  are  satisfied.  Do  you  know  that  these  fisher- 
men don't  sometimes  have  a  very  good  chance  to  make  their  bargain  with 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


591 


tbe  AmericausT— A.  I  know  from  the  universal  opinion  of  those  prao- 
tically  acquainted  with  the  working  of  this  business. 

Q.  You  are  one  of  those  f — A.  Some  of  those  I  refer  to  are  interested 
the  otlier  way.  They  are  interested  in  supplying  bait  to  the  Americans 
or  otherwise  dealing  with  them.  Even  parties  whose  interests  were 
the  other  way  have  told  me  that  it  is  ruinous,  and  that  it  depletes  the 

bait. 

Q.  I  am  not  talking  about  depleting  the  bait;  but  do  they  think  it 
is  au  injury  to  the  fisherman  to  have  a  chance  of  hiring  his  labor  to 
other  pursous  in  preference  to  working  for  the  merchant  or  middleman 
if  he  sees  fit  to  do  sof — A.  Well,  I  can't  name  to  you  any  persons  that 
say  that  it  is  of  any  benefit  in  Newfoundhiiid,  or  that  this  traffic  is  of 
any  advantage  among  any  class  that  you  choose  to  name. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  think  that  tbe  fisherman,  without  regard  to  what  he 
does  with  his  money,  whether  he  spends  it  for  tobacco  and  rum  or  not — 
do  you  think  that  the  fisherman  is  always  the  loser  in  w^orking  for  the 
Americans  helping  them  to  catch  bait  T — A.  I  honestly  believe  they  are 
always  losers. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  think  they  are  an  intelligent  class  of  men  T— A.  They 
are  very  shrewd,  but  they  are  not  an  educated  class,  if  that  is  what  you 
mean. 

Q.  No;  I  don't  mean  that.  It  does  not  require  an  educated  man  to 
make  a  good  bargain. — A.  I  have  stated  to  you  the  inducement  that 
alhires  them.  It  is  a  little  ready  cash  to  fritter  away  in  things  that  are 
of  no  ))ermaneut  benefit  to  themselves. 

Q.  You  think  thiey  are  better  without  cash  ? — A.  They  are  better  with- 
out any  temptation  to  leave  steady  avocations. 

Q.  You  think  they  are  better  without  ready  cash ! — A.  I  think  they 
are  without  this  cash. 

Q.  That  is,  what  is  paid  by  the  Americans  ? — A.  What  is  paid  for  the 
Americans  for  bait,  which  operates  against  themselves,  by  rendering  the 
bait  scarce  and  codfish  scarce,  putting  a  sword  in  the  hands  of  others  to 
compute  against  themselves,  and  to  injure  them. 

Q.  Does  the  fact  of  there  being  two  employments  injure  his  position f 
Does  the  competition  reduce  his  wages? — A.  It  does  if  he  neglects  the 
better  employment  for  the  worse. 

Q.  Y'^ou  don't  think  he  is  intelligent  t — A.  His  intelligence  does  not 
affect  the  case.  It  is  just  one  of  the  things  that  fishermen  will  do.  They 
want  a  little  ready  money,  and  they  are  taken  up  with  strangers. 

Q.  It  is  better  that  they  should  not  have  the  ready  money  ? — A.  It  is 
very  much  better  that  they  should  not  have  it  at  a  sacrifice. 

Q.  Is  it  better  for  them  to  have  or  not  to  have  the  ready  money,  leav- 
ing out  of  sight  what  they  do  with  it  ? — A.  In  this  case  it  is  better  to 
be  without  it,  because  they  will  have  a  larger  sum  by  following  the 
fisheries. 

Q.  Now  what  is  the  rate  between  May  and  October  of  charge  for 
credit!  What  is  the  difference  between  what  a  man  would  pay  who 
oflfers  cash,  and  what  he  would  pay  it  obtaining  his  supplies  on  credit  ? — 
A.  That  requires  some  little  figuring,  for  some  goods  are  taxed  more 
highly  than  others. 

Q.  Take  an  average  ? — A.  I  think  20  to  25  per  cent,  would  be  an 
average. 

By  Mr.  Whiteway : 

Q.  What  period  do  you  refer  to  t— A.  I  am  speaking  now  of  credit 
given  during  the  fishing  season. 


592 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


By  Mr.  Dana :  '' 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is  better  for  a  man  to  pay  25  per  cent,  for  credit 
for  six  months  than  to  have  money  which  will  earn  him  six  per  ceiit.f-. 
A.  I  think  it  would  be  very  much  better  for  him,  if  the  Americans  would 
hand  him  the  full  amount  which  was  necessary  at  the  coinmencemt'iitof 
the  season  to  buy  all  his  supplies,  to  take  the  money,  but  it  is  a  were 
moiety  in  this  case  that  is  given. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  case  where  a  fisherman  gets  a  large  sum  of  mont^y  all 
at  once  that  be  squanders  it  1  Does  not  the  sailor  do  so  at  the  end  of 
his  voyage  ? — A.  Sometimes  it  is  so. 

Q.  Is  it  not  better  for  a  workingman  to  receive  small  sums  of  money 
steadily  along  than  to  buy  his  supplies  at  an  advance  of  25  per  cent,  for 
credit,  and  then  at  the  end  of  the  season  get  a  large  sum  of  money,  such 
as  he  is  utterly  unused  to  T — A.  If  those  small  sums  have  the  effect  or 

Q.  Don't  go  into  that. — A.  But  that  is  an  ingredient  In  the  answer. 

Q.  Well,  whatever  the  ingredients  are,  which  way  do  you  answer?  I 
will  put  the  question  again.  Which  is  best,  having  small  sums  of 
money  coming  in  to  him  at  regular  intervals,  by  the  day  or  the  week, 
or  whatever  it  may  be,  or  having  a  large  sum  come  in  at  the  end  of  the 
season,  and  in  the  meantime  having  to  pay  25  percent,  for  credit  ?— A. 
I  think  it  would  be  better  to  have  the  sum  coming  in  to  him  in  one  lump 
at  the  end  of  the  voyage,  provided  his  whole  efforts  are  direcited  to 
build  up  the  industry  in  which  he  is  engaged,  as  they  would  not  other- 
wise be ;  and  I  think  he  will  have  a  larger  sum  coming  to  him  thuu  it 
he  is  withdrawn  by  occasional  payments  of  smaller  sums. 

Q.  Well,  that  is  the  reasoning  on  which  you  consider  the  present  sys- 
tem the  best  for  the  fisherman.  You  have  given  us  your  reasons,  have 
you  t — A.  That  is  the  reason  I  think  that  Newfoundland  would  be  bet- 
ter off  if  it  were  not  disturbed  by  this  system. 

Q.  I  do  not  suspect  you  of  testifying  out  of  the  way  in  the  least,  but 
are  you  quite  sure  that  your  long  employment  and  interest  on  one  side 
have  not  biased  your  mind  in  the  least  in  the  formation  of  your  opin 
ions? — A.  I  am  strong  in  the  belief  that  it  has  not.  I  am  only  desirous 
of  stating  the  truth. 

Q.  No  doubt  about  that.  You  are  stating  what  you  believe  to  be  the 
truth.  Now,  the  American  trade  in  bait  has  been  recent,  has  it  not!— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  has  not  had  its  full  development  yet  ? — A.  It  is  alarmingly  de- 
veloped, and  I  supi»08e  it  will  go  on  developing. 

Q.  You  are  alarmed  ? — A.  The  people  are  alarmed. 

Q.  Don't  you  share  it  with  them  f — A.  To  some  extent. 

Q.  You  believe  the  seining  is  going  to  drive  the  fish  away  ?— A.  Xo, 
I  do  not  know  enough  about  it.  There  is  a  good  deal  of  seining,  but  we 
do  not  find  that  it  affects  the  fishing,  as  you  say. 

Q.  That  is  done  by  your  own  people ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  take  something  that  is  not  done  by  your  own  people.  If  an 
American  comes  in  for  bait  he  wants  it  in  the  shortest  possible  time?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  average  is  about  a  day,  is  it? — A.  You  mean  the  time  he  is 
detained  there.  I  think  that  is  lower  than  the  average.  I  think  it  would 
be  more  than  that. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  competent  ? — A.  My  opinion  is  that  from  the  time  he 
leaves  the  Banks  until  he  goes  back  it  occupies  three  days. 

Q.  But  the  time  he  is  detained  in  port.  He  goes  in,  and  the  first 
thing  he  does  is  to  buy  bait,  if  he  can  get  it  f — A.  He  could  not  buy  it 
It  would  not  be  pure  if  kept  any  time. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


593 


LI  answer!   i 


Q.  Suppose  it  is  driven  into  one  of  those  small  bights  in  the  cove  f— 
A.  It  depends  upon  the  bait. 

Q.  Well,  as  far  as  be  can,  he  will  buy  it  f — A.  It  depends  upon  the 
bait.  If  it  is  caplin,  he  can  get  it  rapidly  by  seiuiug,  large  quantities. 
HerrlDK  is  the  same.    Squid  he  cannot  get  so. 

Q.  Well,  if  be  can  buy  gooil  bait  at  a  fair  price,  he  will  do  so  ? — A.  I 
presume  he  would. 

Q.  Time  is  a  great  deal  to  him  7 — A.  I  presume  so. 

Q.  Well,  if  be  can  get  one  of  these  men  who  has  a  boat  be  will  em- 
ploy  bim  to  catch  bait  for  him.  That  is  all  of  a  recent  date  1  Do  you 
understand  that  to  be  very  important  to  the  American  f — A.  Well,  I  do. 

Q.  You  say  it  is  "  vital"  to  him,  I  think  f — A.  I  do  not  think  1  used 
the  word  "  vital." 

Q.  What  was  your  word  7 — A.  I  think  it  is  all  essential  to  the  prose- 
cution of  the  Bank  fishing. 

Q.  How  long  have  the  Americans  been  engaged  in  the  Bank  fishing? 
From  time  immemorial  aliuost?  It  was  well  established  in  Burke^s 
time?  I  do  not  mean  the  coming  to  your  island,  but  I  mean  the  Bank 
tisbiiig?— A.  It  is  recent,  I  think ;  but  you  know  more  about  that  than 
I  do. 

Q.  (Rending  from  George  B.  Young's  volume  on  the  fishery  question:) 
"It  bus  been  estimated  on  authority  that  the  number  of  American  ves- 
sels employed  in  these  fisheries  in  1829  was  1,500  sail,  manned  by  some 
15,IKH)  men,  taking  1,000,000  quintals  of  codfish  and  3,000  tons  of  oil." 
This  was  in  1829.  Now,  how  did  the  Americans  got  their  bait  before 
this  very  recent  attempt  to  get  it  here — for  the  cod-fisheries,  I  mean  ? 
Where  did  the  people,  engaged  before  the  Revolution,  and  from  the  time 
of  the  Revolution  down  to  the  present,  that  is,  before  they  commenced 
going  into  Newfoundland  to  set  up  this  demoralizing  business — where 
did  tbey  get  bait  f — A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  what  their  resources  are  at  home  ? — A.  I  do  not 
know. 

Q.  Are  you  unwilling  to  assume  that  the  Americans  have  been  largely 
engaged  in  the  cod-fisheries  for  a  great  many  years? — A.  I  am  willing 
to  believe  that. 

Q.  During  that  time  where  did  they  get  bait  f — A.  I  believe,  until 
recently,  upon  their  own  coasts. 

Q.  Are  you  a  judge  of  their  resources  at  home? — A.  Only  from  what 
their  captains  have  told  me,  that  they  cannot  now  get  a  supply  of  bait 
on  their  own  coast. 

Q.  What  do  they  bring? — A.  A  very  small  quantity  of  salt  bait ;  and 
then  tbey  come  up  to  our  coast. 

Q.  Not  until  they  have  consumed  that ! — A.  They  come  right  down, 
I  think. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  power  of  getting  bait  at  home  failed  them  just 
about  the  time  this  treaty  went  into  operation  ? — A.  I  think  the  bait- 
supply  at  home  was  failing,  or  had  failed,  and  I  think  it  was  a  strong 
interest  in  maturing  this  treaty. 

Q.  Then,  if  you  can  prevent  the  American  from  getting  bait  where 
you  are,  you  can  prevent  his  engaging  lucratively  in  the  Bank  fishery? — 
A.  It  would  lessen  his  chances  as  a  competitor. 

Q.  You  are  going  into  that  business  ? — A.  We  have,  as  I  stated. 

Q.  STou  are  interested  in  that  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Some  of  your  friends  and  neighbors  are  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  it  will  be  a  good  thing  for  them  ?— A.  The  ex- 
38f  ■»      .  " 


594 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


periment  will  solve  that,  whether  it  ia  or  not.    At  all  evente,  tliey  are 
trying  it. 

Q.  Well,  for  the  varioas  reasons  you  have  given— the  opinion  yon 
strongly  hold  that  it  is  better  for  the  men  not  to  have  ready  money,*uot 
to  have  any  competition  between  the  merchants  on  the  one  side  and  a 
new  set  of  employers  on  the  other — that  this  practice  of  draggiucr  yo^. 
harbors  and  bays  for  bait  is  injurious,  and  that  is  a  disadvatitago  to 
have  the  Americans  coming  into  your  harbors  as  they  do,  you  are  on 
the  whole  opposed  to  the  treaty  that  authorized  them  t«  come  tbere, 
are  you  not? — A.  That  is  a  complicated  question.  I  don't  know  that  I 
can  exactly  take  it  all  in. 

Q.  Yon  need  not  take  any  more  than  the  last  part  of  it^  Are  you  not 
opposed  to  the  treaty  for  the  reasons  stated ;  so  far  as  it  relates  to  tiie 
right  of  the  Americans  to  come  in  ? — A.  I  am  satisfied  we  would  con- 
sider it  a  very  happy  deliverance  to  be  released  from  it. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  would  be  willing  to  pay  a  compensation — some  of  tbis 
money  that  is  lying  useless  in  Newfoundland  might  be  well  devoted  to 
driving  the  Americans  oif  ? — A.  We  are  only  in  hopes  it  will  take  soniB 
better  turn. 

Q.  You  told  us  that  the  Americans  used  to  throw  overboard  all  their 
email  fish.  You  put  them  at  22  inches  split  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  calculate  that 
they  would  have  250  quintals  each  vessel  on  an  average  of  two  loads  of 
tish  which  was  formerly  thrown  overboard,  but  is  now  sold  to  the  New- 
foundlanders.  That  is,  250  quintals  tor  each  vessel  for  two  trips.  Most 
of  them,  I  think,  make  two  catches. 

Q.  You  mean  250  for  the  voyage  ? — A.  I  mean  250  for  two  voyages. 
Q.  Now  you  say  they  bring  them  into  Newfoundland  ! — A.  Yes. 
Q.  They  don't  bring  them  all  in? — A.  They  bring  in  all  they  catch. 
They  have  told  me  so.    I  don't  think  they  catch  any  very  small  tish  on 
the  Banks. 

Q.  You  think  they  bring  in  all  that  they  used  to  throw  overboard  ?— 
A.  They  bring  in  all  they  would  otherwise  throw  overboard.  Tliey 
have  the  advantage  of  that  fish  and  the  oil  it  yields 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  market  is  any  disadvantage  to  your  people,  tbe 
chance  they  have  of  buying  these  small  flsh  and  makiug  what  tliey  can 
out  of  them  !  Do  you  think  that  if*  a  disadvantage  to  your  people!— 
A.  No;  except  that  it  goes  into  couipetition  with  thfir  own  catch. 

Q.  TIjen  you  are  opposed  to  competition  ! — A.  Well,  1  don't  supjvose 
any  person  would  like  to  have  too  much  competition. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  think  this  is  too  much  ?  Has  it  a  bad  effect?— A.  I 
can't  say  it  has  had  a  bad  effect,  except  in  the  points  I  have  stated. 

Q.  Was  tbere  any  competition  in  these  small  flsh  before!  It  is  a  new 
thing,  is  it  not?  Where  is  the  competition ?— A.  It  is  this:  these  fish 
go  into  competition  with  their  own  catch,  and  helps  to  supply  tbe  de- 
mands of  other  countries.  Instead  of  being  caught  by  the  JSewfound- 
landers  it  is  caught  by  the  Americans,  and  the  ouly  protit  iu  it  is  between 
the  man  who  buys  and  the  man  who  catches. 

Q.  Is  not  that  generally  the  case,  that  the  man  who  sells  is  supposed 
to  make  something  and  the  man  who  buys  is  supposed  to  make  .some- 
thing?  If  both  m;ike  something,  is  not  that  a  fair  trade? — A.  That  is 
so ;  but  you  sea  our  people  have  nothing  to  do  with  catching  \t.  Where 
tbere  is  small  flsh  caught  among  ourselves,  our  people  have  the  benefit  of 
catching  it. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  industry  of  your  people  has  suffered  from  itf— 
A.  It  has,  to  the  extent  I  tell  you;  this  will  go  in  and  supply  the  de- 
mands of  other  markets. 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


595 


Q.  Your  own  people  sell  it.  It  gives  employment  to  your  people  T — 
A.  Bill  the  profits  don't  spread  among  the  people. 

Q.  Part  of  it  does. — A.  Well,  a  fraction  of  tbe  benefit  goes,  of  course ; 
bat  that  is  all. 

0.  The  Americans  get  only  a  fraction. — A.  They  get  the  whole. 

Q.  Have  they  not  the  expense  of  bringing  it  in  and  handiin*;  it? — A. 
The  liver  would  pay  for  the  salt;  so  that  the  only  outlay  is  the  manual 
labor  for  splitting. 

Q.  Don't  you  supjjose  there  would  be  competition  in  it  very  soon,  if  it 
is  so  profitable? — A.  I  anticipate  that  all  the  American  bankers  will 
berealter  sell  their  small  fish  in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Will  they  have  a  monopoly  of  it? — A.  They  have  of  the  Bank 
fishing. 

Q.  Would  not  one  American  try  to  undersell  another,  if  be  could  f 
The  greater  the  number  in  the  less  will  be  the  cost  of  the  fish  t — A.  Well, 
our  fwople  have  got  pretty  near  an  average  price.  They  know  what  it 
is  worth  in  the  market,  and  they  give  pretty  nearly  the  valao  of  it. 

Q.  Then  you  think  their  saving  from  the  ocean  what  was  lest  and 
briiising  it  into  the  market  is  an  injury? — A.  I  say  it  is  a  very  great 
advantage  to  the  Americans,  and  we  ourselves  naturally  benefit  a  little. 

Q.  It  is  some  lienefit  to  your  people? — A.  It  is  a  very  small  benefit. 

Q.  They  would  not  buy  it  if  they  did  not  make  money  ? — A.  I  sup- 
j)Oj(e  so. 

(J,  Thei-e  are  jury  trials  in  your  island  ? — A.  Ye?,. 

Q.  For  all  sums  of  money,  or  only  large  ones  ! — A.  There  are  jury 
trials,  I  think,  for  sums  over  $20.  There  are  jury  trials  in  other  cases 
wlieio  money  is  not  the  consideration. 

Q,  Assault  and  battery,  murder,  &c.  ?  For  chewing  tobacco  or  driok- 
11)^'  mm  ? — A.  V  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  Now  the  jury  trials  in  ordinary  matters  of  contract  are  causes  that 
must  exceed  $20  ? — A.  I  am  not  sure. 

Q.  These  fishermen  that  go  to  Labrador,  do  they  go  under  the  same 
contracts  as  when  fishing  at  home  ? — A.  Very  much  the  same. 

(^  You  estimate  the  amount  of  the  bait  which  the  Americans  buy 
now  ii)  Newfoundland  to  be  about  $iO,000  a  year,  do  you  not  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  is  not  $Jr0,000  a  year  as  a  new  industry  of  some  importancu 
to  your  people  ? — A.  It  would  be  an  important  item  if  it  stooil  by  itself, 
but  when  it  is  a  mere  decoy 

Q.  You  say  that  all  these  other  considerations  destroy  its  value  f — A. 
When  it  is  a  mere  decoy  to  tlraw  fishermen  from  a  steady  employment. 

Q.  That  is,  the  regular,  old,  established,  steady  relation  between  those 
fihberiucn  and  the  merchants  and  middlemen  is  broken  up? — A.  It  in- 
terferes with  the  lucrative  prosectiMon  of  the  fisheries. 

Q.  That  is  what  you  mean,  that  ihey  have  been  prosecuted  in  one 
way  that  you  consider  lucrative,  and  this  interferes  ! — A.  Yes;  it  with- 
(Irawf;  the  attention. 

Q.  In  that  $10,000  do  you  include  the  trade  in  rozeu  herring? — A. 
Xo;  that  is  additional. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  the  frozen  heiTing  a  good  business  ? — A.  It  is  by 
far  the  best  portion  of  their  transactions  with  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Is  it  any  advantage  whatever  to  the  Newfoundland  i>eople? — A. 
I  aiu  not  practically  acquainted  with  it. 

Q.  You  would  not  be  prepared  to  say  it  Wi'  s  ? — A.  If  I  were  a  sup- 
ply ing  merchant  I  would  like  to  have  the  bent  fit  of  it.  I  do  not  know 
that  it  is  likely  to  do  any  injury  but  supply  them  with  bait  to  come 
<lown  upon  our  fisheries.     You  must  understand  that  the  cod-fishery  ia 


596 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


onr  only  indastry,  and  we  look  npon  it  with  different  feelings  from  what 
you  have  for  your  industries,  which  are  more  varied. 

Q.  Then  there  is  nothing  that  has  come  from  the  Americans  to  yon 
generally  in  the  way  of  the  purchase  and  sale  of  bait  or  of  small  fish  or 
anything  of  the  kind  which,  in  your  mind,  is  a  benefit f  On  the  con- 
trary, it  has  been  an  injury? — A.  I  think  it  is  a  decoy  which  leads  to  a 
permanent  loss. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  an  estimate  of  the  annual  value  of  bait  sold  to 
the  French  from  Newfoundland? — A.  I  think  that  the  amount  sold  to 
the  French  will  average  between  forty  and  fifty  thousand  pounds,  cur- 
rency. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  an  injury? — A.  Well,  it  does  not  injure  us  to 
the  extent  that  tbe  other  does,  because  it  is  used  as  salt  bait  on  tiie  BaDks, 
and  the  proof  of  that  is  that  a  French  banker  came  in  to  get  fresh  bait 
close  to  St.  John's  harbor.  She  found  that  she  could  not  catch  fish 
alongside  of  the  fresh  bait  of  the  Americans.  Now  the  French  would 
like  to  have  the  same  privilege  the  Americntm  have  of  getting  bait. 
They  bny  it  fresh,  but  put  it  down  and  mhc  ,1,  i^alt. 

Q.  Still  they  make  their  flsherie*  pn  tty  profitable,  don't  they,  with 
the  aid  from  government  ? — A.  1  am  not  acquainted  with  the  working 
of  their  fishery. 

Q.  Then  this  is  not  any  advantage,  taking  it  all  Ui  ugh.  It  Ih  less 
disadvantage,  you  would  say  ? — A.  It  is  less  disadvantage. 

By  Mr.  Wbi^eway : 

Q.  You  say  you  have  bad  a  French  vessel  in  to  get  fresh  bait  because 
she  could  not  use  salt  bait  alongside  ot  tbe  A:iiva«  c^n  vessels  that  had 
the  fresh  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  did  the  people  in  the  locality  where  sue  «  ent  treat  that  ves- 
sel?— A.  They  rose  up  and  drove  her  off  the  ground.  She  went  into 
St.  John's  Harbor. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  rate  of  interest  charged  upon  notes,  0  per  cent. 
per  annum,  you  say,  is  tbe  ordinary  rate  of  discount  for  notes?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  rule  paid  in  tbe  savings  banks  on  the  deposits  ?— A. 
It  is  3  per  cent.,  and  in  the  others  tbe  same. 

Q.  Are  there  not  very  lar^xe  sums  deposited  at  3  per  cent.,  now  f— A. 
There  are  in  the  saving's  banlis,  and  in  the  other  banks  also. 

Q.  In  tbe  Union  and  Coaamercial  Bank  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  there  not  large  sums  deposited  that  are  not  upon  interest  at 
all? — A.  Yes;  that  I  know  is  the  case. 

Q.  Now,  to  whom  does  the  greater  part  belong  f — A.  In  the  savings 
bank,  to  tbe  operative  population.    I  cannot  say  about  t*ie  other  banks. 

Q.  Does  not  a  comparatively  small  part  belong  to  tba  capitalists  f— 
A.  Yes;  in  the  savings  banks;  I  am  not  acquainted  with  the  amount  in 
the  others. 

Q.  Well,  now,  is  there  not  generally  a  good  feeling  prevailing  between 
the  employer  and  the  employed  in  Newfoundland? — A.  Yes;  there  al- 
ways is. 

l^.  There  is  mutual  and  implicit  confidence  between  the  two  ? — xV.  Gen- 
erally. 

Q.  You  have  heard  of  none  of  those  disturbances  which  have  taken 
place  between  tbe  laborers  and  the  capitalists  in  other  countries  f— A. 
No ;  nothing  of  tbe  sort. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


597 


1.    It  is  less 


No.  18. 


Thursday,  August  16. 


The  conference  met. 

Angus  Grant,  of  Port  Hawkesbury,  Inverness  County,  Cape  Breiton, 
niercbant,  formerly  fisherman,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government 
of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  Where  is  Port  Hawkesbury  ? — A-nswer.  In  the  Island  of 
Cape  Breton,  on  the  eastern  side  of  of  the  Strait  of  Canso. 

Q.  Have  you  lived  there  any  length  of  time  ? — A.  I  was  born  there. 

Q.  Have  you  been  engaged  in  the  fisheries  ?— A.  I  have. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  ? — A.  Upwards  of  25  or  30  years,  more  or 
less. 

Q.  As  a  practical  fisherman  or  as  a  merchant ! — A.  I  have  been  fish- 
iug  as  a  practical  fisherman  about  10  or  15  years  out  of  that. 

Q.  And  the  rest  of  the  time  yon  have  been  engaged  as  a  merchant, 
that  is,  trading  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  been  trading  in  fish,  but  not  a  practical  fisherman  lat- 
terly?—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  in  American  vessels  or  solely  in  British  bot- 
toms ? — A.  My  first  fishing  was  in  American  vessels  altogether. 

Q.  In  what  year  did  you  first  go  fishing? — A.  1  think  it  was  in  1845. 

Q.  What  branch  of  the  fishery  did  you  prosecute  in  that  year  ? — A.  I 
went  in  a  codfishing  vessel  first.  In  the  year  of  1846  I  went  in  a  mack- 
erel fishing  vessel. 

Q.  What  was  her  name  ? — A.  The  Seaflower. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage? — A.  50  tons. 

Q.  What  was  the  captain's  name  ? — A.  Captain  Furbush,  Alouzo  Fur- 
bash. 

(J.  Where  did  you  fish — in  American  or  British  waters  ? — A.  British. 

(].  Wluit  time  did  you  go  ? — A.  I  went  about  the  Ist  of  July. 

(}.  Wliere  did  the  vessel  hail  from  ? — A.  Newburyport. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make? — A.  Wo  generally  made  two 
trips. 

Q.  Where  did  you  lish  ? — A.  In  the  first  part  of  the  trip  we  would  go 
to  tlie  noith  and  try  along  by  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  and 
up  tlio  isliore  to  North  Cape.  From  that  to  Bouaventure.  No  further 
tliiiii  r.oiiaventure.  lu  the  latter  part  of  the  trip  we  would  fish  off 
rrincc  l^ilward  Island. 

<i>.  How  many  fish  did  you  take  that  tirvSt  trip  you  made? — A.  From 
21(1 1(  .J(»0  barrels — I  cannot  say  exactly  to  a  barrel.  We  were  always 
littecl  out  for  about  that  quantity. 

Q.  Where  were  those  taken  with  reference  to  the  shore  lino  ?  What 
l>roportion  was  taken  inside  of  the  three  miles,  and  what  proportion  out- 
side ?— A.  About  one-half  of  ihe  c  /r  •,  of  the  first  trip  was  taken  in- 
shore and  the  other  half  off  thf)shc:e. 

Q.  That  is  what  you  would  call  the  spring  mackerel  Is  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  the  rest  of  the  year  ? — A.  I  went  home  after  the 
first  trip,  that  is,  I  returned  to  Newburyport.  I  came  back  again  the 
same  season  and  caught  on  the  ictland  coast. 

Q.  That  is  Prince  Edward  Island  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  IJow  many  did  you  take  this  last  trip  ?— A.  The  same  quantity. 
Wo  always  fitted  out  for  i:he  same  number  of  barrels. 

Q.  Did  yon  get  your  fare  ? — A.  Yes. 


598 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Now,  speaking  vith  regard  to  this  second  trip,  what  I  would  call 
the  autumn  trip,  where  were  those  fish  taken  ? — A.  Inside,  from  East 
Point  to  North  Gape.    We  never  went  any  further. 

Q.  What  proportion' eanght  in  the  second  trip  were  taken  inshore  f— 
A.  They  were  all  taken  inshore.  You  can  get  no  mackerel  otf  shore  iu 
the  fall. 

Q.  Are  the  autumn  mackorel  much  finer  than  the  spring  mackerel  !— 
A.  They  are  fat  mackerel,  of  course. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  any  ofi'  Magdalen  Island  coast  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  have  been  a  good  many  years  fishing.  Did  you  ever  catch 
any  on  the  Magdalen  Island  coast  ? — A.  No ;  I  never  did. 

Q.  Can  you  explain  the  reason  f — A.  It  was  always  such  a  blowy, 
stormy  place  that  we  never  cared  to  go,  and  we  never  found  many  wheti 
we  did  go.  We  lost  a  good  many  anchors,  and  our  captain  would  never 
go  there. 

Q.  Coming  down  to  1847,  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  ?— A.  In  the  Sea 
Flower  again. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  ? — A.  Two  tnps.  We  always  made 
two  trips. 

Q.  You  got  a  fare  each  trip  ?— A.  Yes ;  between  250  and  300  barrels. 
That  is  near  it ;  I  cannot  recollect  now. 

Q.  And  with  reference  to  the  places  where  you  took  these  two  faros,  were 
they  the  same  as  the  year  before  ? — A.  We  always  fished  on  the  same 
grounds.  We  considered  that  we  could  catch  them  nowhere  else.  The 
captain  was  well  posted  on  those  grounds,  and  went  there  always. 

Q.  In  preference  to  Bay  Chaleurs  and  other  places  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  proportions  of  the  catch  inside  and  outside  in  1847,  were  they 
the  same  as  in  the  previous  year  T — A.  Yes.  The  fact  is  we  cannot  catch 
them  in  the  fall  of  the  year  without  being  inshore.  We  always  catch  iu 
shore.  In  the  spring,  for  the  first  part  of  the  trip,  we  do  catch  ofi'  shore 
when  the  fish  are  coming.  We  go  there  to  meet  them,  and  have  to  tul- 
low  them  inshore. 

Q.  Do  you  wish  to  make  the  same  statement,  with  reference  to  this 
year,  that  half  of  the  first  trip  were  got  inside  and  the  other  half  out- 
side-^that  is,  of  the  spring  trip  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  nearly  the  whole  of  the  autumn  catch  was  inside !— A. 
It  is  always  so. 

Q.  In  1848  what  vessel  were  you  in  ? — A.  In  the  Sea  Flower  again. 

Q.  No ;  that  was  in  1847.  Were  you  iu  the  Eagle  that  year  ?— A, 
Yes ;  I  was  in  the  Eagle,  of  East  Machias. 

Q.  In  the  State  of  Maine  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage  f — A.  She  was  a  small  vessel ;  about  4.'* 
tons,  I  suppose. 

Q.  What  was  the  master's  name  ? — A.  Davis. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her  ? — A.  But  one  trip. 

Q.  Were  you  solely  for  mackerel  f — A.  No ;  we  got  cod  and  mackerel 
both. 

Q.  What  was  your  catch? — A.  We  got  about  150  quintals  of  codfisli 
and  about  120  or  130  barrels  of  mackerel,  as  neurly  as  I  can  recollect. 

Q.  Where  were  they  caught  ?— A.  We  cuiighttbcm  oft  the  north  side 
of  Prince  Edward  Island.  We  used  to  uuelior  every  Saturday  uight  in 
Campbell's  Cove. 

Q.  Where  is  that? — A.  It  is  on  the  north  const  of  P.  E.  Island. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  the  1:!0  barrels  of  mackerel? — A.  Y  i  took 
them  around  Ea.st  Point,  P.  E.  Island. 


jTn 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHBHY   COMMISSION. 


599 


Q.  Close  in  to  the  shore  ! — A.  Yos;  you  cau't  catch  any  mackerel  off- 
gbore  at  East  Point. 

Q.  Give  the  Commission  some  idea  how  far  from  the  shore  these 
mackerel  were  taken  ?— A.  They  were  taken  from  a  half  a  mile  to  a  mile 
j)D(l  a  half. 

Q.  Were  they  all  taken  there  f — A.  Yea. 

Q.  In  18A9  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  ? — A.  The  (Cypress. 

Q.  Who  was  the  captain? — A.  Captain  Furbusb.  She  was  from 
Newbiiryport. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  f — A  ,  Two. 

Q.  What  catch  did  you  take  each  trip? — A.  We  had  somewhere 
aboat  300 — a  little  over  that.  It  was  a  little  larger  veisel  than  the  Sea 
Flower.    We  fitted  out  for  more. 

Q.  I  don't  want  to  repeat  the  same  question  for  each  voyage,  but  were 
the  proportions  taken  inside  and  outside  the  same  as  before,  or  was 
there  any  difference? — A.  There  was  no  difference  in  those  vessels.  We 
always  got  a  fare.     We  were  with  a  very  lucky  captain. 

Q  But  I  was  speaking  with  reference  to  the  distance  from  the  shore. 
-A.  It  was  just  the  same.  We  always  followed  the  same  grounds.  In 
fact  I  don't  know  any  grounds  you  can  go  to,  except  those. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  especially  with  reference  to  the  proportions  of 
those  tish  taken  within  the  three-mile  limit  and  those  taken  in  the  open 
guH— were  the  proportions  still  the  same? — A.  The  very  same.  Wo 
alwaj's  went,  on  the  first  trip,  a  little  off  shore,  to  catch  them  as  they 
were  coming  in.  Half  the  catch  of  the  first  trip  was  off  shore,  and  the 
second  was  all  inshore. 

Q.  That  is  a  general  statement  as  to  all  trips  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  were  you  in  I80O  ? — A.  1  was  in  the  Cypress,  too,  the  same 
vessel. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  ? — A.  Two  trips. 

Q.  What  was  the  result? — A.  The  same  result. 

Q.  You  caught  in  the  same  places  and  proportions  ? — A.  Yes. 

(.}.  In  1851  ? — A.  I  was  in  tie  Cypress. 

(j.  That  was  the  year  of  the  great  gale,  the  Yankee  gale,  so  called  i — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Your  vessel  was  not  lost? — A.  No.  My  brother  was  lost  on  the 
same  Bank,  in  a  Newburyport  vessel,  too. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  ? — A.  Two. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  ? — A.  The  first  trip  we  had  obtained  the  same 
results  as  before ;  the  last  trip  we  did  not  get  quite  so  many,  on  account 
of  the  gale.    We  went  home. 

Q.  Was  there  any  other  cause  for  it? — A.  Well,  the  water  was  dis- 
colored for  nearly  a  fortnight  by  the  gale,  and  our  captain,  with  a  great 
many  others,  did  not  feel  like  sailing.  We  went  hottro,  having  caught 
about  200  barrels  ;  something  like  that. 

Q.  Ill  1852,  in  what  vessel  did  you  go  ? — A.  I  was  in  the  schooner 
Garland. 

Q.  Wlujt  was  her  tonnage  ? — A.  150  or  120  tons;  somewhere  there. 

Q.  Who  was  the  captain  ? — A.  Captain  Furbush ;  the  same  man. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her? — A.  One  trip. 

Q.  ^^  'th  what  result  ? — A.  Not  very  good. 

<^  How  many  did  you  get  ?— A.  We  did  not  get  more  than  300  bar- 
rels. 

Q.  To  what  cause  do  you  attribute  the  bad  fare  that  year? — A.  The 
••i^ptaiii  had  been  a  very  fortunate  man,  but  commenced  to  drink  the 
lii>t  year  or  two,  and  we  were  in  the  harbors  most  of  the  time. 


600 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  It  was  not  owing  to  the  absence  of  the  fish  ? — A.  No ;  we  did  not 
attend  to  it. 

Q.  Of  those  300  barrels,  what  proportion  were  talien  inshore  ?— A.  We 
got  a  ))ortion  off  shore.    We  were  early  in  the  bay. 

Q.  What  proportion  did  you  get  inside? — A.  We  got  half  inshore  and 
half  off  shore  that  trip. 

Q.  Did  you  go  in  1853? — A.  I  did  not  go  with  that  man  any  more. 
In  1853, 1  was  fishing  in  one  of  our  own  vessels,  the  Matilda. 

Q.  In  the  bay? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  ? — A.  I  did  very  well.  I  was  four  or  five 
weeks  out  and  got  200  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  them  ? — A.  Around  the  island,  close  iu  at 
East  Point.    I  caught  them  altogether  at  East  Point. 

Q.  Was  that  a  good  year,  1854  ?  —A.  That  was  a  fair  year. 

Q.  I  mean  the  year  1853  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1854  where  were  you  ? — A.  In  18oA — I  don't  know  that  I  was 
fishing  in  that  year.    I  was  not  fishing;  I  was  coasting. 

Q.  Did  you  go  afterwards  fishing  in  1855  or  1856? — A.  I  went,  in 
1855,  a  trip  in  the  American  vessel  Kusseta. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage  ? — A.  Ninety  or  100  tons. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  iu  her  ? — A.  One  trip,  the  fall  trip, 
only. 

Q.  Had  she  been  in  the  spring  trip  ? — A.  No ;  she  >-^as  on  the  Grand 
Banks  fishing  cod.    She  only  made  one  mackerel  trip. 

Q.  Wliat  did  you  catch  ?— A.  We  were  not  long,  only  five  days  iu  tbe 
bay.    We  got  about  160  barrels. 

Q.  "Wliere? — A.  At  Aspy  Bay,  Cape  North. 

Q.  Where  is  that? — A.  That  is  at  the  north  point  of  Cape  Breton, 
jnst  inside  of  St.  Paul's  Island. 

Q.  Were  the  fish  plenty  there  ? — A.  Yes,  quite  plenty.  We  might 
have  had  "00  only  that  it  got  calm  on  the  last  day,  and  we  could  not 
get  right  ii/co  the  ground  where  the  principal  biting  school  was. 

Q.  Is  it  a  small  bay  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  many  other  vessels  there  ? — A.  There  were  at  the  last 
of  it.  We  went  on  Sunday  evening  and  came  out  on  Thursday  nifjht. 
"When  we  went  in  there  were  only  5  or  6  sail.  When  we  left  there  were 
30  or  40. 

Q.  flow  did  they  do? — A.  They  all  did  well ;  they  all  did  better  than 
we  did ;  we  went  right  home  then.    We  did  not  stop  any  longer. 

Q.  That  brings  you  down  to  1856.  Did  you  continue  fishing  iu  Ameri- 
can vessels  ? — A.  No ;  that  was  the  last  trip. 

Q.  Generally  with  reference  to  these  years,  that  is  from  1846  tol85fi, 
covering  a  period  of  ten  years,  what  was  the  average  number  of  the 
American  fleet  frequenting  the  bay  during  these  years? — A.  There  was 
a  large  fleet;  that  is,  they  grew  larger  every  year.  I  would  suppose  the 
avemge  number  would  be  600,  between  500  and  600.  We  have  seen 
400  sail  in  Port  Hood  at  a  time.    It  was  like  a  city  with  lights. 

Q.  Had  you  good  opportunities  of  seeing  and  judging  of  tbe  numbers  ? 
— A.  Y'es ;  we  could  not  help  seeing  them. 

Q.  Did  you  converse  much  with  different  captains  and  interchange 
information  as  to  the  catches  you  made  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  would  always 
go  aboard  one  another  to  find  whore  they  got  their  last  day's  fishing 
and  the  run  of  the  mackerel,  and  all  that. 

Q.  Had  you  a  fair  opportunity  of  judging  of  the  catches  of  the  differ- 
ent vessels? — A.  I  had. 

Q.  Give  the  Commission  the  average  catch  taken  any  particular  year 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


601 


or  rnnning  over  2  or  3  or  the  whole  ten  years,  if  yon  please  f — A.  I  was 
jD  small  vessels  and  we  always  got  a  fare.  I  sappose  there  were  larger 
vessels  that  used  to  get  a  larger  quantity,  bnt  in  my  opinion  the  average 
catch  would  be  600  barrels,  taking  the  small  and  the  large  vessels  ;  tak- 
ing those  that  did  well  with  those  that  did  not,  I  feel  that  I  am  within 
bonndn  when  I  say  that. 

Q.  You  say  there  were  larger  vessels;  would  they  make  larger 
catches? — A..  O,  some  got  1,000  barrels;  some  large  vessels  that  came 
down  fitted  out  for  the  season  would  have  1,000  or  perhaps  1,100  barrels. 

Q.  Can  you  form  an  accurate  opinion  as  to  the  proportion  taken  within 
tlie  limits,  of  the  whole  quantity  taken  !  What  would  you  say ! — A. 
What  do  yon  mean  ? 

Q.  Of  the  whole  of  those  fish  caught  in  the  bay,  what  proportion 
Avould  be  caught  inshore  within  the  three  miles,  and  what  proportion 
outside  in  the  bay,  taking  the  spring  and  fall  catch  together  ? — A.  My 
idea  ia  that  about  three-fourths  were  caught  inshore.  For  half  of  the 
first  trip  they  may  catch  them  off  shore,  and  they  do  catch  them  off'  shore, 
but  m.y  opinion  is  that  three-fourths  of  the  fish  are  taken  inshore.  I 
know  they  are  caught  inshore ;  you  cannot  catch  them  anywhere  else. 

Q.  Weil,  is  there  a  large  fleet  of  boats  in  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  Quite  a 
uuinher. 

Q.  How  many  boats  have  you,  approximately! — A.  I  suppose,  taking 
the  whole  thing,  from  Gape  George  around  the  different  banks  to  Gape 
North,  there  are  1,000  boats. 

Q.  Now,  th')  catches  made  by  these  boats,  where  are  they  made  with 
reference  to  the  shore  liiie? — A.  They  cannot  be  taken  outside;  the 
water  is  too  deep.  The  mackerel  are  taken  right  in.  All  the  boat  fish- 
in;;  is  inside. 

Q.  From  1856  where  were  you ;  what  vessel  were  you  in,  or  what  were 
you  doing? — A.  In  the  year  1856  I  was  coasting. 

Q.  Have  you  been  fishing  since  then  f — A.  I  have  been  fishing  in  my 
own  vessels. 

Q.  In  the  bay  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  1858,  I  think  it  was,  I  was  in  a  schooner 
called  the  Union,  of  Miramichi,  mackerel  fishing.  A  company  built  a 
schooner  there,  and  taey  sent  for  me  to  the  strait  to  go  in  her.  I  took 
a  crew — that  is,  I  took  8  men — from  there. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  of  that  ? — A.  We  got  about  300  barrels. 

Q.  Was  it  a  large  vessel  or  a  small  one ! — A.  It  was  not  very  large ; 
it  was  a  vessel  of  about  60  tons. 

Q.  Were  30U  fishing  at  any  other  time? — A.  I  was  there  in  my  own 
vessels. 

Q.  Well,  taking  one  year  with  another,  give  ns  a  general  idea  what 
was  the  result  of  your  fishing  f — A.  I  did  not  prosecute  it  for  the  season 
at  all.    I  would  just  go  a  trip  in  the  fall  of  the  year. 

Q.  You  were  trading  in  your  own  vessel  and  gave  one  year  to  the 
fishing  ? — A.  Yes,  I  used  to  first  go  when  the  mackerel  got  fat  in  the 
autumn. 

Q.  What  was  the  general  average  result  ? — A.  I  did  well.  She  was  a 
vessel  of  about  65  or  70  tons,  and  I  would  make  200  or  250  barrels  of 
fiit  mackerel  in  four  or  five  weeks.  I  recollect  getting  in  one  trip  250 
barrels  right  in  the  rocks,  where  we  had  to  anchor  all  the  time.  That 
was  at  Pabou,  close  to  Bonaventure.  It  is  a  little  inlet  to  the  northwest 
of  Bonaventure  Island. 

Q.  Well,  what  year  was  that? — A.  I  tMnk  it  was  in  1805. 

Q.  Did  you  continue  fishing  from  1865  down  ?— A.  Occasionally. 

Q.  Down  to  what  year?— Down  to  1869. 


6C2 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHEUY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Covering  that  period  of  time,  from  1856  to  1860,  what  would  be 
the  average  number  of  the  American  fleet  frequenting  the  bay  f  Did  it 
keep  up  to  the  average  1 — A.  O,  yes;  it  largely  increased,  1  tliink.  They 
were  very  fine  vessels. 

Q.  Tou  have  given  the  average  up  to  1856  as  600  vessels.  From  ISoC 
to  1869  you  say  it  materially  increased  ? — A.  I  should  suppose  so ;  yes. 

Q.  That  is  your  judgment  from  mixing  in  among  them  ?— A.  Yes. 
They  were  vessels  of  larger  tonnage. 

Q.  Do  you  wish  to  state  that  the  vessels  were  vessels  of  larger  ton- 
nage, and  also  that  they  came  in  increased  numbers! — A.  Yes;  both 
the  number  of  the  fleet  and  the  size  of  the  vessels  increased.  Of  course 
we  wonld  know  that,  because  it  was  very  hard  for  us  to  get  fish  among  such 
a  heavy  fleet.  They  would  lee-bow  us  when  they  could  to  prevent  our 
catching,  but  of  course  we  would  try  to  lee-bow  them  too  when  we  could 
do  so:  though  it  was  hard  work. 

Q.  You  found  they  were  masters  of  the  situation? — A.  No;  the  Ris- 
marck,  that  1  had,  was  a  fine  vessel.  I  had  to  prepare  for  thut  sort  of 
work. 

Q.  You  had  to  play  the  same  game  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  the  average  catch  of  the  fleet  be  during  this  number 
of  yeara,  from  1856  to  1869? — A.  I  suppose  the  average  catch  would  be 
somewhere  about  600  or  700  barrels. 

Q.  Per  vessel  ? — A.  Yes.    Some  of  them  made  three  trips. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  change  in  the  localities  where  the  mackerel 
have  been  taken;  that  is,  have  they  been  closer  in  or  further  out?— A. 
O,  no;  the  same  places.  They  are  catching  them  now  in  the  same 
localities. 

Q.  How  are  the  proportions  inside  and  outside  ? — A.  Tliey  cateli 
more  inshore,  I  think.  I  know  they  are  not  finding  them  otf  sUore  this 
season. 

Q.  Well,  in  1869  did  you  give  up  actual  fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Since  that  what  have  you  been  doing  ? — A.  I  have  been  trading. 

Q.  You  have  resided  since  then  at  the  Gut  of  Oanso  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  had  opportunities  of  seeing  the  fleet  passing  and  re- 
passing ? — A.  Yes.  Every  day  we  see  them.  They  have  to  pass  the 
door  of  the  place  where  I  live. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us,  from  1869  down,  what  the  number  of  the  fleet  has 
been  f — A.  From  what  I  can  estimate,  1  would  suppose  there  were  from 
600  to  700  sail ;  somewhere  al'  :ig  there. 

Q.  Do  they  keep  up,  or  have  they  decreased  ? — A.  There  were  not 
many  last  year. 

Q.  Were  there  many  in  1875  ? — A.  No,  not  many. 

Q.  In  1873  ? — A.  There  was  quite  a  large  fleet  then. 

Q.  Did  the  average  keep  up  to  that  time  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  was  it  in  1874  ? — A.  Well,  there  were  not  quite  so  many  in 
1874. 

Q.  Well,  was  ther*)  a  pretty  fair  number  ?— A.  There  would  be  500, 1 
suppose. 

Q.  In  1875  and  1876  I  understood  you  to  say  it  diminished  ?— A.  Yes. 
*  Q.  To  what  extent? — A.  Usually,  I  suppose  there  was  not  quite  half 
of  that,  particularly  the  last  year. 

Q.  Has  this  depression  continued  during  the  present  season,  or  what 
are  the  indications  ? — A.  There  is  quite  a  large  fleet  coming  iu  now. 
When  I  left  home  last  Monday  they  were  anchored  all  round  the  strait 
in  all  directions ;  and  in  conversation  with  their  captains  I  have  been 
told  that  there  is  quite  a  large  fleet  coming. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


6oa 


ire  were  not 


Q.  When  you  speak  of  the  strait,  yoa  mean  the  Strait  of  Ganso,  be- 
tween Cape  Breton  and  Nova  Scotia  T — A.  Yes. 

Q,  Yoa  were  goinj;  on  to  say  something  about  having  conversed  with 
gome  of  them  f — A.  Yes ;  I  saw  several  this  season,  and  they  tell  me 
there  will  be  a  large  fleet.    I  saw  them  coming  every  day. 

Q.  And  there  is  a  large  number  now  anchoring  about  all  the  coves  ? — 
A.  Yes,  in  all  the  coves  where  they  are  acquainted.  These  people  form 
acqaaintances,  and  they  anchor  in  the  different  localities  where  they 
are  acquainted. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  size  of  the  vessels,  are  they  of  small  or  large 
tonnage  f — A.  They  are  of  large  tonnage,  the  best  vessels  L  have  seen 
yet.   A  good  many  of  them  are  seiners.    I  saw  some  with  two  seines. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  the  seine-flshing  prosecuted  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  upon  the  fisheries ! — A.  Well,  we  don't  look 
apoD  it  as  very  prosperous  at  all.    We  don't  think  anything  of  it. 

Q.  Has  it  a  bad  effect  upon  the  fisheries  or  notf  Does  it  destroy  any 
fish  f— A.  Well,  we  think  so ;  and  from  what  I  have  conversed  with  the 
American  captains  this  season  more  particularly,  they  told  me  that  they 
wished  to  God  there  never  was  a  seine ;  they  would  do  better  and  make 
more  money  in  the  end.  It  destroys  the  young  fish,  and  they  get  no 
jirice  for  them.    That  is  what  they  say. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  These  are  purse  seines  you  refer  to  ? — A.  Yes,  sir.  They  have  never 
been  prosperous  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  with  them,  because  they  can't 
use  the  purse  seine  in  shallow  water. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Well,  how  is  it  in  the  deep  water  ? — A.  Well,  the  fish  are  not  there. 
I  nuderstood  the  other  day  that  there  was  an  American  schooner  came 
iu  and  tried  to  get  a  seine  of  short  depth  for  shallow  water.  I  don't 
know  what  luck  he  will  have. 

Q.  He  was  getting  bis  seine  made  shallower  to  take  the  fish  in  the 
sliallow  waters? — A.  Yes,  I  understood  he  was  sending  home  for  one. 

Q.  Well,  you  have  been  residing  some  years  about  the  Gut  of  Canso, 
can  you  give  me  an  idea  to  what  extent  the  transshipping  of  fish  is 
carried  on  ?  Do  the  Americans  transship  to  any  extent  of  late  years  ? — 
A.  They  have. 

Q.  Just  state  what  you  know  of  this. — A.  I  was  not  in  the  business, 
bat  on  this  very  property  I  have  now,  I  have  seen  the  wharf  so  piled  full 
of  mackerel  that  you  could  not  get  upon  it,  waiting  for  the  steamer 
Albambra  and  others,  and  those  vessels  could  not  take  them  all,  and 
tliey  had  to  wait  trip  after  trip.  They  were  all  anxious  to  get  them  on 
to  get  the  advantage  of  the  high  prices. 

Q.  Those  were  American-caught  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes,  all.  Then  there 
was  a  large  number  of  sailing-vessels  shipping  on  the  other  side  as  fast 
as  they  could  get  them.  The  cable  roused  me  out  of  bed  with  an  offer 
of  a  dollar  a  barrel  from  some  Americans  to  go  home  with  their  fish. 
They  could  not  get  vessels. 

Q.  Where  do  you  mean  when  you  speak  of  the  other  side  I — A.  I 
mean  the  other  side  of  ihe  strait.    I  am  on  the  eastern  side. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  a  large  quantity  being  on  the  wharf,  what  da 
you  mean  ?  Give  us  some  idea.— A.  I  consider  that  7,000  or  8,000  bar- 
rels, piled  up  four  or  five  tiers  high,  waiting  for  steamers  every  week  to 
take  them  away,  is  a  large  quantity  for  our  locality,  which  is  only  a 
wooden  place. 

Q.  Don't  you  get  the  benefit  of  that  traffic?— A.  I  have  not  been  very 


604 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


side  f — A.  There  is  Port  Mu). 


long  in  it.  I  don't  know  about  my  part.  Those  T  have  seen  haven't 
made  much  riches  yet. 

Q.  Is  it  or  is  it  not  beneficial,  this  traffic? — A.  I  don't  think  it.  If 
we  would  employ  our  own  resources  I  think  it  would  be  better. 

Q.  What  is  the  practical  result  to  the  men  in  trade  f  Have  tiicy  made 
money  or  lostf — A..  They  have  lost  money.  We  on  our  side  never  went 
a  great  deal  into  it.  On  the  other  side,  particularly,  the  Americans  have 
traded.    Our  men  would  have  nothing  to  do  wich  it. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  What  is  the  harbor  on  the  other 
grave,  Pirate  Cove,  and  Steep  Ureek. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Is  it  an  extensive  trade? — A.  Not  very;  it  looks  large — very  large; 
but  they  would  not  do  but  very  little.  Wood  is  the  principal  thing! 
Lots  of  poor  men  sell  their  cord-wood  and  think  they  are  doing  wonders, 
but  those  that  go  in  their  own  boats  and  fish  make  more  money  than 
those  who  sell  the  wood. 

Q.  You  have  been  engaged  in  the  cod  fishery,  and  you  know  sooie- 
thing  about  it,  I  suppose? — A.  Yes;  a  little. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  of  the  American  fleet  prosecuting  that  flsherr 
on  an  average  ? — A.  I  am  not  so  very  well  versed  in  that  part  of  it,  but 
from  what  I  wodld  see  I  should  suppose  between  two  hundred  and  three 
hundred  sail. 

Q.  Well,  has  there  been  any  appreciable  diminution  in  their  num- 
bers ? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Where  do  they  prosecute  the  fishery  ? — A.  On  Bradley  Bank  and 
northward,  and  what  they  call  the  shore,  off  Point  Miscou. 

Q.  And  off  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  is  what  you  call  the  bay  ? — A.  We  always  call  it  the  bay  af- 
ter you  leave  the  northern  entrance  of  the  Gut  of  Canso. 

Q.  You  say  a  fleet  of  two  hundred  and  three  hundred  on  an  average 
frequented  this  bay  yearly  ? — A.  Yes ;  that  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  Where  do  they  catch  bait  or  get  bait  ? — A.  These  cod  fishermen  get 
a  good  deal  of  bait  on  board  the  vessels — that  is,  with  nets.  But  lat- 
terly the  Cape  Ann  fishermen  get  a  good  deal  of  bait  around  the  coast. 

Q.  They  buy  bait  and  ice  ? — A.  We  have  ice  in  the  strait. 

Q.  Is  ice  a  necessary  article  in  the  fishing  business? — A.  Of  course; 
it  keeps  the  bait  fresh.  It  is  very  necessary  indeed,  particularly  for 
trawlers.  You  cannot  fish  with  trawls  unless  you  have  fresh  bait — some- 
thing that  will  remain  on  the  hook ;  clams  come  right  off.  The  best  bait 
we  know  of  now  are  the  squid ;  they  are  tough  and  will  remain. 

Q.  Now,  with  reference  to  squid  alone,  do  the  Americans  procure  it 
by  fishing  or  do  they  purchase  it? — A.  Both. 

Q.  Is  that  within  your  knowlege? — A.  Yes;  they  have  done  very 
well  in  our  harbor  fishing  for  themselves.  They  caught  them  altogether 
in  Port  Hawkesbury.  There  was  none  sold.  Our  own  fishermen  from 
the  west  did  the  same. 

Q.  These  are  best  bait  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  had  an  American  vessel  there 
about  three  weeks  ago  getting  bait  to  carry  to  French  St.  Peters  to 
sell.  I  don't  know  what  quantity  he  did  get.  He  was  there  for  some 
time. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  any  of  the  British  vessels  leave  our  waters 
to  prosecute  the  fishery  on  the  American  coast  ? — A.  I  never  heard 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISUEKY   COMMISSION. 


605 


of  one.    I  think  there  was  some  report  of  oue  this  summer.    I  never 
heanl  or  knew  of  oue. 

Q.  You  have  not  fished  there  yourself? — A.  No. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  some  idea  of  the  quantity  of  squid 
that  would  be  taken  by  one  of  those  fisliermeu  in  a  day? — A.  Tlie  Olive 
H.  Robinson  got  35  barrels,  I  think,  during  two  nights.  Ue  got  all  he 
wanted,  and  several  other  schooners  also,  of  which  I  don't  remember  the 
Bame.    They  got  from  tweuty-flve  to  thirty  barrels.    I  saw  them. 

Q.  Would  that  be  sufficient  for  the  trip  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  caught  them  iu  two  nights  f  Now,  when  you  speak  of 
a  fare  of  codflsh,  how  many  do  you  mean?  Of  course  you  can  only 
speak  approximately.  How  many  codflsh  would  that  quantity  of  bait 
enable  tbem  to  catch  f — A.  Well,  they  would  catch  about  400  quintals, 
1  suppose.  Those  men  that  get  bait,  like  those  I  have  referred  to,  are 
generally  fresh  fishermen.  That  is,  they  take  their  fish  home  fresh. 
Tbey  don't  stop  long ;  they  don't  care  so  much  about  the  quantity  they 
get.  Tbey  like  to  get  their  fare  quickly  and  go  home  with  it. 

Q,  The  question  I  am  about  to  put  is  almost  superfluous.  Suppose 
ve  kept  the  inshore  fisheries  to  ourselves,  and  excluded  the  Americans 
from  within  three  miles,  in  your  opinion,  as  a  practical  man  of  30  years' 
eiperieuce,  would  any  American  fisherman  engage  in  the  open-sea  fish- 
ing at  all,  for  mackerel  ? — A.  I  don't  think  they  would  come  to  the  bay 
at  all. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  about  it  f — A.  I  have  no  doubt,  not  the  least 
doubt.    They  would  uot  prosecute  it  at  all. 

Q.  I  mean  three  miles  from  the  land  ? — A.  The  reason  I  think  that  ia 
because  I  was  iu  an  American  vessel  at  the  time  the  cutters  were  here, 
aud  we  always  went  inshore  to  get  them  then. 

Q.  The  cutters  did  not  succeed  in  keeping  yon  out  ? — A.  They  drove 
ns  out  of  the  Bay  Chaleurs  three  times. 

Q.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  they  did  not  keep  you  out  f — A.  We  would 
watch  the  steamer's  smoke,  we  would  find  out  when  she  went  away  to 
Pictou  for  coal,  and  would  run  in  then.  We  knew  she  would  be  4  or  5 
(lays  away.  I  reco  lect  being  there  with  a  very  large  fleet  off  Shippegan, 
close  in.  We  had  done  very  well  the  day  before,  and  we  thought  we 
vould  go  up  again  next  day.  We  were  watching  very  anxiously  for  the 
smoke,  aud  when  we  saw  it  coming  up  the  bay  we  got  under  weigh  as 
fast  as  we  could,  but  she  caught  every  one  of  us  inshore.  Four  or  five 
got  clear,  but  the  rest  of  the  fleet  remained  stationary.  We  watched 
the  first  vessel  go  by  to  see  what  the  steamer  would  do.  She  was  a  fine 
vessel,  and  as  soon  as  she  got  abreast  of  the  steamer  a  gun  was  fired. 
The  vessel  did  not  mind,  and  another  gun  was  fired,  still  she  did  not 
miud,  and  another  was  fired.  We  then  expected  to  see  a  ball,  and  a  ball 
was  sent  across  and  brought  them  to.  Every  one  of  us  had  to  pass  un- 
der tbat  old  fellow's  stern.  When  we  came  along  the  captain  knew  us, 
and  said  he :  "  Well,  you  are  here  again  ;  what  brought  you  here  ?" 
Onr  captain  said,  "  We  have  a  sick  mau  on  board."  "  There  are  no  sick 
men  in  the  treaty  of  1818,"  said  he.  "  This  is  the  third  time  you  have 
been  here,  and  if  1  catch  you  here  again  I  will  seize  you."  We  went  off 
and  (lid  uot  go  in  there  any  more. 

Q.  Did  you  go  in  anywhere  else? — A.  Well,  you  see  around  Prince 
Edward  Island  it  is  pretty  hard  to  keep  us  off.  We  can  get  under 
weigh  auy  minute  and  dodge  around,  but  in  the  Bay  Chaleurs  it  is  dif- 
ferent. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  then,  yon  did  evade  the  cutters  and  get  in  in 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


/> 


^   o^% 


M7  />         v^%^ 


1.0 


I.I 


I4i|2^    12.5 
|io  '■^~     IMa^s 


1.25      1.4    III  1.6 

•• 6"     

► 

Hiotc^raphic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


m 


,\ 


iV 


\\ 


A" 


O^ 


33  WEST  MAIN  STREiT 

WnSTIR.N.Y.  M3S0 

(716)  173-4503 


^ 


y 


«06 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERT  COMMIHSION. 


spite  of  them  f — A.  Of  coarse  we  did.    We  had  to  get  oar  fish  some 
way. 

Q.  If  joa  had  oot  got  in  yoa  woald  not  have  had  any  fish  ?— A.  Ko 
sir.  ' 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  What  year  was  it  that  yon  ha  "*  so  much  trouble  with  the  cotters  !— 
A.  I  don't  recollect  the  year  altogether.  It  was  when  the  Devastatioc 
and  Basilisk  were  in  and  those  steamers. 

Q.  What  vessel  were  yoa  in  f — A.  I  was  in  the  Garland. 

Q.  Was  that  a  Newburyport  vessel  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  yoa  were  speaking  of  the  nnmber  of  American  cod  vessels 
that  yoa  were  ia  the  habit  of  seeing  in  the  gnlf  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yon  think  there  were  200  or  300  of  them  right  along !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  there  as  many  as  that  this  year  f— A.  I  think  there  are  a  larger 
number  this  year. 

Q.  Are  they  principally  engaged  catching  fresh  fish  for  the  markets, 
those  in  the  gulf  f — A.  A  great  many  of  them.  Most  of  the  Gloucester 
vessels  are. 

Q.  Perhaps  yoa  know  about  the  Gloucester  vessels.  How  many 
Gloucester  vessels  come  for  codfish  in  St.  Lawrence  Bay  ? — A.  I  should 
suppose  there  were  perhaps  100  sail  of  Gloucester  vessels  in  there,  that 
is  in  the  bay,  and  then  there  are  more  that  go  outside. 

Q.  Whereabouts  can  they  take  squid  in  the  bay  f — A.  They  take  a 
large  quantity  at  Hawkesbury,  and  follow  them  aloug  to  Margaree  and 
along  there. 

Q.  How  do  they  catch  them  T — A.  With  the  jig. 

Q.  Do  they  seine  them  ashore  f — A.  No. 

Q.  You  said  something  about  the  traffic  carried  on  at  Port  Hawkes- 
bury, which  you  think  lias  not  been,  on  the  whole,  profitable  to  yonr 
4)eople.  How  many  establishments  have  you  had  engaged  in  the  traffic 
there  T— A.  Well  there  are  only  three  establishments  there  on  that  side. 

Q.  What  are  tho»e  T — A.  There  are  two  Paints,  and  Levi  Hart. 

Q.  Those  are  pretty  large  establishments  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  sell  f — A.  They  are  general  stores,  and  sell  every- 
thing. 

Q.  What  do  you  include  in  thatf — A.  Salt,  barrels,  flour,  dry-goods, 
groceries,  and  everything  lil<e  that. 

Q.  Bait  f— A.  They  do— but  not  much  bait.  They  don't  sell  so  much 
•bait  on  our  side. 

Q.  Do  they  sell  ice  f — A.  Yes ;  we  have  two  ice-houses. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  bad  those  T — A.  Not  very  long.  Last  year  and 
this  year  principally. 

Q.  Has  Port  Hawkesbury  kept  up  as  much  as  formerly  of  that  trade, 
■or  has  it  gone  off  to  other  places  ? — A.  We  never  had  much  of  that 
trade.    It  was  on  the  other  side. 

Q.  Where  is  Guysboro  T — A.  Guysboro  is  about  30  miles  from  Hawkes- 
bury, at  the  head  of  Ohedabucto  Bay. 

Q.  On  which  sidef — A.  It  is  on  tht>  south  entrance  to  the  Strait  of 
Oanso,  between  Cape  Oauso  and  the  entrance. 

Q.  Was  there  a  good  deal  done  there  in  the  way  of  supplies  ?— A.  I 
4hink  not.    They  go  into  Orow  Harbar  and  those  places  and  get  biit,  1 
understand. 

Q.  Do  they  buy  itt— A.  Yes,  and  catch  it  too,  I  think.  I  would  not 
be  so  certain  about  their  catching  it.  I  know  they  buy  it  and  catch  it 
too  when  there  is  occasion,  or  wheu  they  can  catch  it. 


▲WiLBD  OF  THE  FI8UEBT   COMMISSION. 


607 


Q.  Which  do  they  do  most T— A..  They  bay  most  jast  there. 

Q,  How  long  have  yoa  ever  known  an  American  col  flsherm»n  to 
stay  for  bait  ac  any  of  those  ports  f — A.  Not  very  long ;  3  or  4  days,  2 
or  3  days,  or  a  day. 

Q.  Do  they  generally  stny  as  long  as  that  f — A.  Tes.  I  have  tele- 
graphed for  them  to  find  out  if  tibere  were  other  places  for  them  to  get 
bait,  and  thoy  have  gone  there. 

Q.  Whether  it  conld  be  canght  there  f — A.  Caught  or  bought. 

Q.  Do  yoa  have  boats  at  Hawl^esbnry  engaged  in  the  basiuess  of 
catching  bait  for  the  Americans  t — A.  No,  none. 

Q.  Do  your  people  advertise  iu  the  Gloacester  papers  t — A.  They  ad- 
vertise  ice. 

Q.  What  else  t — A.  O,  well,  they  advertise  sometimes  as  supplying 
American  fishermen.    Some  of  them  do,  I  thinlc.    I  sell  to  them  myself. 

Q.  What  do  you  sell  to  them — the  jreneral  requirements— all  they 
want  t— A.  Yes,  I  do,  whatever  they  want. 

Q.  Bait  t— A.  No. 

Q.  Ice  ?— A.  I  do. 

Q.  Have  you  an  icehouse  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  advertised  in  the  Gloucester  papers  f — A.  Not  this  sum- 
mer.   I  did  last  year. 

Q.  In  what  papers  f — A.  In  the  Gape  Ann  Advertiser. 

Q.  Now  take  one  of  the  other  ports.  By  the  way,  what  is  the  popu- 
latiuu  of  Port  Hawkesbury  f — A.  Five  or  six  hundred,  I  suppose. 

Q.  What  other  establishments  are  there  f — A.  There  are  three  estab- 
lisiiments  engaged  in  the  business  there. 

Q.  Do  the  others  do  as  much  as  you  do  T — A.  Yes;  they  do  more,  per- 
haps, than  I  do. 

Q.  Do  they  advertise  in  the  States  too  ! — A.  I  think  one  firm  does, 
Peter  Paint,  senior. 

Q.  What  is  the  trouble  with  the  business.  Don't  you  get  enough,  or 
does  too  much  competitiot  between  you  throw  the  profits  down  f — A. 
There  is  a  good  deal  of  con  ^^stition. 

Q.  With  each  other  I— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  a  considerable  between  the  different  ports  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  has 
been  so. 

Q.  Well,  take  the  other  ports. — A.  There  is  Port  Mulgrave  right  op- 
posite. 

Q.  How  fur  across  is  itf — A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half. 

Q.  What  is  the  population  of  Port  Mulgrave  ? — A.  Four  or  five  hun- 
dred, I  suppose. 

Q.  Bow  many  establishments  are  there  engaged  there  in  furnishing 
various  supidies  to  American  fishermen  f — A.  There  are  but  two  now,  I 
think. 

Q.  What  are  the  names  ? — A.  F.  C.  Cooke  and  Michael  Keating  &  Co. 

Q.  Do  they  furnish  all  the  things  you  do  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Ice? — A.  No;  there  is  no  ice  at  Port  Mulgrave. 

Q.  Do  they  furnish  barrels  f — A.  They  do. 

Q.  Bait  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Give  me  another  place  on  the  strait  that  furnishes  the  Americans. — 
A.  Pirate  Cove. 

Q.  How  large  a  place  is  that  f — A.  It  is  very  small.  It  is  just  a  cove. 
There  are  only  a  few  families  there,  and  one  store. 

Q>  What  does  that  furnish  f — A.  He  has  been  in  that  trade  too. 

Q<  Does  he  bave  ice  f — A.  No ;  but  he  sells  bait. 

Q-  Oeueral  ships'  stores  T — A.  Yes ;  they  send  over  to  our  side  for  ice. 


608 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  is  tbe  name  of  the  man  f — A.  Jonathan  Hartly. 

Q.  Now,  give  us  another  dealer. — A.  There  is  John  Magaire,  of  Steep 
Greek. 

Q.  How  large  a  place  is  that  f— A.  Abont  the  same  as  Pirate  Gove. 
There  are  one  or  two  families.    There  is  one  man  in  that  business. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  business  carried  on  there  f — A.  There  is  another 
man  alongside  of  him. 

Q.  Does  he  keep  the  same  sort  of  establishment  f — A.  No.  He  sells 
little  groceries  and  things  like  that. 

Q.  I  suppose  he  will  sell  those  to  the  Americans T— A.  Yes;  he  keeps 
liquor,  too. 

Q.  I  suppose  he  does  not  even  refuse  that  to  the  Americans  ?— A.  No; 
I  do  not  8upi)ose  he  would  refuse  it  to  any  one.  I  forgot  to  mentioa 
Mr.  William  Wylde,  in  Wylde's  Cove,  who  has  been  doing  a  little. 

Q.  Does  he  keep  all  these  various  things  f — A.  No ;  not  so  much  this 
year. 

Q.  Does  he  have  ice  f — A.  No. 

Q.  What  is  the  reason,  then,  so  little  is  sold  now  ? — A.  Tbe  times  are 
hard  and  the  fishermen  do  not  want  so  many  things. 

Q.  The  business  is  affected  by  the  dullness  of  the  times  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Give  us  another  place  f — A.  There  is  Port  Hastings. 

Q.  How  large  a  place  is  thatf — A.  It  has  300  or  400  inhabitants. 

Q.  How  many  establishments  are  there  there  supplying  Americans  f— 
A.  There  is  but  one. 

Q.  Whose  is  that  f — A.  It  has  changed  hands  several  times.  It  was 
James  O.  McKean.  He  did  the  largest  business  with  the  Amerlcau 
fishermen  while  he  was  there. 

Q.  Who  succeeded  him  f — A.  George  G.  Lawrence. 

Q.  He  is  considerable  of  a  person,  is  he  not  1  He  is  a  commission 
merchant,  ship's  broker,  Lloyd's  agent,  notary  public,  and  receiver  of 
wrecks.  He  deals  in  all  these  various  things  you  have  mentioned,  does 
he  not  T — ^A.  To  a  very  large  extent. 

Q.  (Beads  from  list  of  articles  advertised  in  Cape  Ann  Advertiser.) 
Does  he  engage  in  all  that  f — A.  Well,  he  has  a  large  quantity  of  ice, 
but  you  could  hardly  get  anything  else. 

Q.  Why  does  he  advertise  all  those  things  if  he  has  not  them  f— A. 
Sometimes  they  come  around  bothering  us  to  get  them  a  yard  or  two, 
sometimes. 

Q.  He  is  a  second-rate  kind  of  fellow  from  that  account.— A.  Yes ; 
that  is  our  idea  of  biui. 

Q.  Is  there  anybody  else  at  Port  Hastings  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Go  to  any  other  place  you  remember. — A.  That  is  all,  I  think,  in 
the  Strait  of  Canso. 

Q.  Whitehead,  whr^e  is  that  ? — A.  It  is  fifteen  miles  westward  of 
Cape  Canso.    It  is  on  the  Nova  Scotia  side,  on  the  Atlantic  coast. 

Q.  How  large  a  place  is  that? — A.  There  are  not  very  many  inhabi- 
tants. 

Q.  How  much  business  do  they  do  f — A.  I  don't  know  that  they  do 
any  business,  except  that  I  think  they  have  ice. 

Q.  (Reads  advertisement  as  follows :  "  Bait !  Bait !  Bait !  Ice  I  Ice ! 
Ice !  Put  up  for  American  and  Dominion  Fishermen,  at  White  Head, 
N.  S.,  and  will  be  sold  at  the  lowest  market  prices.  Vessels  will 
also  be  supplied  with  bait  on  liberal  terms.  Drafts  taken  on  owners. 
For  inf(  -ttion  call  at  the  post-ofBoe  at  White  Head.— James  H.  Felt- 
mate  &  ^  "US.")  Don't  they  do  a  pretty  lively  trade  !— A.  They  do  in 
ice  and  bait.    That  is  all  I  know  they  can  do  it  in.    The  bait  amounts 


AWAHD  OF   THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


60d 


tot  very  large  item.    We  very  often  give  the  Americans  $100  in  cash 
to  gtt  this  bait.    It  comes  pretty  hard  on  ns  to  get  that  much  cash. 

Q.  What  do  yon  charge  them  f — A.  Sometimes  we  don't  charge  them 
aoTtbing. 

Q.  You  do  it  ont  of  pnre  good  nature  Y — A.  Tes ;  out  of  cutting  into 
one  another  and  making  fools  of  ourselves. 

Q.  Well,  the  amount  seems  to  be  that  in  that  vicinity,  looking  to  the 
iocrease  in  the  fishing  business,  your  own  people  are  going  into  this 
trade  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  there  are  too  many  to  make  money  as  rapidly  as  you 
likeT— A.  That  is  so ;  we  are  losing  it. 

Q.  That  is  because  there  are  too  few  Americans  f — A.  No ;  that  is 
because  there  are  too  many  of  them.  It  is  a  mushroom  affair.  We 
have  done  better  since  they  dropped  off. 

Q.  Ton  attribute  your  difficulties  to  the  fact  that  they  used  to  come, 
and  not  to  their  having  ceased  to  come  now  f — A.  Tes,  I  think  so ;  but 
I  tbiuk  they  will  not  cease  to  come. 

Q.  Well,  there  is  Peter  Paint,  senior,  he  cashes  drafts,  too,  at  Port 
Hawkesbnry  f — A.  He  does  if  they  are  good. 

Q.  You  do  not  cash  those  yon  tbink  badf — A.  I  have  done  it. 

Q.  Those  you  thought  bad  T — A.  Well,  I  did  not  know. 

Q.  Have  you  mentioned  all  the  places  you  thought  off  Where  is 
Cape  Ganso  ? — A.  It  is  about  15  miles  eastward  of  Whitehead.  It  is 
tbe  eastern  part  of  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  Do  they  do  this  business  there! — A.  They  do  considerable. 
Largely  in  ice  and  bait. 

Q.  It  is  a  large  place  f— A.  There  are  700  or  800  there,  I  suppose. 

Q.  How  many  establishments  are  engaged  in  supplying  the  Ameri- 
cans there  f — A.  Three  or  four — Cahoon,  Hart,  and  Whitman. 

Q.  Bart  is  an  enterprising  man,  isn't  he  f — A.  He  does  considerable. 

Q.  (Reads  advertisement  as  follows :  "  ice !  ice !  ice ! — The  subscriber 
offers  tor  sale  Two  Thousand  Tons  heavy,  clear  ice ;  also  fishing  supplies, 
cord-wood,  &c.,  &c. — Alfred  W.  Hart,  Cape  Canso,  Nova  Scotia.")  Is 
that  the  man  f — A.  That  is  the  man. 

Q.  H%8  be  ice  T — A.  He  has  ice. 

Q.  Where  is  Prospect,  Nova  Scotia  f — A.  It  is  outside  of  Halifax, 
afouud  Sambro. 

Q.  It  is  one  of  the  first  places  they  would  strike,  off  the  coast  f — A. 
Yes,  likely. 

Q.  How  large  a  place  is  that  f— A.  I  can't  say  much  about  that.  I 
don't  know  a  great  deal  about  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  William  B.  Christian,  Prospect  ?— A.  I  have  heard 
the  name. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  of  the  following  advertisement:  "Ice!  ice! 
ice!  ice!  At  Gloucester  Price. — I  am  prepared  to  supply  ice,  bait, 
wood,  and  coal,  and  general  stores  to  vessels  as  usual.  Currency  or 
drafts  accepted.  Captains  of  vessels,  having  small  fish  or  haddock  to 
(lisiwse  of,  will  find  it  to  their  interest  to  call  on  me  before  selling  else- 
where. W.  B.  Christian,  Pro8|)ect,  N.  S."! — A.  I  am  not  acquainted 
on  that  shore;  that  is,  with  the  people.  I  know  tbe  harbors  pretty 
well,  but  not  the  people. 

Q.  Where  do  your  people  generally  get  the  bait  which  they  sellt — 
A.  They  catdi  it  in  their  nets  on  tbe  coast. 

Q.  That  is  fresh  bait!— A.  Yes. 

<4>  Do  they  also  put  it  up  in  barrels  f — A.  No. 
39  p 


GIO 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  bait  is  there  advertised  for  sale  t— A.  That  I  suppose  is  salt 
bait. 

Q.  Does  not  that  come  from  the  States  t— A.  The  pogies  are  brought 
from  thence. 

Q.  Do  your  people  import  pogies  and  sell  them  to  the  Americans  f— 
A.  We  sometimes  do,  and  perhaps  we  may  have  to  take  some  old  pogies 
from  the  Americans  in  surety  until  the  fullowiug  year,  for  tbeir  bilii) 
which  are  not  paid  when  they  go  home. 

Q.  Do  you  do  this  under  compulsion  ? — A.  Sometimes  \rben  these 
bills  are  not  paid,  we  are  glad  to  obtain  them. 

Q.  Can  you  not  hold  their  vessels  lor  tbeir  bill  ? — A.  We  do  not  like 
to  do  that. 

Q.  Is  there  no  bait  which  they  themselves  catch,  put  up  by  your  peo- 
ple f — A.  The  Americans  very  often  buy  our  fat  herring. 

Q.  Do  they  take  them  to  the  States  t — A.  No ;  but  to  the  bay. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  f — A.  To  catch  mackerel. 

Q.  Do  they  use  fat  herring  lor  bait  f — A.  Sometimes  they  thus  use  afew. 

Q.  Do  your  people  collect  and  salt  squids  for  bait  T— A.  Xo. 

Q.  When  squids  are  taken,  I  believe  that  they  are  salted  ?— A.  They 
are  put  up  in  ice  and  kept  fresh. 

Q.  They  are  kept  frozen  f — A.  Tes. 

Q.  Do  they  keep  a  supply  of  them  on  hand  f — O,  no.  I  understand, 
however;  that  this  is  done  in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  How  much  of  these  supplies  are  sold,  on  the  average,  by  your  i)eo- 
pie  to  American  vessels ;  how  much  does  it  cost  such  a  vessel  to  refit 
for  another  voyage  in  your  ports  T — A.  I  do  not  know.  They  generally 
want  barrels  and  salt;  these  are  the  principal  things. 

Q.  Can  you  give  an  estimate  regarding  their  cost? — A.  Not  very 
well. 

Q.  Do  they  buy  flour  ? — A.  They  generally  have  flour  enough  with 
them,  but  they  will  want  butter  and  sugar. 

Q.  Will  they  have  enough  pork  and  molasses  and  other  ship's  stores 
on  hand  f — A.  My  experience  regarding  a  vessel  which  is  now  fitting 
out  at  my  wharf,  was  this :  she  took  two  strips  of  pork. 

Q.  She  had  a  suflBciency  on  hand  f — A.  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  The  supplies  furnished  do  not  amount  to  much  f — A.  No. 

Q.  I  suppose  they  are  not  so  liberal  when  they  are  doing  poorly  iu 
their  fishing?— A.  No. 

Q.  This  is  one  of  the  troubles  in  this  regard  ? — A.  1  fancy  so. 

Q.  When  the  business  was  good  and  things  were  thriving, "  hum- 
ming," as  they  sometimes  say,  did  they  not  buy  a  good  many  supplies! 
—A.  I  suspect  that  they  did.    I  was  not  in  the  business  then. 

Q.  Was  that  not  within  your  own  knowledge? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  They  then  bought  fresh  provisions  pretty  freely,  did  they  not?— 
A.  They  are  not  the  people  to  buy  fresh  provisions.  You  can  hardly 
sell  them  fresh  beef.    They  are  not  English  enough  to  buy  it. 

Q.  Did  they  not  buy  a  good  many  clothes  ? — A.  No ;  but  of  late  years. 
I  think,  they  have  purchased  to  a  small  extent  clothing,  more  than  used 
to  be  the  case.  The  clothing  here  is  usually  not  fashionable  enough  for 
Yankee  sailors  when  at  home.  When  I  first  went  fishing  I  could  not 
save  much  money,  because  such  clothing  cost  a  considerable  amount. 

Q.  Do  not  these  fishermen  leave  a  good  deal  of  money  among  your 
traders  or  drafts  on  Gloucester,  most  of  which,  1  dare  say,  are  paid  f— 
A.  They  leave  drafts  for  what  they  get. 

Q.  And  that  does  not  amount  to  a  great  deal  ? — A.  No. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Gil 


Q.  How  does  it  bappen,  then,  that  so  roao.y  people  engage  in  the  basi- 
0688 f  It  innat  have  been  profitable  once  T — A.  There  are  net  very  many 
who  engage  in  it.  I  knew  Port  Malgrave  when  three  or  I'oar  carried  it 
on,  but  they  are  now  all  gone. 

Q,  Wby  f— A.  They  have  failed. 

Q,  Whnt  made  them  fail  ? — A.  The  American  trade. 

Q.  Did  this  trade  fall  off?  What  was  the  cause  f — A.  It  was  dne  to  their 
coin|)etition  with  one  another  and  the  consequeut  retlaction  in  prices. 
The  Ainericans  would  go  from  one  store  to  another  and  say,  **  If  you 
doD't  do  80  and  so,  Mr.  So  and  so  will,"  and  thus  they  secuied  reductions 
in  the  price  of  goods. 

Q.  Tbey  are  sharp  traders,  I  suppose  ? — A.  Yea,  a  trader  would  say, 
"So  and  so  is  not  going  to  get  to  the  windward  of  me,"  and  comply,  ex- 
pecting to  secure  their  trade  the  following  year,  but  then  they  would 
|)erhaps  go  to  a  third  trader.  This  is  the  way  in  which  they  have  mau- 
aged  in  my  experience. 

Q.  Then  yoa  think  that  it  is  a  mistake  for  your  people  to  go  into  this 
business? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  they  begin  to  make  that  mistake  at  Guysborough  T — A. 
There,  as  I  said  before,  we  have  not  engaged  in  the  busines;}.  The 
Paints  have  money,  but  they  have  never  engaged  in  the  American  trade. 
Tbey  are  the  only  men  in  the  Strait  of  Ganso  who  have  much  money. 

Q.  Do  they  not  advertise  fishing  supplies,  &c.,  for  sale  f — A.  Of 
course.  They  have  always  been  so  engaged  in  business,  supplying  our 
own  fishermen. 

Q.  How  do  they  advertise  for  the  benefit  of  your  fishermen  in  the 
Cape  Ann  Advertiser  ? — A.  They  advertise  merely  for  the  sake  of  seli> 
log  ice. 

Q.  Ice  and  Hshing  supplies  ? — A.  The  inducement  held  out  in  that 
advertisement  i8  ice. 

Q.  They  do  not  want  the  other  trade  ?— A.  No.  One  of  the  Paint» 
in  particular  will  not  carry  on  trade  with  the  Americans.  He  has  said 
that  he  bas  always  lost  money  when  he  has  touched  this  business  at  all^ 
and  bo  will  have  nothing  to  do  with  it. 

Q.  Uave  you  mentioned  all  the  things  thpt  you  think  your  people  sell 
to  the  Americans  f  What  about  the  sale  of  ropes  and  hawsers  for 
rigging  and  refitting? — A.  They  always  have  those  articles  in  stock. 

Q.  Are  they  not  offered  for  sale  to  the  Americans  f — A.  No. 

Q.  What  do  yon  think  about  the  following  advertisement : 

The  Dnrtmonth  Ropework  Co.,  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia  (Dominion  of  Canada),  mannfaetnra 
with  quick  despatch  Manilla  fishing  hawsers  slightly  tarred  or  white,  of  any  sise  or  length 
in  one  piece  up  to  120  fathoms. 

Vessels  losing  their  hawsers  upon  the  Banks  can  be  supplied  in  Halifax  more  qnickly, 
sDil  at  a  lower  price  than  in  any  other  port ;  and  the  attention  of  outfitters  is  solicited  to 
Hslifax  prices  when  they  are  fitting  ont  with  new  hawsers. 

tjf  Be  particular  to  have  hawsers  of  the  Dartmouth  Ropework  Co.'s  make. 

(T'AII  other  descriptions  of  tarred  and  Manilla  cordage  in  stock  are  made  to  order. 

Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  January  3, 1877. 

A.  That  is  correct  enough. 

Q.  Things  of  that  kind  are  cheaper,  with  the  exception  of  bait,  here 
than  iu  the  United  States  f — A.  I  do  not  know  about  that. 

Q.  All  things  required  for  fishing  purposes  are  cheaper  here  than  in 
the  States,  are  they  not  f — A.  I  do  not  know  that  this  is  the  case. 

Q.  Can  yon  not  build  fishing- vessels  here  from  25  to  40  per  cent,  more 
cheaply  than  in  the  States  f— A.  I  believe  so. 

Q.  That  is  because  everything  that  enters  into  the  eqnipment  of  a 
vessel  is  ever  so  much  cheaper  here,  such  as  ropes,  and  spars,  and 


612 


AWARD  OF   THE  FISHEST  COMMISSION. 


anohors,  and  lines,  and  everything  of  tkat  sortf — A.  Yes;  tbis  is  the 
cane  to  some  ex  rent. 

Q.  All  these  things  are  cheaper  here t— A.  I  would  not  say  that  alt 
are  cheaper. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  collector  at  Port  MulgraveT-i-A.  His  name  ig 
David  Murray. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  be  is  coming  hei«  T — A.  I  do  not,  I  am 
aare. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  me,  if  you  (»tn,  what  proportion  of  the  American 
Teasels  that  come  through  the  Strait  of  Canso,  and  make  two  trips,  land 
their  cargoes  somewhere  in  the  Strait  of  Oanso  f — A.  I  would  say  that 
two-thirds  of  them  do  so,  when  mackerel  are  plentifiil. 

Q.  When  mackerel  are  scarce,  they  do  not  get  two  full  fares  a  season,  of 
^wurse.  This  has  not  been  the  case  within  the  last  two  years,  I  sap- 
jiosef — A.  I  do  not  know  that  mackerel  have  been  really  scarcer  during 
the  last  two  years  than  previously  in  the  bay;  but  the  American 
fishermen  have  caught  a  good  mary  on  their  own  coast  during  tbe  last 
year  or  two,  and  that  is  something  exceptional  in  ray  experience.  Per- 
haps this  is  the  reason  why  they  did  not  come  over  here  in  such  num- 
bers as  formerly. 

Q.  Do  you  happen  to  know  how  they  have  caught  them,  and  wby  it 
is  that  they  have  been  catching  so  many  more  fish  during  this  period 
than  was  formerly  the  case  on  their  own  coast? — A.  I  could  not  give 
the  reason  for  the  fish  going  on  their  own  coast,  but  I  know  that  they 
have  been  there. 

Q.  The  trouble  used  to  be  that  they  would  not  always  bite  there!— A. 
The,^  have  caught  them  in  seines. 

Q.  With  the  purse  seine  they  can  catch  fish  whether  these  are  inclined 
to  bite  or  notf — A.  Yes;  if  the  fish  show  themselves. 

Q.  That  is  the  reason  why  they  fish  so  much  more  at  home?— A. 
During  last  year,  yes. 

Q.  That  is  the  reason  for  the  growing  decline  in  tbe  number  of  Ameri- 
can vessels  that  come  up  hereY — A.  For  tbe  last  year,  yes. 

Q.  You  think  that  three-quarters  or  two-thirds  of  them  land  their 
cargoes  at  the  Gut  of  GansoY — A.  About  two-thirds  of  them  do  so. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  them  refit  Y — A.  All  those  that  land  would 
have  to  refit  partially. 

Q.  And  wherever  they  do  so  they  have  to  purchase  their  supplies  of 
your  people  Y — A.  Of  course. 

Q.  Then  whenever  the  fishing  business  is  prosperous  a  great  deal  of 
trade  must  thus  be  furnished  Y — A.  This  would  be  the  case  for  one  or 
two  persons. 

Q.  And  if  too  many  of  your  people  go  into  it  the  usual  results  would 
follow  Y— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  once  went  ood-fishing  in  an  American  vessel  to  the  Banks  t— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  make  more  than  one  trip  that  year  Y — A.  No. 

Q.  On  what  Banks  did  you  fish  Y — A.  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Will  yon  kindly  state  of  what  the  outfitting  of  an  American  vessel 
in  the  spring  generally  consists  Y— A.  Of  flour,  pork,  lard,  butter,  salt, 
barrels,  bait,  hooks,  and  lines. 

Q.  Do  the  fishermen  on  board  get  ontfittings  Y — ^A.  The  Americans 
ship  a  good  many  men  down  at  our  place  now.  Of  course,  tbe  latter 
ean  be  obtained  at  lower  rates  than  is  the  case  with  men  in  the  States, 
and  these  men  take  outfittings  to  a  certain  extent. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


618 


Q.  Is  the  trade  which  is  thus  occasioned  by  the  whole  American 
fleet  satlicient  to  pay  more  thau  a  fair  remaaeratiou  to  the  houses  in 
tbe  gat  T — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Tbe  total  profits  which  coald  be  made  out  of  this  refitting  and  fur- 
Disking  of  American  vessels  would  not  be  more  than  s'ulUcient  for  two 
or  three  houses  ? — A.  If  it  was  not  for  the  other  trade  we  have,  it  would 
not  maintain  us  at  all.  I  suppose  that  150  or  more  sail  have  gone 
through  in  the  gut,  and  when  I  loft  quite  a  number  of  the  American 
vesHels  were  anchored  along  the  shore  at  different  places,  and  out  of  all 
tbeHe  vessels  only  one  or  two  did  anything  on  our  side  iu  the  way  of  fit- 
ting out. 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  spoke  of  a  great  deal  of  decrease  as  apparent  in  our 
isheries  here.  Have  our  fisheries  greatly  decreased  f  Do  yo*^  call  the 
results  of  this  year  a  decrease  from  those  of  previous  years  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  of  this  year*s  prospects ! — A.  It  is  going  to  be 
a  good  year.    The  prosfiects  are  excellent. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  case  on  tbe  American  coast  this  year,  judging 
from  the  information  which  yon  have  received  from  American  captains  ? — 
A.  According  to  tbe  Americans  there  is  no  fishing  on  their  coast  at  al  1 
this  year.  Some  of  them  iiold  me  the  other  day  that  if  they  did  not  get 
any  more  on  their  shores  the  whole  of  the  fleet  would  come  up  here. 

Q.  So  this  year  there  will  not  be  a  repetition  of  1875  and  1876  f — A. 
No,  sir ;  I  am  sure  it  will  not. 

Q.  And  tbe  Americans  have  to  come  to  our  waters  for  fish  Y — A.  If 
there  are  none  caught  on  the  American  coast,  they  must. 

Q.  You  were  asked  a  number  of  questions  about  Prospect  Bay,  and 
I  Doticed  that  in  your  answers  you  did  not  seem  to  give  accurate  infor- 
mation ;  do  you  know  anything  about  it  at  all  ? — A.  I  know  that  there 
is  SDcb  a  bay. 

Q.  Have  you  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  trade  of  its  people  ? — 
A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  there  7 — A.  I  have  passed  there  and  just  know 
where  it  is. 

Q.  You  have  no  further  knowledge  of  its  people  or  trade  beyond  the 
fact  that  yon  know  there  is  such  a  bay  ? — A.  I  have  heard  of  Ohristian, 
who  lives  there. 

Q.  You  do  not  profess  to  know  anything  about  Prospect  Bay  Y — A. 
Beyond  its  iK>sition  I  do  not. 

Q.  Some  questions  were  asked  about  Lawrence,  in  Port  Malgrave;  is 
he  a  successor  to  McKeen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  McEeen  was  engaged  for  many  years  in  the  American  trade  f — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  he  become  bankrupt? — A.  About  three  years  ago. 

Q.  And  this  Lawrence,  whose  advertisement  was  read,  is  his  succes- 
sor?—A.  Yes. 

Q.  McKeen,  I  believe,  was  tho  American  consul  there  ? — A.  He  is  so 
now. 

Q.  And  he  had  the  bulk  of  the  American  trade  ? — A.  He  did  a  great 
deal  of  it.    He  had  the  place  all  to  himself. 

Q.  And  the  result  was  bankruptcy.  You  spoke  of  the  effect  of  this 
trade  on  our  people ;  can  you  give  the  Commission  an  idea  as  to  what 
has  been  the  effect  of  the  prosecution  of  the  Bay  fishery  by  the  Ameri- 
cans, with  respect  to  their  prosperity  and  the  prosperity  of  the  town  of 
Gloucester,  which  appears  to  be  the  chief  outfitting  portf  Has  it 
prospered  by  reason  of  this  trade  or  been  prejudiced  f — A.  I  think  that 


614 


AWABD   01'  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


tbey  have  very  largely  prospered  by  it.  Of  coarse  you  can  see  that  in 
the  class  of  vessels  they  have. 

Q.  Have  yoa  a  pretty  intimate  knowledge  concerning  these  matteriT— 
A.  I  have,  indeed.  We  can  tell  a  Gloucester  vessel  whenever  we  look  at 
it  They  are  of  a  differout  style  from  most  other  vessels.  When  I  6r8t 
went  to  the  United  States  Gloncester  was  a  small  place,  but  it  iH  qait« 
a  place  now.  Tbey  own  a  great  many  vessels  there ;  and  moat  of  these 
vessels  have  frequented  the  Bay  of  Chalenrs.  So  of  course  tbey  must 
have  prospered  by  it,  since  they  have  such  a  large  fleet  and  such  Hue 
vessels. 

Q.  One  witness  said  that  Gloucester  had  been  built  up  by  this  fish- 
ing business ;  is  that  your  opinion  t — A.  Of  course.  This  must  be  the 
oase.  Tbey  do  some  other  business,  but  their  principal  fishing  occapa- 
tion  is  mackerel  fishing,  in  the  greater  part.  They  would  not  put  one 
of  these  fine  schooners  years  ago  in  the  cod-fishing  business ;  tbey  were 
all  engaged  in  the  prosecution  of  the  mackerel  fishery  in  the  Bay  ot 
Ohaleurs. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  Tou  do  not  happen  to  know  how  the  number  of  vessels  owned  at 
Gloucester  compares  with  the  number  they  held  a  lew  years  ago  ?— A. 
I  think  that  the  number  is  about  the  same. 

Q.  Has  the  number  not  fallen  oft  one  quarter! — A.  do  not  think  it. 

Q.  How  recently  were  you  there? — A.  I  was  tberr,  I  think,  in  1870. 

Q.  Seven  years  ago  ? — A.  Yes  ^  but  we  see  their  vessels  every  day. 
We  are  in  continual  communication  with  them. 

No.  19. 

Jambs  McKay,  deputy  inspector  of  pickled  fish  at  Port  Mulgrave, 
was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
•worn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  W^hat  is  your  occupation ! — Answer.  I  have  been  pretty 
much  all  my  life-time  engaged  in  fishing;  but  during  the  last  two  or 
three  years  I  have  been  engaged  in  the  inspection  of  pickled  fish. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  acquainted  with  the  fishing  business  !— 
A.  Some  forty  years. 

Q.  That  would  be  since  1837.  In  what  way  did  you  commence  fish- 
inff  in  1837  f — A.  My  first  trip  was  in  an  American  vessel  to  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands,  in  the  Bay  of  Saint  Lawrence  for  herring.  We  took  a 
a  load  of  them  to  the  United  States,  and  returned  in  search  of  mackerel. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  the  name  of  that  American  vessel  T— A.  It  was 
the  Porpoise. 

Q.  Where  did  she  iiail  from  ? — A.  From  Isle  Haute. 

Q.  Off  the  coast  of  Maine? — A.  Yes;  close  to  Deer  Island. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage  ? — A.  About  60  tons. 

Q.  How  did  you  ship  ?— A.  I  shipped  at  the  head  of  Guysborough 
Bay.    I  belong  to  Guysborough.    I  worked  on  wages  by  the  month. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  ? — A.  To  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  What  did  you  get  ? — A.  A  load  of  herring. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  them  ? — A.  We  took  them  borne  to  the 
United  States  and  landed  them. 

Q.  In  bulk?-.A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  land  tbem  ?— A.  We  landed  part  of  tbem  on  Isle 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


615 


Haote,  and  the  balanoe  op  the  PeoobBoot  River,  near  Castine  or  Barnt 

IftlAOd. 

Q.  Did  that  conelode  your  fishing  for  that  year  f— A.  No;  we  oame 
back  Hiid  went  into  the  bay  for  maclcerel. 

Q.  When  did  yon  retnrn  T— A.  Sometime  in  Juiy. 

Q.  It  was  early  in  the  spring  when  you  went  for  the  herring  f — A.  It 
was  the  last  of  April  or  the  first  of  May,  as  well  as  I  recollect.  I  think 
it  wa8  abont  the  first  of  May. 

Q.  You  got  back  to  the  gulf  abont  the  first  of  July  f— A.  It  was 
gometime  in  July. 

Q.  Yon  were  in  the  same  schooner  f— A.  Tes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  f — A.  Mostly  around  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  At  the  bight  of  the  island  f — A.  Yes.  We  fished  for  a  good  part 
of  the  time  from  five  to  fifteen  miles  from  East  Point. 

Q.  You  kept  inshore  f — A.  Y^es;  close  inshore. 

Q.  What  fish  did  you  catch  that  trip  f — A.  Mackerel.  I  think  we 
paclced  out  IGO  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  with  them  T — A.  We  packed  them  out  at  Isle 
Haute,  Maine. 

Q.  Did  you  go  back  again  that  yenrt — A.  "So.  I  fished  on  the  Amer* 
ican  coast  dnring  the  balance  of  the  year. 

Q.  How  did  you  succeed  there  ? — A.  We  did  very  poorly  there  for  the 
balance  of  the  season. 

Q.  Had  the  mackerel  ceased,  so  far  back  as  that,  to  frequent  the 
American  shore  f — A.  Not  that  I  know  of ;  but  I  know  that  we  did  not 
get  many  there  that  season.  We  fished  until  sometime  abont  the  first 
of  November. 

Q.  What  is  the  best  season  for  fishermen  on  the  American  coast  when 
there  are  mackerel  in  that  quarter  f — A.  I  think  that  July  is  about  as 
good  a  mouth  as  they  have  any  time  in  the  year. 

Q.  Is  there  any  fall  fishing  when  mackerel  are  to  be  found  there  at 
all  f— A.  They  do  catch  some  mackerel  in  the  fall.  We  caught  some 
that  fall— about  40  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  make  your  next  venture  ? — A.  I  then  knocked  off 
fishing  fur  a  few  years  and  went  to  sea. 

Q.  Yun  left  off  fishing  for  two  years  and  went  to  seaf — A.  I  left  off 
fishing  for  about  three  years. 

Q.  What  did  yon  do  then  f — A.  I  afterwards  fished  on  the  American 
coast. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  the  name  of  the  vessel  in  which  you  were ! — A. 
It  was  the  Freedom.  She  belonged  to  Lubeo  or  Eastport.  I  think  she 
was  from  Lubec. 

Q.  That  is  situated  close  beside  Eastport  ? — A.  It  is  a  few  miles  from 
Eastport. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  that  year  in  that  vessel  ? — A.  In  the  Bay  of 
Fuiidy— about  Grand  Manau  Island,  and  in  that  neighborhood. 

Q.  Grand  Manan  Island  is  only  a  short  distance  from  Eastport  ? — A. 
Yes.    I,  however,  forget  the  number  of  miles  between  them. 

Q.  You  can  see  Grand  Manau  from  Eastport  ? — A.  Yes ;  plainly  on  a 
clear  day. 

Q.  Grand  Manan  is  a  British  island? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  Little  Manan  is  an  American  Island! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  close  inshore  wheu  fishing  f — A.  We  went  close  in* 
shore  tor  bait.    I  was  then  cod-fishing. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  for  or  buy  baitf — A.  We  used  to  catch  some  and  buy 
some. 


616 


▲WABO  OF  THE  FISHERY   C0MIII8BI0V. 


Q.  Where  would  yoa  catch  codflsh  f— A.  Always  offshore. 

Q.  How  far  off  from  itT— A.  Probably  from  7  to  0  miloH. 

Q.  You  fished  around  Oraud  Mauan  aud  a  long  the  New  Rrutiswtck 
coast  T — A.  We  fished  off  Grand  Manau,  and  right  to  the  west  of  it. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  New  firuuswiuk  shore  T— A.  I  could  not  tell 
you. 

Q.  If  you  went  within  0  miles  of  it,  you  must  have  been  pretty  near 
the  New  Brunswick  shore  f — A.  We  fished  around  Grand  Manan  and 
right  square  off  in.  the  bay.  We  were  running  into  the  ocean  as  it 
were. 

Q.  You  got  bait  inshore  f— A.  Yes :  right  in  the  harbors ;  we  used  to 
obtain  most  of  the  bait  from  the  inhabitants  on  shore  out  of  weirs. 

Q.  These  weirs  are  fastened  in  the  mud  T— A.  Yea ;  right  in  the  har- 
bors. 

Q.  Without  that  bait,  yon  could  not  have  fished  f — A.  We  had  to  get 
it  somewhere,  and  this  was  the  most  convenient  and  best  place  for  the 
purpose. 

Q.  Where  else  did  you  go  that  year  f— A.  After  I  knocked  off  cod- 
fishing  that  year  I  went  to  sea  again. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  the  following  year  f — A.  I  then  came  back  and 
fished  for  mackerel. 

Q.  This  I  suppose  was  about  1842  or  1843  f^A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  for  mackerel  f — A.  In  the  Bay  of  Fuudy,  or 
rather  we  tried  for  the  fish  there. 

Q.  Where  f — A.  All  around  Grand  Manan,  and  up  in  the  bay  apiece. 
I  fished  up  as  for  as  Isle  Haute  in  the  bay. 

Q.  Is  this  the  same  Isle  Haute  that  you  previously  mentioned  T— A. 
No ;  it  is  another. 

Q.  Yon  fished  off  Quaco  Ledge  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  is  in  New  Brunswick  territory  ? — A.  Yes.  I  also  fished  for 
mackerel  off  an  island,  which  I  think  is  called  Fishermen's  Island.  It 
is  an  island  at  high  water. 

Q.  This  is  on  the  New  Brunswick  shore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  any  there  f — A.  We  got  a  few.  I  also  fished  off 
above  Cape  Sharp,  and  off  Fishermen's  Cove,  but  secured  no  fish  there, 
however.  We  did  not  stop  long  there,  but  came  back  and  tried  around 
Grand  Manan  Island.    We  then  went  in  and  I  left  the  vessel. 

Q.  Why  did  you  always  keep  inshore  about  the  island  instead  of  fish- 
ing out  in  the  bay  f — A.  Because  we  found  more  fish  there.  We  fished 
around  the  northern  part  of  Grand  Manan  Island,  in  British  waters. 

Q.  Could  you  find  mackerel  out  in  the  open  bay  at  all  f — A.  We  have 
risen  them  out  there,  but  none  to  speak  of. 

Q.  The  best  fisheries  are  inshore  around  the  islands  you  have  men- 
tioned ? — A.  I  could  not  say  much  about  Grand  Manan  Island  in  this 
respect.  I  only  fished  there  for  part  of  the  season,  but  we  got  most  of 
the  fish  inshore. 

Q.  Did  yon  fish  any  more  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  t— A.  No ;  I  went  on 
the  American  coast  the  next  year. 

Q.  Were  you  successful  f — A.  No.  The  vessel  in  which  I  was  did 
nothing. 

Q.  How  did  the  others  do  t— A.  I  guess  that  some  got  mackerel. 

Q.  Yon  got  nothing  you  mean  f — A.  We  got  no  fish  to  speak  of. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  the  vessel  in  which  you  were  f — A.  Some- 
where about  40  tons. 

Q.  Can  you  recollect  her  name T— A.  No;  she  was  a  pinkey. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


617 


Q.  Aud  you  ouly  caught  very  few  barrels  f — A.  Yes ;  aud  not  enough 
to  pay  expenses. 

Q,  Do  you  remember  how  many  you  caught  ? — A.  It  was  probably  35 
barrels.  I  think  we  were  out  for  about  two  months.  Wo  did  uot'get 
more  than  35  barrels. 

Q.  That  would  not  pay  for  two  months'  time  T — A.  No:  we  di<I  not  pay 
expeuHes. 

Q.  Was  that  a  fair  average  for  the  other  vessels  on  the  Amt^rioan 
coast  that  year  f — A.  I  can  only  speak  for  the  vessel  in  wliiuh  I  was. 
Some  of  the  others  caught  more,  and  some  caught  less. 

Q.  As  far  as  you  know,  yours  was  a  fair  average  catch  f — A.  It  might 
have  been. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  it  was  not  ? — A.  I  know  nothing  to  the  con- 
trary. I  left  before  the  season  was  over,  aud  came  over  to  the  Gut  ot 
Canso. 

Q.  Before  the  fishing  season  was  over  7 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  the  same  pinkey  f — A.  No ;  but  in  a  coasting  vessel. 

Q.  You  did  not  come  to  fish  ? — A.  No ;  I  came  home  to  Guysborough. 

(j.  You  did  no  more  fishing  that  year? — A.  No;  not  in  the  Bay  of 
St.  Lawrence  that  year  or  for  a  few  years  after.  I  went  next  fishing 
along  the  Nova  Scotia  shore,  in  boats. 

Q.  On  the  shore  of  the  gulf  f — A.  No;  I  went  to  the  Cape  of  Canso, 
and  crossed  over  to  St.  Peter's,  Cape  Breton,  aud  fished  around  there. 

Q.  Was  boat  fishing  largely  carried  on  at  that  timet — A.  Yes;  a  great 
(leal  of  net  fishing  in  boats  was  then  done. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  in  the  nets  ? — A.  Fat  herring  and  mackerel 
chiefly. 

Q.  Did  yon  not  fish  in  the  bay  for  mackerel  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Was  this  a  paying  business  as  far  back  as  that  time  ? — A.  It  paid 
pretty  well  generally.    Some  years  it  paid  very  well. 

Q.  Did  the  Americans  interfere  with  any  of  the  boat-fishing  f — A. 
Not  there,  about  that  coast. 

Q.  W^bat  did  you  do  afterwards  f — A.  I  fished  there  for  a  few  years, 
and  then  I  went  to  the  Strait  of  Canso,  where  I  now  live,  and  engaged 
in  the  collection  of  light  dues. 

Q.  This  is  at  Port  Mulgrave  ? — A.  Yes;  I  went  for  one  trip  in  an 
Americaj  vessel  to  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  got  a  good  load  of  her- 
ring. I  then  engaged  in  the  collection  of  light  dues,  and  was  in  the 
service  of  the  collector  of  these  duties  for  three  summers.  This  is  now 
some  18  years  ago. 

Q.  W^bere  was  that  ? — A.  At  Port  Mulgrave.  I  collected  light  money 
from  the  fishing  vessels  which  ]>as8ed  through  the  strait. 

Q.  In  what  year  was  that  f — A.  I  think  it  was  some  time  in  the  1S50 
decade. 

Q.  Was  it  before  the  Keciprocity  Treaty  came  into  operation— that  is, 
before  1864  ?— A.  During  the  existence  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  I  waa 
io  the  light-collector's  boat. 

Q.  Had  yon  been  so  engaged  previously  f — A.  I  do  not  remember. 
I  am  not  certain  on  that  point. 

Q.  Was  it  your  business  to  coUact  those  duties  from  American  ves- 
sels passing  through  the  Strait  f — A.  It  was  our  duty  to  board  all  the 
Teasels  passing  through  the  Strait  of  Canso  that  we  could. 

Q.  Did  you  manage  to  board  them  all,  or  did  some  escape  during  the 
fog  and  the  night  T— A.  We  could  not  board  them  all. 

Q.  Why !— A.  Very  often  a  large  fleet  would  arrive.  I  have  seen 
probably  as  many  as  20  or  25  sailing  up  the  Strait  at  one  time  with  a 


618 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


fftir  wind.  We  might  board  foar  or  five  or  six  or  a  dozen  of  them  if  it 
was  not  very  windy,  but  the  rest  would  slip  along,  and  we  would  Dot  be 
able  to  see  them  afterwards.  We  could  not  board  tbetu  all  with  only 
one  boat. 

Q.  They  would  not  stop  ? — A.  Stop  t    No,  sir. 

Q.  Would  vessels  get  through  nnperceived  at  nighl  or  on  foggy  davsT 
— A.  I  dare  say  a  good  many  did.  Of  course,  during  the  summer  season 
you  can  see  these  vessels  coming  and  going  any  night. 

Q.  Practically,  is  it  possible  for  any  one  man  to  get  an  accurate  list 
of  the  vessels  that  pass  through  the  Out  of  Canso  in  any  one  given 
season  ? — A.  No  one  man  stationed  in  the  Out  of  Ganso  can  get  a  list  of 
all  the  vessels  that  go  through  there ;  to  do  so  is  a  moral  impossibility. 
He  canrot  do  it. 

Q.  Why! — A.  Because  they  go  tiiroughdnringthenightwhen  becannot 
see  them ;  this  is  done  when  it  is  pretty  dark  or  foggy,  and  sometimes 
during  a  gale  of  wind.  At  snch  times  he  cannot  see  who  or  what  they 
are.  eave  that  they  are  vessels;  such  a  gale  may  be  blowing  that  he 
dare  not  go  near  them  or  board  them.  I  have  seen  American  flshermen 
passing  through  during  a  heavy  breeze  going  northward  and  coming 
from  the  north. 

Q.  Then  your  opinion  is  that  practically  one  man,  or  several  for  that 
matter,  cannot  actually  get  a  correct  list  of  the  number  of  vessels  which 
pass  through  the  Out  f — A.  No.  That  is  my  opinion.  I  have  served 
three  summers  of  it  and  I  could  not  get  them  all. 

Q.  You  have  not  only  lived  there  for  18  or  19  years,  but  you  have 
also  passed  three  or  four  years  in  this  especial  business  ? — A.  Yes.  We 
bad  to  board  every  vessel  we  could  catch. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  during  these  three  summers  you  kept  an  accu- 
rate list  of  the  number  of  vessels  passing  through,  or  anything  like 
it  f — A.  We  did  not  board  all  of  them. 

Q.  You  only  kept  a  list  of  those  from  whom  you  collected  light- 
money  ? — A.  Yes ',  it  was  not  my  business  to  keep  a  list  of  the  names 
of  the  vessels. 

Q.  Did  many  American  vessels  come  into  the  Oulf  of  Saint  Law- 
rence during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average,  in  your  judgment,  tor  each  year  du- 
ring the  existence  of  the  Beciprocity  Treaty  ? — A.  Somewhere  about 
600. 

Q.  That  would  be  the  average  for  each  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  treaty  ended  in  186G,  and  you  say  that  from  1854  to  1866  the 
yearly  average  was  about  600  f — A.  That  is  my  calculation. 

Q.  You  observed  what  passed  as  accurately  as  most  men,  I  suppose, 
during  all  that  time.  Had  you  anything  to  do  with  the  fisheries  your- 
self during  any  portion  of  this  time  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  T— A.  In  1861  or  '62, 1  went  into  the  bay  after 
mackerel  in  an  American  schooner. 

Q.  And  up  to  1861  or  '62,  do  I  understand  that  you  were  engaged  io 
the  collection  of  light-dues? — A.  Yes;  up  to  1861, 1  think. 

Q.  And  then  you  went  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  f — A.  I  went  in  an  English  vessel  in  the  bay  for  codfish. 

Q.  Where  T — A.  We  went  over  to  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  How  did  you  succeed  f — A.  We  got  a  trip  of  codfish.  I  then  went 
fishing  for  mackerel,  after  we  had  landed  the  codfish. 

Q.  What  time  did  you  land  the  codfish  ? — A.  In  August. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  any  cod  within  the  three-mile  limit  f — A.  Yes. 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


619 


Q.  How  many  f— A.  We  caa^ht  about  130  qaintals  in  the  bay  be> 
tween  Cape  Alrifrht  and  Entry  Island. 

Q.  Where  is  Pleasant  Bay  f — A.  On  the  eastern  side  of  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands. 

Q.  Ton  caught  them  in  this  bay? — A.  Yes;  in  10  fathoms  of  water. 

Q.  Close  inshore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  did  yon  catch  ? — A.  About  130  quintals. 

Q.  What  was  your  whole  fare? — A.  About  400  quintals. 

Q,  You  caught  more  than  one-fourth  there  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  did  yon  get  bait;  did  you  fish  for  itf— A.  Yes;  we  set 
nets  ou  shore  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  Had  you  to  land  to  do  sof— A.  Yes;  the  inhabitants  informed 
us  where  to  set  nets  to  secure  bait. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  to  procure  baitt — A.  We  anchored  in  the  bay 
and  tried  for  fish,  and  if  we  caught  any  wo  staid  thv'jre  for  a  few  days 
until  the  fish  struck  ofif. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  many  outside  Y — A.  We  obtained  the  balance  of 
the  trip  outside.  We  obtained  about  130  quintals  outside,  between  3 
and  4  miles  from  Deadman's  Island,  and  we  caught  part  of  the  trip  off 
Gape  Kiiowles  and  Pleasant  Bay. 

Q.  Inshore? — A.  No;  offshore. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  secure  ? — A.  The  balance  of  the  trip. 

Q.  Where  did  you  land  that  cargo  ? — A.  We  came  over  to  Little 
Canso  and  sold  them  there. 

Q.  Where  did  youthen  go? — A.  We  went  back  and  fitted  out  for 
the  bay. 

Q.  For  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish? — A.  Chiefly  about  Margaree,  Port  Hood, 
find  East  Point. 

Q.  Around  the  Cape  Breton  shore  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  at  Cheticamp. 

Q.  Inshore  ? — A.  Bight  inshore. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  good  fare  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  ? — A.  1  almost  forget  now ;  but  we  had  a  very 
good  trip. 

Q.  What  was  your  tonnage? — A.  I  think  it  was  about  60  tons. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  full  cargo  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  obtained  what  we  fitted 
up  for— about  260  barrels,  I  think. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  through  that  trip? — A.  It  was  in  the  last  of  the 
season  that  we  knocked  off;  I  think  it  was  the  last  part  of  October. 

Q.  During  that  year,  which  yon  think  was  about  1861,  how  many 
American  vessels,  in  your  judgment,  frequented  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Law- 
rence f — A.  Quite  a  large  fleet  came  to  the  bay  that  year. 

Q.  The  average  would  still  be  about  600? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Supposing  you  arecorrect  as  to  the  year,  where  did  you  go  in  1862  f 
—A.  I  went  in  an  American  schooner  that  year. 

Q.  Where  did  she  hail  from  ? — A.  Gloucester. 

Q.  What  was  her  name  ? — A.  The  Marshal  Ney. 

Q.  Where  did  you  ship — at  Gloucester  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How,  on  shares  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  ?— A.  To  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  other  parts 
of  the  Bay  of  Saint  Lawrence. 

Q.  You  came  through  the  Gut  of  Canso  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  light-dues  or  not? — A.  In  every  vessel  in  which  I 
was  the  light-dues  were  always  paid  when  demanded. 

Q.  Were  they  demanded,  or  did  you  get  through  without  paying  ? — 
A.  I  do  not  know  that  these  dues  were  then  collected. 


620 


AWABD  OF   THE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Have  these  dues  been  collected  since  1861, 1862,  or  1863  T—a. 
License  fees  have  been  since  collected. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  on  that  trip  1— A.  We  obtained  a  trip  of 
mackerel  pretty  quickly.    We  secured  somewhere  about  250  barrels. 

Q.  Around  Prince  Edward  Island  or  Cape  Breton  f — A.  Parlly  about 
Prince  Edward  Island,  but  we  obtained  the  heft  of  them  over  aboot 

Q.  That  is  off  Gape  Breton  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Close  to  the  shore ! — A.  Yes ;  pretty  close ;  so  close  that  we  would 
sometimes  be  and  anchor  among  the  boats. 

Q.  Were  all  your  fish  caught  within  two  miles  of  the  shore  ?— A.  A 
good  many  were  taken  within  half  a  mile  of  the  shore. 

Q.  And  none  of  them  were  caught  three  miles  from  the  shore  f— A. 
None  of  that  trip  were  taken  offshore. 

Q.  When  did  the  trip  end  ? — Q.  I  think  we  got  in  somewhere  about 
the  first  week  of  September.  We  landed  them  at  Port  Mulgrave,  fitt«(l 
out  again,  and  went  back  to  the  bay.  We  landed  250  barrels  to  beseut 
home,  while  we  went  back  to  the  bay. 

Q.  If  you  had  had  to  return  to  Gloucester,  could  you  have  got  back 
that  season  f — A.  We  could ;  but  I  suppose  that  we  would  have  very 
likely  lost  a  trip  by  it. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  when  you  got  back  to  the  bay  ! — A.  About 
the  island ;  we  fished  at  first  along  the  head  of  the  island,  and  then  we 
crossed  over  to  Margaree  and  Chetticamp ;  we  also  caught  some  fish 
about  Port  Hood  and  Cape  George.  We  ran  over  to  the  Magdalea 
Islands  once  or  twice,  but  were  blown  away  from  there. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  inshore  all  the  time  ?— A.  Yes ;  pretty  much  all  tbe 
time.  We  ran  across  from  one  island  to  another,  and,  en  route^  we  very 
often  heaved  to.    We  might  then  probably  catch  a  few,  or  get  none. 

Q.  Practically,  you  caught  all  the  fish  inshore? — A.  We  obtained  two- 
thirds  of  that  trip  inshore. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  that  trip  ? — A.  260  barrels. 

Q.  WWt  did  you  then  do  I — A.  We  went  home. 

Q.  Thiis  was,  I  suppose,  late  in  October  ? — A.  It  was  the  last  of  Oc- 
tober.     \ 

Q.  Whaidid  yon  do  next  ? — A.  The  following  year  I  went  in  an  Eng- 
lish schooner,  called  the  Topaz,  from  our  place. 

Q.  How  did  you  succeed  that  year  ?  Were  you  fishing  for  mack- 
erel ? — A.  We  went  for  codfish,  and  proceeded  in  the  first  place  to  tbe 
Western  Banks;  we  afterward  went  northward.  We  fished  chiefly  off 
Bank  Bradley  and  Bank  Orphan,  and  in  the  mouth  of  the  Bay  of  Cba- 
leurs,  near  Caraquette.  We  used  to  have  to  run  to  Caraquette  for  bait 
We  obtained  a  small  trip  of  codfish,  and  came  home  some  time  towanl 
the  last  of  August.    We  landed  them  and  fitted  out  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  the  bulk  of  that  small  trip  of  codfish  ?— A. 
Offshore— on  Bank  Orphan. 

Q.  On  the  Banks  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  land  them  ? — A.  At  Harbor  Bouche,  I  think. 

Q.  Did  you  afterward  go  to  the  gulf  f — A.  We  fitted  out  for  mack- 
erel, and  came  back  to  the  bay. 

Q.  How  did  you  succeed  ? — A.  We  obtained  a  very  good  trip. 

Q.  When  did  you  complete  the  trip  ? — A.  In  the  last  of  October. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  get  t — A.  400. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  your  vessel  f— A.  About  JO  tons,  English 
measurement. 


▲WARD  OF  THE   FISH£RT   COMMISSION. 


621 


Q.  Wbat  did  you  tben  dof — A.  Tbe  fish  were  shipped  to  Boston. 

Q.  Where  did  .yon  catch  them  f — A.  We  secured  a  part  of  them  at 
Margaree  and  Ghetticamp,  and  some  abont  the  island  and  Gape  Bear. 

Q.  All  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  f — A.  The  balance  we  obtained 
between  Margaree  and  East  Point,  oflfsbore.  We  secnred  abont  two- 
thirds  of  tbe  trip  inshore. 

Q.  The  rest  you  think  were  caught  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit  t — 
A.  We  obtained  some  outside  of  this  limit. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  that  you  caught  one-third  of  the  trip  or  less  at  that 
distance  from  the  shore  T — A.  I  guess  that  we  got  about  one-third  of 
that  trip  outside. 

Q.  And  could  you  have  done  so  had  yon  not  had  the  privilege  of  fol- 
lowing the  fish  inshore  and  bringing  tbem  out  again  f — A.  Wbat  I  call 
catching  fish  inshore  is  when  we  run  close  to  the  shore  and  induce  a 
school  of  mackerel  to  follow  us  out.  Though  we  then  drift  off  for  10 
miles,  I  call  that  inshore-fishing,  because  we  fetch  the  fish  from  tbe 
shore.  And  if  we  raise  a  school  of  mackerel  o,  6,  or  8  miles  from  the 
land,  I  call  that  fishing  offshore. 

Q.  Wbat  did  you  do  next  ?  Had  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  expired  at  the 
time  yon  made  the  trip  which  you  just  described  1 — A.  1  think  not. 

Q.  Wbat  did  yon  do  the  following  year? — A.  I  was  tben  in  the  same 
vessel. 

Q.  You  were  still  in  a  British  vessel  ? — A,  Yes. 

Q.  Wbat  did  yon  fish  forf — A.  God  and  mackerel,  the  same  as  tbe 
year  before. 

Q.  How  did  you  succeed  with  respect  to  codfish  ? — A.  We  did  very 
well. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  them  ? — A.  Our  first  trip  was  made  out  on 
the  Western  Banks,  and  the  second  in  the  Bay  of  Saint  Lawrence. 

Q,  Inside  of  the  bay  f — A.  In  and  up  tbe  gulf. 

Q.  In  what  part  of  it  ? — A.  Most  of  tbem  were  taken  off  Banks  Brad- 
ley and  Orphan.  A  part  of  them,  about  130  quintals,  were  taken  in  the 
Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  cod  in  the  body  of  Ciialenrs  Bay? — A.  Yes;  not 
within  six  miles  of  tbe  shore. 

Q.  Is  tbe  best  fibbing  in  tbe  body  of  the  bay,  or  inshore  ? — A.  A  great 
maiy  fine  fish  are  caught  close  inshore  off  Fort  Daniel.  A  good  many 
boats  fish  there. 

Q.  You  refer  to  codfish  ? — A.  Yes.  We  would  go  to  Port  Daniel  for 
bait,  proceeding  right  inshore. 

Q.  Port  Daniel  is  on  the  northern  shore  of  the  bay  ? — A.  It  is'on  tbe 
starboard  hand  as  you  get  to  the  northward,  on  entering  the  bay. 

Q.  There  is  here  a  fine  cod-fishery  inshore  ? — A.  Yes ;  the  boats  fish 
right  close  inshore. 

Q.  Is  there  good  fishing  four  or  five  miles  out  from  the  shore  in  the 
Bay  of  Chaleurs T — A.  At  times  it  is  very  good  there. 

Q.  Wbat  about  the  mackerel-fishery  in  tbe  body  of  the  bay  ? — A.  I 
never  caught  many  mackerel  in  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs. 

Q.  Inshore  or  offshore  ? — A.  Neither  in  nor  out.  I  seemed  to  have  no 
lack  there. 

Q.  You  say  that  there  is  a  fine  cod-fishery  farther  outside  in  the  bay, 
and  inshore  ?— A.  Yes,  it  is  a  good  place  for  boat  fishing.  There  is  a 
large  bank  there  where  tbe  herring  play  in  the  last  of  July  and  begin- 
ning of  August.    Many  are  taken  for  bait. 

Q.  To  what  bank  do  yon  refer? — A.  To  tbe  Garaqnette  Bank. 

Q.  Is  this  close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  It  is  5  miles  from  the  shore. 


622 


AWABD   OF  THE  FISHE.EY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  far  in  from  the  eDtrance  of  the  bay  T— A.  I  could  not  tell 
you.    It  is  quite  a  little  distance. 

Q.  Twenty  or  thirty  miles  f — A.  No ;  it  is  quite  a  run  up  from  Point 
Misco  to  the  bank. 

Q.  Is  it  10  or  12  miles  T— A.  Tes. 

Q.  It  is  situated  well  iuto  the  bay? — A.  Yes;  right  o£f  the  town  of 
Caraquette. 

Q.  It  is  a  very  good  bank  for  fishing  ! — A.  Yes,  for  herritig.  They 
are  used  for  bait. 

Q.  Are  squid  found  there  T — A.  Not  to  my  knowledge,  but  it  may  be 
the  case.    I  never  saw  any  caught  there. 

Q.  Did  the  Americans  in  your  time,  and  do  they  still,  as  far  as  yon 
aK'  aware,  catch  bait  on  that  bank  ? — A.  I  have  seen  them  there  alter 
bait. 

Q.  Did  they  want  them  to  fish  for  cod  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  On  your  different  trips  mackerel  fishing,  what  bait  do  you  take  I— 
A.  Fogies. 

Q.  These  are  generally  put  up  on  the  coast  of  Maine  ? — A.  Ye». 

Q.  Where  would  yon  buy  them  if  British  vessels  take  them  ?— A.  Oor 
merchants  used  to  import  them  from  Portland,  Boston,  and  Gloucester. 

Q.  To  Port  Mnlgrave  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  sell  them  as  articles  of  merchandise  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  bought  and  sold  them  f — A.  The  same  as  a  barrel  of  flour. 

Q.  After  you  finished  your  codfishiug  trip,  did  you  again  go  for  mack- 
erel that  year  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  have  a  fair  trip  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  yon  catch  them  inshore  f — A.  Two-thirds  or  three-quarters  of 
them  were  caught  inshore. 

Q.  After  the  Beciprocity  Treaty  expired  in  186G,  what  was  the  number 
of  American  fleet  which  came  to  the  bay,  taking  one  year  with  anotber— 
say  until  1870  or  1871? — A.  In  186C,  if  I  recollect  right,  mackerel  were 
in  the  bay.    I  was  that  year  in  the  Onyx,  an  English  schooner. 

Q.  Where  did  she  hail  from  ? — Port  Mulgrave,  I  think. 

Q.  Whatdidyoudof — A.  We  went  after  mackerel.  I  did  not  go  until 
August.    I  stayed  ashore  until  that  time. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fi.sh  ? — A.  Just  over  about  the  island  at  first;  then 
we  went  over  to  Margaree,  Gheticamp,  and  Limbo  Gove. 

Q.  Around  Gape  Breton? — A.  Yes;  we  fished  also  at  Port  Hood. 
We  stayed  there  pretty  much  all  fall. 

Q.  What  was  your  fare  ? — A.  A  good  one. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  yonr  vessel  ? — A.  About  60  tons. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  yon  take? — A.  Somewhere  about  250 or 
260,  probably  more.    It  was  a  very  good  trip. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  all  the  mackerel  were  taken  with  the  line?— A.  We 
got  most  of  them  late  in  October,  right  in  against  the  shore.  We  were 
among  a  large  fleet.  The  heaviest  fishing  that  I  ever  saw  took  place 
there  during  two  days. 

Q.  You  refer  to  the  American  fleet  ? — A.  The  greater  part  of  the 
American  fleet  was  there. 

Q.  What  did  the  American  fleet  number  that  year? — A.  I  shoald 
judge  that  300  sail  was  there  then. 

Q.  And  how  many  British  vessels  ? — A.  Probably  50,  or  55,  or  60. 

Q.  That  would  make  about  360  altogether  fishing  in  one  school  of 
fish  ?— A.  Yes.    I  think  that  this  was  in  1866,  or  1867,  or  1868. 

Q.  Then  the  Americans  were  there  in  as  large  numbers  as  usual,  were 
they  not?— A.  A  large  American  fleet  came  to  the  bay  that  year.  I 


■P 


AWABD   OF   THE  FISHEST   COMMISSION. 


623 


noticed  that  we  coald  not  tben  take  mackerel  half  a  mile  off  shore.  We 
could  not  get  one  mackerel  one  mile  off  shore.  They  kept  rif;bt  in  along 
shore,  aud  the  fleet  closely  followed  them  from  Margaree  to  Limbo  Gove. 
We  stayed  with  them  three  days. 

Q.  Was  it  the  experience  of  the  American  skippers  that  they  could 
not  catcb  fish  outside  of  a  mile  from  the  shore  that  season  ? — A.  When 
tbey  get  in  witb  a  school  of  mackerel,  they  will  not  leave  as  long  aa 
tiiey  can  catcb  tbem.  Tbe  mackerel  were  tben  pretty  much  inshore ; 
tbey  collected  in  one  body,  and  it  extended  for  miles. 

Q.  You  did  not  tish  any  more  that  year  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  tbe  Americans  frequent  the  gulf  tbe  following  year  in  as  great 
numbers  as  previously — this  would  be  in  1867  ! — A.  1  did  not  then  fish 
nutil  18G8,  wben  I  was  again  in  an  English  schooner. 

Q.  Was  tbere  as  large  an  American  fleet  as  usual  in  tbe  bay  in  1867, 
as  far  as  you  are  aware? — A.  There  was  quite  a  large  fleet  in.  It  was 
a  large  fleet.  A  lot  of  vessels.  I  think,  tben  brought  licenses,  but  some 
of  them  did  not  do  so. 

Q.  Only  a  few  brought  licenses,  comparatively  speaking  ? — A.  No  at 
great  many  did  so,  I  guess. 

Q.  Wliat  would  be  tbe  number  of  this  fleet — 500  or  600? — A.  I  guess 
it  wonld  be  500. 

Q.  Were  you  in  the  bay  in  1868? — A.  Yes;  in  an  English  vessel. 

Q.  Belonging  to  Port  Mulgrave  ? — A.  No,  but  to  Gnysborougb  Bay. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  that  year  ? — A.  I  went  out  late  in  the  fall,  and 
we  did  very  little. 

Q.  How  late  was  it  ? — A.  Tbe  middle  of  September. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  ? — A.  Up  about  the  island,  around  East  Point, 
and  as  far  as  North  Cape  and  back.  We  got  a  few  mackerel  going  up 
and  coming  down. 

Q.  Did  you  obtain  a  good  fare  ? — A.  No ;  we  took  a  very  poor  fare. 
What  few  we  got  we  caught  off  Port  Hood  close  inshore. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  poor  fare  because  it  was  late,  or  because  the  mack- 
erel did  not  strike  in  that  year  ? — A.  Tbe  best  part  of  the  season  was 
then  over,  and  the  weather  was  blustery.  We  could  not  stay  out  like 
tbe  others  in  rongh  weather,  because  our  sails  were  in  a  very  bad  state. 
This  caused  our  failure  in  part. 

Q.  It  was  tbe  fault  of  your  outfitting  ? — A.  Yes,  in  part ;  we  besides 
had  poor  bait. 

Q.  You  did  not  have  porgy  bait? — A.  Yes,  we  did,  but  it  was  of  very 
poor  quality. 

Q.  This  was  in  1868?— A.  I  think  it  was  along  about  that  time,  but 
I  am  not  certain  of  it. 

Q.  The  next  year  was  1869  ? — A.  I  did  not  fish  any  more  until  1871, 
in  the  bay. 

Q.  Was  the  American  fleet  in  the  bay  as  numerous  as  usual  in  the 
years  1869  and  1870  ? — A.  Quite  a  number  came  in  and  went  out. 

Q.  Was  it  a  large  fleet  ? — A.  It  was  quite  large,  averaging  500  or 
thereabouts. 

Q.  Now  take  1872  T — A.  In  1871 1  went  in  an  English  vessel. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  for  mackerel  or  cod  f — A.  We  fished  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Where  ? — A.  About  Port  Hood,  and  Margaree,  and  along  there.  I 
did  not  go  out  until  late  in  tbe  fall,  iEind  made  short  trip. 

Q.  What  was  your  success  ? — A.  We  canght  about  50  barrels. 

Q.  You  went  out  very  late  f — A.  It  was  toward  the  last  of  September. 

Q.  That  is  very  late  in  the  scuson  f — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  You  were  lucky,  considering  the  short  time  you  fished  f — A.  We 


624 


▲WARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


did  very  well  for  the  time  we  were  there,  having  only  a  small  vessel  and 
a  small  crew. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  the  vessel  T— A.  About  45  tons. 

Q.  How  many  men  were  on  board  ? — A.  I  think  ten. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  fish  ?— A.  Only  two  days.  The  weather  was 
snch  that  we  coald  not  fish  the  greater  part  of  the  time.  We  got  all  our 
fish  in  two  days. 

Q.  Did  yon  fish  in  1872?— A.  Yes.  I  then  went  in  an  American 
schooner. 

Q.  What  was  her  name  f — A.  Colonel  Oook. 

Q.  Where  did  she  hail  from  f — A.  Gloucester. 

Q.  Who  commanded  her  f — A.  George  Bass. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  T — A.  Over  to  the  Island  first. 

Q.  Where  did  she  land  the  fare  she  took  f — A.  At  Port  Mulgrave. 
She  was  then  fitted  out  and  went  back. 

Q.  They  were  permitted  to  land  the  fish  at  Port  Mulgrave,  notwith- 
standing the  fact  that  the  Beciprocity  Treaty  had  expired  ?— A.  Yes ;  I 
never  seen  any  person  prevented  from  landing  a  cargo. 

Q.  They  all  lauded  their  fares  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  went  right  back  T — A.  I  had  been  working  on  the  wharf, 
And  I  shipped  and  went  to  the  bay  for  mackerel.  We  went  first  over 
to  the  island  and  caught  some  mackerel ;  we  also  took  some  over  at 
Margaree.    The  cutters  were  in  the  bay  that  year. 

Q.  What  did  you  succeed  in  obtaining  ? — A.  400  barrels. 

Q.  At  the  second  trip  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  you  enter  the  bay  on  the  second  trip  f — A.  Some  time  in 
AugQst,  and  we  soon  returned. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  t  \e  vessel  ? — A.  80-odd  tons. 

>Q.  Did  you  ship  on  shares  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  were  most  of  the  fish  caught— inshore  or  outside !— A. 
Inshore. 

Q.  What  proportion  was  caught  inshore  t — A.  Three-quarters  of  tlie 
fare. 

Q.  Did  you  while  on  that  trip  see  much  shore  fishing  carried  on  in 
boats  along  Prince  Edward  Island? — A.  O,  yes;  there  were  a  good 
many  boats  engaged  in  fishing  around  the  island. 

Q.  How  did  you  treat  the  boats  ? — A.  The  vessel  in  which  I  was  never 
interfered  with  the  boats.  We  did,  however,  sometimes  heave  to  and 
•drift  among  the  boats. 

Q.  What  is  the  efie'tt  of  this  on  the  boat  fishing?— A.  We  would 
take  their  mackerel. 

Q.  The  boats  have  U  go  ashore  when  you  drift  amoc;  them?  Do 
they  have  to  leave  ? — A.  I  have  seen  them  in  such  cases  compelled  to 
get  out  of  the  way.  At  Margaree  we  anchored  on  the  spring,  so  close 
to  the  boats  that  they  had  to  move  away  from  us. 

Q.  Otherwise  you  would  swamp  them? — A.  We  did  hurt  one  fellow  a 
little ;  but  the  skipper  paid  for  the  damage  done. 

Q.  Was  he  sued  for  it  ? — A.  No.  The  man  came  on  board  and  his 
claim  was  settled. 

Q.  What  was  this  skipper's  name  ? — A.  George  Bass.  The  damage, 
hoW)^ver,  was  a  trifle. 

Q.  You  come  in,  throw  out  the  pogie  bait,  and  draw  the  fish  out  from 
the  boats  ? — A.  We  throw  out  bait,  of  course,  and  we  get  a  fare  as  soon 
as  we  can. 

Q.  And  you  thus  draw  the  fish  away  from  the  boats? — A.  Very  likely 
we  do.    Of  course  the  fish  will  follow  the  best  bait. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


625 


)uie  time  in 


Q.  What  was  the  number  of  the  American  fleet  in  the  bay  in  1872  f — 
A.  It  was  quite  large.    There  were  from  400  to  500  sail. 

Q.  What  about  1873  T— A.  I  was  then  in  the  bay,  fishing.  It  was  a 
good  year  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Was  there  a  large  American  fleet  in  the  bay  that  year  ? — A.  Yes, 
quite. 

Q.  Was  it  not  an  unusually  large  fleet  f-^A.  I  think  that  the  cutters 
were  not  there  after  1872. 

Q.  You  went  in  the  bay  in  1873  in  an  American  vessel  ? — A.  Yes,  in 
the  same  vessel. 

Q.  Were  the  cutters  then  in  the  bay  ? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  During  the  season  the  cutters  were  there  did  they  succeed  in  keep- 
ing you  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  During  one  year  that  we 
were  in  the  bay  we  used  to  keep  ofi",  of  course ;  while  they  were  there 
we  kept  oif  shore  more  than  if  they  were  not  there,  but  nevertheless  we 
fished  inshore.    If  a  cutter  then  came  in  sight  we  got  out  of  the  way. 

Q.  Would  you  watch  the  movements  of  the  cutters,  and  when  she 
left  would  you  go  inshore  again  I — A.  Very  likely  we  would.  This  is 
the  most  likely  thing  that  we  would  do  under  such  circumstances.  I  guess 
that  we  watched  the  cutters  about  as  well  as  they  watched  us.  We 
wanted  to  get  all  the  fish  we  could  wherever  we  could  secure  them. 

Q.  And  you  found  that  the  best  places  for  catching  fish  were  inshore? — 
A.  Yes;  this  has  been  the  case  ever  since  I  have  fished.  My  experience 
is  that  the  most  are  caught  within  three  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  The  year  1874  was  a  very  good  one,  was  it  not? — A.  I  was  not  in 
the  bay  that  year. 

Q.  What  did  you  get  in  1873? — A.  I  shipped  that  year  in  August. 
We  came  in,  fished,  and  landed  our  first  trip  300  barrels.  We  caught 
something  over  300,  but  we  kept  some  on  hand.  The  captain  told  me 
that  they  caught  400  barrels  on  their  first  trip  that  season. 

Q.  I  understand  that  during  the  previous  year  in  two  trips  you  took 
800  barrels? — A.  The  first  year  we  caught  800  barrels,  and  400  barrels 
during  the  first  trip  the  following  year,  and  when  I  went  in  her  we  took 
360  barrels. 

Q.  That  made  760  barrels  for  these  two  trips  ?— A.  Yes :  this  was  in 
1873. 

Q.  And  you  caught  800  barrels  in  1872  ? — A.  Yes.  We  caught  the 
greater  portion  of  the  fish  in  1873  down  about  Gape  Low,  Gape  Breton, 
close  inshore. 

Q.  In  1874  you  were  not  fishing  in  the  bay  at  all  ? — A.  I  have  not 
been  there  since. 

Q.  Was  there  not  a  large  American  fleet  in  the  bay  in  1874? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  you  say  was  the  number  that  year? — A.  I  think  that 
the  average  was  about  the  same.  The  number  might  have  fallen  off 
slightly. 

Q.  What  do  you  say  about  1875  in  this  respect  ? — A.  The  number  of 
the  fleet  had  then  greatly  fallen  off. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  reason  why  ? — A.  Que  reason  was  because  the 
mackerel  were  not  plentiful  that  year  as  formerly. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  in  the  gulf? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  there  were  more  of  them  on  the  American  coast  than  usual  ? — 
A.  They  bad  good  doings  at  home  in  1875,  and  also  in  1876  particu- 
larly. They  would  not  come  down  to  the  bay  for  mackerel  when  there 
were  good  doings  on  the  American  coast. 

Q.  I  believe  that  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  is  full  of  mackerel  this 
40  F 


626 


▲WARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


year. — A.  The  prospects  are  very  good.    We  receive  very  good  accoants 
respecting  the  fishery. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  have  entered  the  bay  to  your  knowl. 
edge  f — A.  I  have  kept  count  of  those  that  have  passed  tlirotigh  the 
Strait  of  Oanso  since  the  21st  of  July,  and  I  have  counted  78,  and  I  am 
certain  more  have  gone  through  of  which  I  have  not  heard.  I  am  in- 
formed that  one  vessel  is  down  at  Sydney  fishing.  She  did  Dot  come 
through  the  Strait  of  Causo  at  all. 

Q.  She  is  fishing  on  the  other  side  of  the  Island  of  Cape  Breton  ?—  \ 
Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  there  is  a  large  American  fleet  either  in  the 
bay  now  or  expected  to  be  in  there  this  season  I — A.  It  has  been  re- 
ported since  I  left  home  that  there  would  be  a  very  large  fleet  in  the 
bay  this  year. 

Q.  And  the  prospects  are  that  the  bay  fishery  will  be  as  good  as  ever 
this  year  f — A.  The  prospects  are  very  good  indeed. 

Q.  There  are  prospects  of  a  good  mackerel  fishery  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  it  be  possible  for  American  fishermen  to  prosecute  the 
mackerel  fishery  in  the  gulf  unless  they  had  the  right  to  come  within  the 
three-mile  limit  ? — A.  I  should  think  not.  I  would  not  go  in  a  vessel 
unless  I  could  get  fish  where  I  pleased,  inshore  or  offshore. 

Q.  If  the  Americans  were  kept  out  of  the  three-mile  limit  could  they 
snccessfully  prosecute  mackerel-fishing  in  the  gulf  ? — A.  I  think  they 
could  Mot  do  anything ;  they  would  not  catch  anything,  and  it  would 
not  be  worth  while  for  them  to  come. 

Q.  Would  they  not  lose  money  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  American  fisherman  in  the  gulf  fishing  for  mackerel  must 
have  the  privilege  of  the  inshore  fishery  f — A.  In  my  judgment  they 
must. 

Q.  Now,  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  they  may  land  and  go  in  and 
get  bait ;  do  you  hold  that  to  be  any  privilege,  for  instance,  to  an 
American  cod-fisher  f — A.  It  is  a  great  privilege  to  be  allowed  to  go  in 
and  get  bait  and  ice  where  they  choose. 

Q.  Explain  why  you  think  it  is  a  great  privilege  with  respect  to  ice.— 
A.  The  ice  preserves  their  bait. 

Q.  Since  the  treaty  they  have  come  in  and  got  ice  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  as  to  whether  they  were  in  the  habit  of  coming  in 
and  getting  ice  before  1871  ? — A.  They  used  to  come  in  before  1871,  but 
the  ice-houses  were  not  then  so  plenty  as  now — there  was  scarcely  an 
ice-house  there  then. 

Q.  They  require  ice  to  keep  the  bait  fresh  for  cod-fishing  on  the 
banks? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Take  the  privilege  given  to  Americans  of  transshipping  and  land- 
ing cargoes :  do  you  think  it  is  an  advantage  to  them  ? — A.  I  think  it 
is  a  great  advantage  to  an  American  fishing  in  the  bay,  for  if  he  wants 
to  make  another  trip  he  has  the  privilege  of  transshipping  his  fish,  re- 
fitting, and  can  then  return. 

Q.  Does  the  privilege  of  transshipment  enable  the  American  fisher- 
men to  take  advantage  of  high  markets? — A.  He  can  transship  the 
fish,  generally,  pretty  soon.  Steamers  run  there  which  carry  the  mack- 
erel. 

Q.  Is  the  privilege  of  transshipment  equal  to  an  extra  trip  ?— A.  I 
have  known  it  to  be  equal  to  an  extra  trip. 

Q.  Is  it,  in  your  opinion,  equal  to  an  extra  trip  T — A.  Yes;  becan)w 
it  is  at  the  best  season  of  the  year. 

Q.  They  would  otherwise  lose  the  best  part  of  the  fishing  season  t 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


627 


)ect  to  ice.— 


A.  As  good  a  part  of  the  season  as  there  is,  and  the  best  weather ;  that 
is  between  the  first  and  second  trip. 

Q,  It  gets  stormy  in  the  galf  toward  tlie  fall  of  the  year  T— A.  Tes. 

Q.  Wbat  do  you  say  is  the  effect  of  seining  on  the  fishery  T — A.  I 
bave  never  been  purse  seining.  I  have  never  seen  a  vessel  with  one  of 
those  seines. 

Q.  Tou  have  heard  American  fishermen  speak  of  the  practice  f— A. 

Yes. 

Q.  What  did  they  say  1— A.  Some  say,  as  I  know,  that  it  spoils  the 
fishing— that  it  ruins  the  fishing. 

Q.  Do  they  give  any  reaHon  for  that  opinion  ? — A.  I  heard  a  skipper 
say  it  frightens  the  fish  and  destroys  a  great  many  small  fisb,  of  which 
they  make  no  use. 

Q.  Do  they  say  they  would  be  glad  to  have  it  abolished  ? — A.  Some 
American  captains  told  me  this  summer  they  would  sooner  have  it  abol- 
ished than  allowed  to  go  on  the  way  it  is  practiced. 

Q.  Did  they  then  tell  you  whether  it  had  destroyed  their  own  fishery  ! 
—A.  They  have  told  me  it  has  injured  their  fishery,  and  it  is  my  opinion 
that  if  it  is  allowed  to  be  carried  on  two  years  longer  in  our  bay,  we 
shall  bave  no  mackerel  to  catch,  because  the  seining  will  drive  them 
away  and  destroy  them.  No  later  than  this  week  an  American  schooner 
was  up  to  Gasp^,  went  around  a  school  of  fish  with  a  seine,  mostly  her- 
ring, and  filled  the  seine  full  of  solid  fish.  They  meshed  in  the  seine  and 
a  large  number  were  killed. 

Q.  That,  of  course,  is  destructive  to  the  fishery  T — A.  Of  course,  it  is 
destructive  to  inclose  such  a  large  quantity  of  fish,  for  a  {large  number 
were  unfit  for  anything. 

Q.  Your  opinion  is  that  if  seining  is  continued  for  two  years  on  your 
shores  the  mackerel  fishery  there  will  be  destroyed  t — A.  Purse  seining 
is  an  injury  to  the  mackerel  fishery. 

Q.  If  allowed  to  be  pursued  two  years  more  it  will  destroy  the  mack- 
erel fishery  there? — A.  If  allowed  two  years  more  the  seining  will 
destroy  the  fishing.  The  seiners  will  scare  away  from  the  grounds  the 
tish  they  don't  kill. 

Q.  And  American  captains  think  seining  destroys  the  fishing  ? — A. 
Yes ;  and  would  sooner  that  it  was  abolished  altogether,  both  at  home 
and  here. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  from  them  whether  they  intend  to  get  more 
shallow  seines  for  the  fishing  inshore  than  the  seines  they  have  If — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  have  they  said  ?— A.  I  have  a  son-in-law  captain  of  an  Amer- 
ican fishing  schooner.  I  asked  him  how  deep  his  seine  was,  and  he  told 
me  seventeen  fathoms.  He  said  he  knew  it  was  too  deep  and  he  was 
going  to  reduce  it  before  he  fished  for  mackerel  in  the  bay  with  it.  I 
have  beard  that  they  would  reef  the  seines  instead  of  cutting  them,  and 
afterward  use  them  the  full  size. 

Q.  Has  any  American  captain  spoken  to  you  of  the  prospect  of  good 
fishing  in  the  gulf? — A.  Yes;  Captain  Joyce  said  there  was  a  good 
prospect  for  mackerel-fishing.  He  had  got  300  barrels  in  the  schooner 
Alice,  and  he  went  home. 

Q.  How  long  was  he  taking  the  300  barrels  ? — A.  From  three  weeks 
to  a  month.    Not  longer  than  a  month. 

Q-  That  is  a  very  good  catch  ? — A.  He  got  them  all  in  two  or  three 
small  hauls.    He  caaght  them  all  with  seine. 

Q.  Inshore  f — A.  In  very  shoal  water. 

Q.  Did  he  say  yr  do  yoa  know  how  many  American  vessels  are  com- 


628 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ing  down  this  year  T — A.  It  is  reported  there  is  going  to  be  a  large  tlect. 
When  vessels  arrive  and  the  captains  are  asked  as  to  the  fleet,  thejKay 
there  are  more  vessels  coming,  and  that  if  they  cannot  get  mackerel  a't 
home  they  will  all  come  here.  The  Cape  Ann  fleet  and  Booth  Bay  fleet 
I  refer  to. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  the  Commission  where,  according  to  your  experi- 
ence and  observation,  the  mackerel  breed  T — A.  Yes ;  I  tbink  1  can. 

Q.  Where  do  they  breed  1 — A.  I  think  they  spawn  a  great  deal  off 
Cape  North,  Prince  Edward  Island,  all  along  the  ground  Uowd  to 
Point  Miscou.  That  is  the  first  place  to  catch  mackerel  iu  tbe  spriug 
with  hooks. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  spawning  there  ? — A.  I  have  caught  some  with 
half  the  spawu  iu  them,  some  full  of  spawn  and  other:}  which  had  lost 
the  spawn. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  any  spawn  on  the  north  shore  of  Bay  Gha- 
leurs  ? — A.  They  go  into  Bay  Chaleurs,  and  I  think  they  spawu  there. 
They  spawn  a  great  deal  in  Antigonish  Bay,  Port  Hood,  and  along  the 
coast.  •  They  catch  mackerel  there  after  spawning. 

Q.  The  fish  sp&wn  there  1 — A.  It  is  my  opinion  they  spawn  there, 
because  they  are  caught  there  very  early  in  the  season  after  they  have 
done  spawning. 

Q.  Has  your  attention  ever  been  directed  to  the  throwing  overboard 
of  offal  by  American  vessels  1  What  is  your  opinion  of  the  effects  of 
that  practice  on  the  fishery  f — A.  It  hurts  the  fishing- grounds. 

Q.  Can  you  catch  fish  after  you  have  thrown  ott'al  overboard  for  some 
days  or  weeks  ? — A.  You  can  catch  fish. 

Q.  How  long  after  you  have  thrown  offal  overboard  ? — A.  We  have 
thrown  offal  overboard  and  gone  to  work  fishing,  but  probably  we  drift- 
ed off  the  ground  where  we  heaved  the  offal.  I  can  say  nothing  about 
that  matter ;  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Yon  think  the  practice  is  injurious  to  the  fishery? — A.  Yes;  I 
think  it  is  injurious. 

Q.  Is  the  privilege  given  to  Canadian  fishermen,  under  the  Treaty  of 
Washington,  of  fishing  on  the  American  coast,  of  any  value;  and,  if  so, 
what  value,  to  Canadian  fishermen  ? — A.  I  have  never  known  it  to  have 
any  value  to  any  of  them.    In  my  opinion  it  is  of  no  value  at  all. 

Q.  When  is  the  last  time  you  were  on  the  American  coast  fishing  !- 
A.  I  was  in  the  schooner  A.  G.  Brooks.  I  omitted  to  tell  you  that.  I 
forget  what  year  it  was,  but  I  recollect  the  vessel.  That  was  tbe  last 
year  I  fished  on  the  American  coast. 

Q.  What  catch  did  you  succeed  in  getting  ! — A.  We  were  part  of  the 
season  in  Bay  Saint  Lawrence,  and  went  home  about  12th  September: 
fished  on  the  coast,  and  got  12  barrels  for  the  rest  of  the  season. 

Q.  Did  you  get  these  inshore? — A.  Boston  Bay. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  land  ? — A.  About  10  miles  off  land. 

Q.  Not  inshore  at  all? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  never  returned  to  the  American  coast  ? — A.  Not  fishing. 

Q.  In  your  judgment  the  privilege  of  fishing  on  the  American  coast 
is  really  no  privilege  at  all  f — ^A.  No  privilege  to  us. 

No.  20. 

James  Puboell,  inland  revenue  ofiicer  and  collector  of  light  dues, 
Port  Mnlgrave,  Strait  of  Canso,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Goverumeot  of 
Her  Britannic  Mfyesty,  sworn  and  examined. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


629 


aerican  coast 


By  Mr.  Daviea : 

Question.  How  many  years  have  you  lived  at  Port  Mulgrave  ?— An- 
swer. Some  forty  years. 

Q.  ^  hr.t  occupation  have  you  followed  daring  that  time  ? — A.  For 
the  first  twenty  years  I  followed  fishing  and  trading.  For  the  last  twenty 
years  I  have  been  a  revenue  officer  and  collector  of  light  dues. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  flHhed  on  board  American  vessels  ! — A.  No. 

Q,  Altogether  on  board  British  schooners  T — A.  In  my  own  vessels. 

Q.  What  branch  of  the  fishery  do  you  prosecute  f — A.  The  cod  and 
macljerel  fishery. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  when  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  came  into  force ! — 
A.  Perfectly  well. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  when  the  treaty  was  abrogated  !— A.  Terfectly 

well. 

Q.  Yon  lived  in  the  Gut  of  Oanso  during  that  time  f — A.  I  did. 

Q.  Were  you  at  that  time  collecting  light  dues  ? — A.  The  Reciprocity 
Treaty  came  into  force  in  1854.  I  became  revenue  officer  and  collector 
ofligbt  duesiu  1856. 

Q.  Then  during  nearly  the  existence  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  you 
collected  light  dues  ?— A.  Nearly  so. 

Q.  lu  your  capac'ty  as  collector  had  you  an  opportunity  of  judging 
mih  accuracy  the  number  of  American  vessels  which  passed  through  to 
the  bay  !— A.  I  had. 

Q.  Describe  what  were  your  opportunities. — A.  I  was  bound  to  board 
every  vessel  and  demand  light  dues,  and  if  they  had  not  been  collected 
at  some  other  port  to  collect  them. 

Q.  You  had  facilities  for  doing  so  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  were  your  facilities  f — A.  The  revenue  boat  and  4  men. 

Q.  Did  you  succeed  in  boarding  every  vessel  ? — A.  I  don't  say  I  could 
have  boarded  all.  I  boarded  as  many  as  I  could.  Some,  even  many, 
would  escape,  but  I  boarded  as  many  as  I  could. 

Q.  Would  the  light-dues  collected  be  a  fair  leturn  as  showing  the 
actual  number  of  vessels  that  passed  through  the  Gut  of  Canso  ?  Sap- 
pose  twenty  vessels  came  along,  would  yoa  be  able  to  board  the  whole 
of  tbem  ? — A.  Sometimes  I  would  not  be  able  to  board  half  of  them. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  any  estimate  of  the  average  num- 
ber of  the  American  mackerel  fleet  that  frequented  the  bay  during  the 
existeuce  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  1 — A.  To  the  best  of  my  opinion 
there  were  from  500  to  600  vessels  on  an  average.  That  is,  the  average 
of  each  season. 

Q.  After  the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  did  the  American 
fleet  iucrease  or  decrease  f — A.  It  decreased. 

Q.  Till  when  ? — A.  After  the  license  of  $2  per  ton  came  into  force 
the  fleet  decreased ;  afterward  an  arrangement  was  made  for  50  cents  a 
ton,  and  then  the  fleet  came  nearly  as  usual. 

Q.  What  years  do  you  speak  of  ?— A.  1868, 1869,  and  1870;  those 
are  the  years  the  license  system  was  in  operation. 

Q.  What  would  you  place  the  American  fleet  at  during  the  years  from 
the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  until  the  adoption  of  the 
Washington  Treaty ;  say,  up  to  1871  ?— A.  I  don't  think  there  would 
be  a  great  diminution. 

Q.  Pretty  much  the  same  average  as  during  the  existence  of  the  Re- 
ciprocity Treaty  f— A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Has  it  continued  the  same  since  1871 !— A.  On  to  1873.  In  1873 
there  was  a  large  fleet  in  the  bay,  and  the  vessels  did  well.    Up  to  that 


630 


AWAHD   OF  THE   FISHERY   C0MMIH8I0N. 


year  I  speak  with  anthority,  bat  in  1874  and  1875 1  was  away,  my  rev- 
enae  duties  leading  me  to  travel  around  Gape  Breton. 

Q.  Give  the  Commission  the  results  of  your  observation.— A.  My  ob- 
servation was  that  till  1873  the  fishing-fleet  continued  iiretty  nearly  tbe 
same  as  during  the  Beoiprocitv  Treaty. 

Q.  Since  1874  the  number  of  vessels  has  fallen  ofif  ? — A.  Yeg. 

Q.  Gan  you  give  an  approximate  idea  of  the  number  of  the  fleet  dnritig 
the  two  years  1875  and  1876  f — A.  I  could  not  give  you  an  idea. 

Q.  You  were  there  f — A.  Occasionally  I  was  at  home,  but  I  was  away 
often.  I  was  traveling  in  the  interests  of  the  revenue  around  Caii« 
Breton. 

Q.  Your  duties  wonld  enable  you  to  know  the  quantity  of  fish  caught 
by  the  American  vessels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Gan  you  tell  the  Commission  what  was  the  average  take  of  the 
fleet  T — A.  My  opinion  is  that  the  vessels  would  average  about  250  bar- 
rels a  trip. 

Q.  And  how  many  trips  wonld  they  make  a  year  T — A.  Soiuo  years 
during  the  war  tbe  average  was  higher.  I  take  the  whole  thing  as  a 
general  average,  good  and  bad  years  as  they  come. 

Q.  Would  two  trips  be  an  average  per  season  1 — A.  Yes,  except  dur- 
ing the  time  of  the  war,  when  they  made  all  tbe  trit)S  they  could ;  they 
made  more  than  two  trips. 

Q.  You  fished  in  your  own  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  parts  of  the  bay  did  you  fish? — A.  Hound  Prince  Edward 
Island,  North  Gape,  Margarie,  Cheticamp,  and  otf  Port  Hood. 

Q.  That  is  chiefly  around  the  shores  of  Prince  Edward  Island  aod 
Cape  Breton  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  tbe  shore  did  you  generally  take  mackerel ! 
— A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half  from  shore,  sometimes  closer  in,  otteu 
closer. 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  material  portion  of  your  mackerel  outside  of  the 
three-mile  limit? — A.  I  never  recollect  to  have  caught  any  mackerel 
farther  from  land  than  three  miles ;  except  at  one  time  when  we  caught 
some  mackerel  ofi*  Fisherman's  Bank,  ofl:  Georgetown,  about  nine  miles 
from  land. 

Q.  Your  operations  were  confined  to  the  shores  of  Prince  Edward 
Island  and  Cape  Breton,  and  you  always  caught  mackerel  withiu  the 
three-mile  limit  ? — A.  We  always  coucluded  to  fish  inshore ;  that  was 
where  the  mackerel  were  and  where  we  proceeded  for  them. 

Q.  Will  you  state  the  number  of  boats  engaged  in  mackerel-fish- 
ing off  Gape  Breton? — A.  J  cannot  give  you  an  idea  of  the  number  of 
boats  on  the  east  or  south  side,  but  from  Cheticamp  to  the  Strait  of 
Canso  there  would  be  something  like  1,000. 

Q.  How  far  ofisbore  do  the  boats  catch  the  fish  ? — A.  Bight  along 
shore. 

Q.  Practically  on  the  shores  of  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Gape  Bre 
ton, all  the  mackerel  are  caught  within  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  All 
the  mackerel  I  have  seen  caught  were  within  three  miles,  on  both  shores. 

Q.  You  have  seen  American  vessels  fishing  ? — A.  Yes,  thousands  of 
times. 

Q.  Where  do  they  fish  ? — A.  Along  the  shore,  among  the  boats,  wher- 
ever the  fish  were. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  them  fish  out  in  the  deep  sea  ? — A.  I  never  did. 
They  might  have  fished  there,  but  I  was  not  there  to  see  them. 

Q.  From  your  experience  of  thirty  years'  fishing  in  your  own  vessel, 
and  your  knowledge,  as  a  general  rule,  you  saw  them  fishing  witbio 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


631 


three  miles  of  ehove  f — A.  I  always  saw  them  flshiog  along  the  shore, 
up  and  roond  Prinoe  Edward  Island  and  Caiie  Breton. 

Q.  Suppose  the  Amerioans  were  excluded  from  the  inshore  fishery, 
what  would  be  the  resalt,  in  your  opinion  f — A.  The  result  would  be 
that  they  would  not  prosecute  the  fishery.  They  would  not  be  such  fools 
as  to  do  80.  For  my  part,  I  would  not  fit  out  a  vessel  if  I  were  pre* 
vented  from  going  along  the  shore  to  catch  mackerel. 

Q.  Would  you  invest  any  money  in  it  1 — A.  Not  sixpence. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  fishing  grounds  off  the  Americaa 
coast!— A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  of  any  British  vessel  going  there  to  fish  ?— A.  I 
never  knew  and  never  heard  of  any. 

Q.  Yon  also  prosecuted  the  cod-fishery  to  some  extent  T — A.  Yes,  I 
did.    Occasionally^  when  not  trading  I  went  cod-fishing. 

Q.  That  fishery  is,  to  some  extent,  a  deep  fishery  t — A.  To  a  large  ex- 
tent it  is.  I  never  saw  an  American  vessel  catching  cod  along  our 
shores. 

Q.  Where  do  those  who  engage  in  the  fishery  get  their  bait  1 — A. 
They  get  their  bait  in  our  harbors — they  sometimes  buy  it  and  some* 
times  catch  it. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  do  they  use  ? — A.  Herring,  mackerel  and  squid. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  them  catching  bait  ? — A.  I  have. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  taking  nquid  to  any  extent  f — A.  I  have  seen 
them  catching  squid  as  fast  as  they  could  haul  them, 

Q.  Ill  what  harbors  f — A.  At  Hawkesbury.  I  don't  know  the  num- 
ber of  barrels  they  caught,  but  I  was  told  the  next  day  that  they  caught 
30  barrels ;  I  don't,  however,  state  that  as  a  fact. 

Q.  I  understand  you  saw  them  engaged  in  fishing,  but  the  actual 
quantity  of  squid  they  took  you  heard  from  hearsay  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  you  saw  them  taking  squid? — A.  Yes,  as  fast  as  they  could 
haul  tliem. 

Q.  More  than  one  vessel  ? — A.  Fifteen  vessels. 

Q.  At  one  time? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  to  prosecute  the  cod-flahery  that  they  purchase  and  catch 
cod  fishery  bait  in  your  shores  and  harbors? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  get  any  ice  for  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  that  essential  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Explain,  as  a  practical  man,  why  it  is  essential. — A.  They  require 
to  go  500  miles  to  the  Grand  Banks  and  Banquero.vu  to  catch  codfish. 
They  have  to  take  their  bait  fresh,  and  if  they  have  not  ice  to  keep  it 
fresh  the  bait  is  no  use. 

Q.  Can  they  use  cured  bait,  clams  for  example  ? — A.  Ibey  cannot  fish 
vrith  clams  on  trawls ;  they  must  have  fresh  bait  to  fish  on  trawls. 

Q.  They  must  have  ice,  and  they  must  procure  that  ice  in  our  ports? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  So,  practically,  you  state  that  that  fishery  cannot  be  carried  on  by 
American  fishermen  unless  they  have  this  privilege  of  procuring  bait 
and  ice?— A.  I  say  so  positively. 

Q.  In  your  neighborhood,  I  understand,  a  good  deal  of  transshipping 
of  mackerel  is  done  by  American  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  give  an  estimate  of  the  extent  to  which  that  right  is 
avoided  by  them  ? — A.  I  have  seen  at  one  time,  I  could  not  state  posi- 
tively the  number,  but  I  heard  it  was  7,000  barrels  on  the  wharf. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  could  judge  pretty  well  with  your  eye  how  many 
were  on  the  wharf? — A.  I  could  tell  pretty  well.    I  saw  as  many 


632 


AWABD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


on  Hart's  wharf  at  Hawkesbary  as  from  five  thoasand  to  six  thousand 
barrels. 

Q.  Is  that  continuously  daring  the  snramer  f — A.  I  hardly  ever  have 
seen  the  wharf  when  there  was  not  fish  there  being  shipped  by  Aioeri- 
cans.  I  have  seen  our  street  in  Port  Mulgrave  blocked  so  that  people 
conld  not  pass,  with  fish  beiug  transshipped  by  Americans. 

Q.  It  is  not  an  exceptional  but  n  continuous  practice  ? — Ji.  This  year 
if  they  can  catch  fish  it  will  be  their  object  to  land  the  fish  aud  llave 
them  transshipped  and  prepare  for  another  voyage. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  consider  it  a  very  great  advantage  ? — A.  The 
Americans  themselves  consider  it  of  the  greatest  advantage.  Tbcy 
consider  it  an  advantage  because  mackerel  cannot  be  caught  at  all  timet! 
in  the  bay.  There  are  times  when  mackerel  can  be  taken.  The  latter 
part  of  July  and  August,  and  September  are  the  principal  months  that 
mackerel  bite,  and  the  weather  is  generally  favorable.  When  they  are 
able  at  that  particular  time  to  obtain  the  fish,  every  day  saved  is  of 
great  importaiicc;  ronsequently,  when  they  come  to  land  aud  have  the 
fish  transshipped  without  delay  at  ports  in  Canso,  they  can  prosecute 
the  fishery  without  any  obstruction  at  all. 

Q.  It  is  therefore  a  great  advantage? — A.  I  consider  it,  and  they  con- 
sider it  themselves,  of  the  greatest  advantage. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  the  Commission  the  average  catch  of  the  cod  fisher- 
men ? — A.  I  could  not  give  you  an  answer  to  that  question,  except  as  to 
hearsay.  They  fit  out  with  fresh  bait  and  ice,  aud  when  that  stock  of 
bait  is  out  they  come  into  ports  on  the  coast  with  whatever  fish  they 
have  on  board,  and  refit  with  bait  and  ice,  and  go  down  to  Bay  Saiut 
Lawrence  and  complete  their  voyage  there.  I  hear  that  they  go  down 
with  500  barrels,  and  that  they  return  with  1,000.  I  have  seen  the  ves 
sels  deeply  laden,  and  have  asked  how  they  have  fared,  and  they  have 
said  they  fared  well,  or,  if  they  had  not  done  so,  they  would  tell  me  so. 

Q.  Did  their  statements  agree  with  your  own  experience  and  observa- 
tion ? — A.  They  did,  decidedly,  from  what  I  saw  of  the  state  ot  the 
vessels  and  the  appearance  of  the  cargoes. 

Q.  As  a  practical  man,  had  you  the  slightest  doubt  that  they  had 
made  good  fares  ?~A.  Not  the  slightest  doubt. 

Q.  Those  things  can  be  judged  by  the  appearance  of  the  vessels?— 
A.  I  know  perfectly  well  when  a  voyage  has  not  been  completed  or  has 
been  unsuccessful. 

Q.  From  actual  observation  aud  information  furnished  by  American 
captains,  at  how  many  quintals  would  you  place  the  average  catch  f— 
A.  I  could  not  make  a  statement  of  that  kind.  In  fact,  in  my  opiuiou, 
it  would  be  so  large  it  might  appear  an  exaggeration. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  give  any  informatiou  in  regard  to  the  herring 
iishery?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  your  knowledge  of  that  fishery? — A.  Do  you  mean  tlic 
Magdalen  Islands  branch  ? 

Q.  Both  branches. — A.  There  are,  on  an  average,  50  vessels  ou  the 
Magdalen  coast,  average  about  1,000  barrels  per  vessel.  They  bring  a 
large  quantity  of  herring  from  Boone  Bay,  Newfoundland.  This  year 
there  were  some  vessels  taking  large  cargoes  at  the  Magdalen  islaiiils 
for  Norway,  repacking  in  the  Strait  of  Canso,  and  shipping  theiu  direct 
to  Norway. 

Q.  Could  they  have  furnished  their  goods  to  Norway  without  repacli- 
ing  them  I — A.  No,  they  would  have  been  spoiled. 

Q.  Is  that  likely  to  be  a  growing  trade  ? — A.  It  is  expected  that  it  is 
going  to  be  a  profitable  trade;  it  has  been  profitable,  aud  it  ia  a  trade  to 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


633 


;he  cod  fisher- 


ail  mean  the 


which  the  Americans,  the  Gloucester  men,  look  forward  to  the  prospect 
of  making  it  very  profitable. 

Q.  Is  it  prosecuted  to  any  extent  already  ;  are  there  many  vessels  ? — 
A.  I  foget  how  many  barrels,  probably  10,000  or  more,  were  shipped 
this  season.  To  be  within  the  mark  I  say  10,000.  I  understand  they 
came  down  fitted  out  to  procure  30,000  if  they  could ;  but  with  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands  the  fishery  was  partially  a  failure. 

Q.  The  herring  fishery  round  your  coast  is  somewhat  extended  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  enough  herring  for  bait  ? — A.  Nearly  always. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  effect  of  seine  fishing  on  mack- 
erel?—A.  If  continued,  it  will  destroy  the  mackerel  fishing. 

Q,  What  are  your  reasons  for  holding  that  opinion  ? — A.  My  reason 
is  that  when  fish  become  harassed  and  worried  on  their  feeding-grounds 
they  abandon  them  finally.  I  think  also  that  it  will  ruin  those  engaged 
iu  that  branch  of  fishing. 

Q.  Are  the  Americans  unable  to  use  their  seines  iu  our  waters  ? — A. 
Last  Sunday  fortnight,  at  Harbor  Bushy,  a  seiner  took  100  barrels  right 
inshore,  where  it  happened  that  the  water  was  deep. 

Q.  Some  of  the  witnesses  have  said  that  the  American  seines  were  too 
deep  for  our  shores  ? — A.  That  is  the  reason  they  assign  for  not  being 
able  to  catch  fish  for  the  last  two  years  in  the  bay,  that  the  fish  keep  too 
close  inshore  and  their  seines  were  too  deep.  I  Lave  heard  that  some 
Americans  are  supplied  with  shoal  seines  and  are  to  some  extent  being 
successful  now. 

Q.  From  your  experience  and  observation,  are  you  able  to  state  what 
effect  the  throwing  of  offal  overboard  has  on  the  fisheries  ? — A.  I  always 
heard  it  had  a  bad  effect.  My  own  experience  is  that  it  is  an  injury  to 
the  fish  and  fishery. 

Q.  Does  your  experience  lead  you  to  form  a  strong  judgment  on  the 
point  ? — A.  I  always  had  a  strong  opinion  that  the  throwing  overboard 
ofottalis  injurious  to  the  fishery,  and  the  fish  abandon  the  grounds 
where  offal  is  thrown.  I  arrive  at  that  judgment  by  actual  experience 
and  by  the  opinions  of  those  who  have  had  a  larger  experience  than  my- 
self. 

Q.  What  effect  has  the  presence  of  American  vessels  on  boat  fisher- 
men J   Does  it  interfere  or  injure  them  ? — A.  It  injures  them  immensely. 

Q.  Explain  why. — A.  When  they  go  in  with  superior  tackle,  superior 
bait,  and  all  other  appliances,  to  where  the  boats  are  fishing,  they  take 
the  fish  awaj'  from  the  boats. 

Q.  The  boats  fish  at  anchor  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  vessels  drift  and  take  the  fish  away  with  them  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  the  American  coast  fisheries  ?  Are  they 
of  any  value  to  us? — A.  I  don't  think  they  are  of  any  value  whatever. 
I  never  heard  they  were,  never  thought  they  were,  and  I  don't  think 
they  ever  will  be. 

Q.  Some  evidence  has  been  given  of  the  superiority  of  the  mackerel 
caught  on  the  American  coast  as  compared  with  that  caught  in  the  bay. 
What  is  your  opinion  ? — A.  It  is  an  admitted  fact,  from  all  experience, 
that  the  mackerel  are  never  in  prime  condition  until  the  latter  part  of 
September  and  October.  Then  they  are  in  prime  condition,  and  those 
are  the  two  principal  months,  and  always  have  been,  when  mackerel 
have  been  most  abundantly  taken  on  our  shores,  and  finer  mackerel  are 
not  found  in  any  part  of  the  earth  and  waters  of  the  globe  than  in  Bay 
St.  Lawrence  and  round  the  shores  of  Cape  Breton  and  Nova  Scotia.  I 
have  seen  American  mackerel,  have  eaten  them,  and  am  able  to  form 


634 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


an  opinion.  I  know  what  fish  are.  No  better  mackerel  can  ever  be 
taken  than  those  on  our  shores.  There  is  this,  however,  to  be  said  on 
that  point :  mackerel,  when  not  long  salted,  look  better  and  plumper. 

Q.  They  are  very  delicate  fish  to  keep  ? — A.  They  are. 

Q.  They  require  great  care  in  hauling  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  longer  they  are  kept  the  worse  they  appear  ? — A.  Unless  when 
very  fat.  If  kept  any  time  in  salt  they  would  deteriorate  a  great  deal 
both  in  appearance  and  quality. 

Q.  You  estimate  that  the  superior  price  attained  for  American  mack- 
erel is  due  to  their  being  able  to  put  them  into  the  market  almost 
fresh  ? — A.  Yes.  As  to  the  quality  of  the  fish,  I  don't  think  they  have 
superior  fish.    It  would  be  strange  if  they  had. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  has  been  of  any  great  value  to  Americans  to  be 
able  to  laud,  say  in  the  Strait  of  Ganso,  and  to  buy  bait,  ice,  and  other 
necessaries  of  life,  and  fishing  and  unload  and  transship  their  cargoes 
there  ? — A.  I  should  think  it  is. 

Q.  Will  you  state  a  possible  opinion  as  to  whether  you  think  it  is  of 
any  advantage  to  them  ? — A.  One  advantage  that  is  afforded  them  is 
this :  by  being  enabled  to  land  their  cargoes  at  the  Strait  of  Canso  they 
are  enabled  to  catch  at  least  one-third  more  fish  than  they  could  possi- 
bly catch  if  they  had  to  land  their  fish  at  their  own  ports. 

Q.  They  make  one  more  trip  than  they  would  make  if  they  took  the 
fish  home? — A.  Two  more. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  state  whether  you  think  on  the  whole  the  transship- 
ping, the  opportunity  to  purcliaso  bait,  ice,  and  provisions,  and  refit,  are 
of  great  advantage  to  American  vessels  ? — A.  They  are  of  great  advan- 
tage. 

Q.  Do  they  avail  themselves  of  it  ? — A.  They  do. 

Q.  Has  there  sprung  up  a  trade  in  these  articles  in  the  Strait  of  Can- 
so?  Have  your  people  been  selling  to  the  Americans  largely? — X.  Some 
years  they  have  sold  to  them  largely. 

Q.  A  number  of  mercantile  houses  have  been  spoken  of  as  at  Hawkes- 
bury,  Port  Mulgrave,  Ira  Cove,  Steep  Creek,  Port  Hastings,  White  Head, 
and  so  on ;  are  there  parties  at  these  different  places  who  carry  on  the 
trade  of  supplying  American  fishermen  ?  The  Americans  buy  their  bait 
there  ? — A.  Not  for  mackerel.  They  buy  their  bait  for  codfish  at  some 
of  those  places. 

Q.  Advertisements  appear  in  the  Gloucester  papers  that  bait,  salt,  ice, 
and  anything  else  they  need  can  be  bought  there.  Do  you  consider  that 
is  a  pretty  stirring  and  active  business? — A.  I  consider  it  would  be  quite 
unnecessary  for  those  men  to  advertise  in  the  Gloucester  papers  that  we 
have  bait  to  sell.  They  have  bait  to  sell  to  our  fishermen.  Those  peo 
pie  advertise  in  a  general  way ;  they  do  not  advertise  particularly  for  the 
American  fishermen.  We  have  a  western  fleet  which  takes  bait,  salt, 
and  other  supplies. 

Q.  What  is  the  western  fleet? — A.  English  vessels  from  the  western 
part  of  the  province. 

Q.  Are  there  many  of  those  engaged  in  the  fishery  ? — A.  About  40 
sail. 

Q.  That  bears  a  very  small  proportion  to  the  number  of  American 
vessels? — A.  It  is  pretty  small. 

Q.  Besides,  are  they  not  better  able  to  get  their  own  provisions  and 
outfits  on  the  shores  where  they  live  ? — A.  Perhaps  it  does  not  suit  them 
always  to  do  so. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


635 


Q.  They  can  get  home  more  quickly  than  the  Americans?  They  don't 
transship  at  the  Gut  of  Ganso  f — A.  I  never  said  they  did. 

Q,  Then  the  trade  in  the  gut  in  the  way  of  retailing  and  purcliasing 
necessary  snpplies,  salt,  ice,  or  bait,  whether  for  cod  or  other  fishing,  is 
mainly  an  American  trade  f — A.  It  is  mainly  an  American  trade. 

Q.  Is  it  not  almost  entirely  an  American  trade  ? — A.  I  tell  yon  that 
a  large  number  of  our  vessels  are  supplied  there.  A  great  many  get 
salt  and  bait  there. 

Q.  They  don't  go  there  to  transship  1 — A.  No. 

Q.  Nor  to  refit  their  vessels  ? — A.  Sometimes  I  have  heard  of  western 
men  having  got  some  of  their  refit  there. 

Q.  As  a  main  thing,  they  are  pretty  near  home  and  able  to  commu- 
nicate with  home  ? — A.  They  go  to  the  gut  principally  for  mackerel 
bait,  because  it  is  prepared  there  for  them.  It  is  difficult  in  Halifax  to 
get  pogy  bait,  and  they  get  it  there,  and  at  the  s^me  time  they  get 
other  supplies. 

Q.  That  is  American  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  has  been  imported  from  the  United  States  ? — A.  Yes,  and  is 
part  of  the  American  trade. 

Q.  You  have  said  the  Americans  cannot  get  on  at  all  unless  they  take 
advantage  of  these  opportunities  for  refitting,  transshipping,  and  get- 
ting supplies,  and  they  get  these  articles,  such  as  ice,  much  better  from 
these  parties  than  if  they  went  back  to  the  United  States  to  get  them  ? — 
A.  That  is  a  slight  deviation  from  what  I  said.  I  say  they  could  not 
prosecute  the  cod  fishery  without  getting  this  fresh  bait.  I  did  not  say 
they  could  not  prosecute  the  mackerel  fishery  without  these  privileges, 
but  I  say  they  could  not  do  it  as  successfully. 

Q.  I  said  nothing  about  the  cod  or  mackerel  fishery. — A.  I  want  to 
make  the  distinction,  because  you  said  that  I  said  it  would  be  impossi- 
ble for  them  to  carry  on  the  fishery.  I  said  that,  without  getting  a 
supply  of  fish -bait,  it  was  impossible  for  the  cod  fishermen  to  carry  on 
the  Bank  fishery. 

Q.  And  the  mackerel  fishery  they  would  carry  on  at  a  great  disad- 
vantage?—A.  Yes;  that  is  just  it. 

Q.  Then  the  whole  American  fleet  engaged  in  the  cod  fishery  takes 
advantage  of  this,  without  which  you  think  they  could  not  carry  on  the 
cod  fishery  at  all  ? — A.  I  don't  say  they  could  not  carry  on  the  American 
fishery  at  all,  because  I  know  before  the  treaty  of  1818  they  carried  on 
the  cod  fishery,  but  we  know  how.  They  carried  it  on  with  the  assist- 
ance of  bounties. 

Q.  Tliey  could  not  carry  it  on  to  a  profit  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  American  vessels,  which  are  large,  introduce  a  very  extensive 
business;  is  not  that  so  f — A.  Yes;  comparatively  speaking. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  profitable  business  to  yonr  people  to  sell  to  the  Ameri- 
cans?— A.  It  is  not  to  the  interests  of  our  fishery. 

Q.  Is  it  a  profitable  business  on  the  whole  to  those  ]>er8on8  who  are 
engaged  in  it  ?  I  don't  speak  of  the  moral  efi'ect  on  the  character  of  the 
people,  but  as  merely  a  commercial  matter.  I  suppose  the  people  en- 
gaged in  it  find  it  profitable  or  they  would  not  engage  in  it  ? — A.  I  could 
give  you  no  answer  to  that  question,  because  I  cannot  tell  how  success- 
ful they  have  been  ;  what  money  they  have  made.  All  I  can  tell  you 
is  that  some  have  failed. 

Q.  Do  you  decline  to  answer  the  question  ? — A.  I  cannot  answer  it. 

Q.  To  the  best  of  your  judgment  it  is  a  profitable  business? — A.  I 
cannot  say  whether  it  is  a  profitable  business  to  them  or  not ;  I  have 
no  means  of  knowing. 


t*ff*»'i 


636 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Yoa  find  men  engaged  in  bnsiness ;  the  Americans  sell  pogies 
transship  and  refit ;  you  don't  know  the  profits  of  the  Americans?- a! 
I  do  not.  I  only  know  their  advantages  in  getting  fish.  1  don't  know 
what  they  make  by  their  voyages. 

Q.  You  find,  on  the  other  side,  British  subjects  or  others  resident  tbere 
selling  articles  to  Americans  and  buying  American  pogies  for  bait. 
Every  time  an  American  vessel  lands  to  transship,  it  employs  a  good 
many  of  your  people  1 — A.  No ;  they  do  not ;  they  land  their  flsb  with 
their  crews,  and  those  men  they  do  business  with  take  care  of  the  tisli, 
I  can  only  speak  from  what  I  have  seen. 

Q.  You  have  seen  American  vessels  come  there  in  numbers  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  seen  cargoes  transshipped? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  count  how  many  barrels  then  go  out  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Barrels  are  bought  there  to  a  great  extent  ? — A.  lu  many  instances 
they  have  been  brought  from  the  States  there,  and  very  often  staves 
and  heads  are  brought  down  from  the  American  market  and  made  up 
there. 

Q.  My  question  was,  have  you  not  seen  and  known  that  to  a  large 
extent  barrels  are  sold  to  Americans  for  refitting  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Americans  then  do,  to  some  extent,  employ  the  people  there  ?— A. 
They  employ  them  on  board  their  vessels,  take  them  on  board  to  flsli 
with  them. 

Q.  To  return  to  the  business  in  the  Strait  of  Canso;  there  is  this  busi- 
ness going  on,  and  you  know  a  good  many  mercantile  houses  are  en- 
gaged in  it.  If  the  Americans  should  withdraw  altogether,  should  not 
transsnip  any  cargoes,  should  not  purchase  anything  there,  and  should 
not  bring  bait  there  for  sale,  that  mercantile  business  would  substan- 
tially come  to  an  end,  would  it  not?  There  are  not  enough  vessels  in 
the  40  schooners  you  mentioned  to  keep  up  that  business? — A.  Yes. 
And  it  would  be  very  lucky  if  it  was  ended. 

Q.  You  think  they  would  be  better  off  if  they  lost  the  American 
trade  ? — A.  I  do.  The  only  parties  who  are  well  off  are  those  who  never 
had  anything  to  do  with  it. 

Q.  Then  it  is  a  losing  trade  ? — A.  So  far  as  I  know.  Those  engaged 
in  it  have  been  ruined,  so  far  as  I  know. 

Q.  Then  it  is  a  bad  business  ? — A.  I  don't  think  they  made  any  for- 
tune. 

Q.  Have  they  made  any  money  ? — A.  I  never  knew  one  who  had 
made  money  from  it. 

Q.  Have  they  all  failed  ? — A.  Those  who  have  not  failed  are  pretty 
well  in  slings. 

Q.  Y^ou  mean  they  are  very  much  embarrassed  ? — A.  You  may  inter- 
pret it  that  way. 

Q.  But  still  hold  on  to  it;  perhaps  they  have  nothing  better  to  do?— 
A.  Perhaps  so. 

I  Q.  Then  the  result  seems  to  be  that,  speaking  of  American  vessels 
coming  there,  it  comes  down  substantially  to  an  American  trade,  ajd 
you  think  the  sooner  they  are  rid  of  it  the  better  ?  That  is  your  judg- 
ment?— A.  My  judgment  is  this,  that  the  faciliiias  Americans  have  tor 
landing  their  fish  and  transshipping  it  are  of  great  advantage  to  them. 
That  is  my  belief  from  my  own  knowledge  and  actual  observation.  On 
the  other  side,  my  experience  has  led  me  to  know  that  those  engaged  in 
supplying  them  have  never  made  anything  by  them. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  better  to  have  the  trade  cut  off  ?— A. 
The  only  reply  I  could  give  is  that  those  men  who  were  not  engaged  in 
that  trade — I  could  name  them  if  necessary — Messrs.  Paints  in  the 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


637 


straits,  who  never  supplied  an  American  vessel,  still  live,  are  well  o£f 
aud  comfortable. 

Q.  What  is  that  firm  engaged  in  at  present  ? — A.  Buying  fish  from 
oar  own  people  and  selling  goods  to  our  own  people. 

Q.  They  are  not  engaged  in  the  Americau  trade  ? — A.  Not  as  far  as 
I  know ;  if  so,  it  is  to  a  very  limited  extent. 

Q.  You  don't  know  that  they  advertise  in  the  Gloucester  papers  for 
American  trade  ? — A.  Perhaps  they  may ;  if  so,  it  is  very  recently.  One, 
I  know,  has  not.  One  put  up  an  icehouse  here  some  time  ago.  It  is  no 
matter  what  they  have  advertised.  If  you  wish  to  test  ray  testimony  you 
can  do  so  by  telegraphing  to  them,  and  1  pledge  myself  that  they  will 
tell  you  they  never  supplied  20  Americau  vessels  in  their  lives.  I  don't 
say  but  that  they  advertised. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  their  advertising  ? — A.  Perhaps  they  want 
to  extend  their  business;  I  cannot  tell  you  that. 

Q.  They  want  to  lose  more  money  ? — A.  Perhaps  they  could  find  out 
a  way  to  conduct  it  more  successfully. 

Q.  You  say  the  best  mackerel  in  the  world  are  to  be  caught  in  the  gulf 
in  September  and  October  ? — A.  That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  on  the  American  coast  mackerel  fishing  in  No- 
vember ? — A.  No ;  I  never  was  on  the  American  coast  at  all. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  the  American  mackerel  are  on  the  American 
coast  after  they  have  left  you  a  few  weeks,  whether  they  are  worse  or 
better,  the  same  schools? — A.  When  they  leave  us  in  October  and  No- 
vember, I  don't  know  they  have  much  time  to  get  better  or  worse  when 
on  their  coasts. 

Q.  Have  yon  ever  eaten  mackerel  caught  off  Massachusetts  in  Novem- 
ber?—A.  I  have  been  in  Massachusetts  and  perhaps  eaten  mackerel 
there. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  know  of  having  eaten  mackerel  caught  in  November 
off  Massachusetts?— A.  I  never  saw  it  labeled  at  the  hotel  as  to  what 
particular  month  it  was  caught.  Indeed,  I  never  paid  particular  atten- 
tion as  to  whether  I  eat  any  or  not ;  I  cannot  say  that  I  did. 

Q.  Will  you  undertake  to  say  that  mackerel  caught  in  Massachusetts 
Bay  in  November  may  not  be  just  as  good  as  they  are  here  ? — A.  I  don't 
say  they  could  not. 

Q.  I  thought  you  said  the  mackerel  caught  in  the  gulf  in  October  and 
November  were  the  best  in  the  world  ? — A.  I  say,  as  regards  our  mack- 
erel, there  are  none  superior  to  them ;  that  is  what  I  mean  to  convey. 

Q.  You  fished  altogether  in  British  vessels  ? — A.  In  my  own  vessels. 

Q.  How  large  are  they  ? — A.  Small  vessels,  20  tons;  we  have  one  now 
50  tons. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  in  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  years  were  you  engaged  in  fishing  in  your  own  ves- 
sels?— A.  From  185L  to  1850  off  and  on,  not  continuously.  I  never 
was  necessitated  to  go  continually  on  a  vessel.  I  went  sometimes  for 
my  health,  sometimes  for  my  need,  aud  at  other  times  to  look  after  the 
men. 

Q.  When  you  went  in  your  vessels,  did  you  fish  for  mackerel  close  in- 
shore ?— A.  Always. 

Q.  Did  you  come  to  anchor  ? — A.  Sometimes.  We  fished  on  what  we 
call  a  spring. 

Q.  Sometimes  you  fish  on  a  spring  and  sometimes  you  drift  t  When 
the  wind  is  off  shore,  you  go  as  close  in  as  the  depth  of  water  will  admit 
and  then  drift  off  ?— A.  Yes ;  we  do  that  sometimes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  English  vessels  ever  happen  to  strike  a  boat  that  ia 


638 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


flsbing  or  be  ia  the  way  of  boat-fishing  f  We  have  been  told  that  Amer- 
ican vessels  drift  slowly  off,  throw  the  bait,  and  sometimes  get  foul  of 
British  boats. — A.  I  never  saw  them  get  foul  of  them. 

Q.  You  never  saw  au  American  vessel  get  foul  of  a  British  boat  ?— -A. 
I  never  saw  them  get  foul  of  any  boat. 

Q.  Not  an  American  vessel  ? — A.  I  never  saw  one  get  foul  of  a  boat. 
I  have  seen  them  dash  in  among  the  boats,  throw  bait,  and  drift  otf. 

Q.  You  never  saw  a  British  vessel  do  that  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  have  seeu 
British  vessels  do  so ;  we  went  in  among  them  ourselves. 

Q.  To  foul  them  ? — A.  I  never  di<l  that. 

Q.  You  go  in  just  as  the  Americans  do? — A.  Yes;  certainly. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  Where  were  licenses  applied  for  when  they  were  issued  iu  18G8  ami 
1869,  and  how  were  they  obtained  ? — A.  At  Port  Mulgrave. 

Q.  For  all  the  fishing  vessels  ? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Was  there  one  place  where  they  were  all  obtained  f — A.  At  Port 
Mulgrave  the  largest  number  were  obtained. 

Q.  Is  that  part  of  the  way  in  which  you  know  how  many  vessels 
passed  the  Gut  of  Canso— by  the  licenses  ? — A.  1  have  various  reasons 
besides  that. 

Q.  Did  any  go  through  to  fish  without  having  licenses  ? — A.  There 
were.  I  know  the  first  year,  when  the  license  was  so  high,  scarcely  any 
took  out  licenses. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  You  have  not  seen  American  vessels  interfering  with  boats  or  in- 
juring them  ? — A.  No ;  I  have  not. 

Q.  Do  you  confine  that  statement  to  Cape  Breton  or  extend  it  round 
the  whole  coast  ? — A.  I  don't  wish  to  make  any  statement  further  tban 
what  I  know  myself. 

Q.  Over  what  distance  do  you  wish  to  extend  the  statement  ? — A.  I 
never  saw  the  vessels  run  foul  of  the  boats  or  injure  them. 

Q.  To  where  do  you  mean  to  confine  your  experience  on  that  point  ? 
Do  you  mean  that  they  never  foul  boats  at  Prince  Edward  Island  ?— A. 
I  know  nothing  about  boat-fishing  at  Prince  Edward  Island.  When  1 
frequented  North  Bay  there  was  very  little  boat  fishing ;  it  was  not  car- 
ried on  to  any  extent  at  that  time. 

No.  21. 

Friday,  August  17. 

The  Conference  met. 

Capt.  Edward  Hardinge,  R.  N.,  C.  B.,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  You  are  post  captain  iu  the  royal  navy  ? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  so  in  1870  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  were  on  this  station  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1870  were  you  in  command  of  a  vessel  of-war,  and,  if  so,  state 
her  name,  to  guard  the  fisheries  in  the  gulf? — A.  Yes;  the  Valorous,  a 
steam  frigate,  stationed  on  No.  6  station. 

Q.  Station  No.  6  is  in  the  gulf.  Describe  where  it  is. — A.  From 
North  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  to  Cape  Wolfe,  thence  across  to 
Bichibucto  Head,  along  the  coast  of  New  Brunswick  to  Cape  Bozier. 

Q.  Yoa  were  stationed  at  Bay  Cbaleurs  on  the  Quebec  side  of  tbe 
bay?— A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


639 


Q.  How  many  men  bad  yoa  on  hcwd  ? — A.  Two  buudred  and  thirty-  < 

five. 

Q.  How  many  guns  ?— A.  Twelve  gnus. 

Q.  When  did  you  enter  the  gulf? — A.  I  entered  the  station  on  15th 
July,  and  I  must  have  entered  the  gulf  some  days  earlier,  because  I 
coaled  at  Pietou  before  proceeding  to  my  station. 

Q.  As  you  came  up  the  gulf  toward  your  station,  did  you  see  many, 
or  any,  American  fishing-vessels? — A.  Passing  up  Northumberland 
Strait  I  saw  very  few,  but  on  reaching  Mirimicbi,  off  Mirimichi  River, 
we  came  into  a  fleet  of  fishing-vessels. 

Q.  When  you  got  to  Mirimichi  Bay  did  you  see  fishing-vessels  in 
tljere  ?— A.  Not  inside  the  bay.  I  saw  a  fleet  of  53  sail ;  1  have  it  re- 
•  orilcd.    They  were  outside  the  limits. 

Q.  Tliey  were  Americans  ? — A.  They  were  all  Americans. 

Q.  What  were  they  doing  when  you  saw  them  ? — A.  They  were  sail- 
ing. 

Q.  Not  fishing?— A.  Not  fishing. 

Q.  Wlien  they  fish  they  lie  to?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  days  altogether  were  you  upon  the  station  f — A.  I  was 
actually  on  No.  6  station  only  twenty  days. 

Q.  How  many  days  were  you  in  the  gulf  ? — A.  About  sixty  days. 

Q.  You  were  only  twenty  days  on  the  station  ? — A.  Only  twenty  days 
actually  on  No.  6  station.  It  was  upwards  of  sixty  days  from  the  time 
of  passing  through  the  Gut  of  Canso  to  returning  to  it  again. 

Q.  What  sort  of  a  steamer  did  you  command  ?  Was  it  one  which 
could  be  seen  at  a  distance  ? — A.  It  was  a  paddle-wheel  steam  frigate, 
between  1,200  and  1,300  tons,  400  horse-power,  with  large  paddle- 
boxes. 

Q.  How  far  distant  could  the  vessel  be  seen  on  a  clear  day  ? — A.  A 
fiillrigged  ship  of  that  tonnage  could  be  seen  a  long  distance.  From 
the  peculiarity  of  her  paddle-boxes  at  five  miles  distant  she  might  be 
told  exactly. 

Q.  And  known,  of  course,  to  be  a  man-of-war  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  she  could  be  seen  five  miles  off,  and  American  fishing-vessels 
were  within  the  Hmits,  could  they  not  easily  sail  out  before  you  could 
get  hold  of  them  ? — A.  Naturally,  certainly. 

Q.  iSuch  a  steamer  as  that,  so  large  and  visible  at  a  great  distance, 
would  not  practically  be  of  any  very  great  use  for  the  purpose  of  catch- 
ing lisbiug-vessels  within  the  three-mile  limits? — A.  Practically,  I  found 
it  none  at  all. 

Q.  It  was  useless  for  that  purpose  ? — A.  Almost  useless. 

Q.  When  you  were  in  the  gulf,  I  think  there  were  American  vessels 
of  war  also? — A.  I  met  with  three;  I  think  Nipsic,  Frolic,  and  Guard. 

Q.  What  were  their  sizes  ? — A.  The  Frolic  and  Nipsic  were  steamers. 
The  Nipsic  was  a  large  corvette,  carrying  4  guns  and  100  men.  The 
(ruard  was  a  sailing-ship  with  110  men,  and  I  think  4  guns.  I  don't 
know  what  the  Frolic  carried. 

Q.  You  co-operated  with  the  American  commanders  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  vis- 
ited them  and  they  visited  me. 

Q.  You  got  on  cordially  enough  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  other  vessels  belonging  to  the  British  Navy  also  pro- 
tecting the  fisheries  ? — A.  I  think  there  were  seven. 

Q.  Each  having  its  own  district  f — A.  Yes.  There  were  six  stations 
and  occasionally  there  would  be  two  vessels  on  one  station. 

Q.  Do  yoa  remember  the  names  of  the  British  men-of-war  ? — A.  They 


640 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


were  the  Bojalist,  Philomel,  Plover,  Britomart,  Cherub,  Sphinx,  and 
Lapwing. 

Q*  During  those  twenty  days  when  you  were  on  your  station,  did  yon 
see  with  your  own  eyes  any  American  fishing- vessels  within  the  limits* 
— A.  Frequently. 

Q.  Where  did  you  see  them  ? — A.  Oflf  Mirimichi,  on  the  coast  between 
Mirimichi  and  Bay  Chaleurs  and  in  the  bay. 

Q.  How  many  at  one  time  ? — A.  I  have  seen  thirteen  at  one  time 
within  the  limit,  fishing ;  by  the  time  I  got  down  they  were  outside  tlie 
limit. 

Q.  Did  you  board  any  of  them  after  they  got  outside  ? — A.  No,  not 
those  outside.  On  one  occasion,  oflf  Miscou,  I  boarded  a  vessel  when 
she  came  out  of  the  three-mile  limit;  she  had  been  fishing  inside.  She 
was  the  Glenwood,  of  Gloucester. 

Q.  Miscou  is  one  of  the  points  oflf  Mirimichi  ? — A.  At  the  entrance  of 
Bay  Chaleurs,  on  the  south  side. 

Q.  Did  j'ou  speak  to  them  ? — A.  I  went  on  board  myself.  I  asked 
the  captain  if  he  was  aware  of  his  position.  At  first  he  said  he  was  not. 
On  asking  him  if  he  had  no  instructions,  he  produced  Mr.  Buutwellii 
circular. 

Q.  Mr.  Boutwell  was  Treasurer  of  the  United  States  ? — A.  Yes.  I 
cautioned  the  captain  and  left  him.  He  was  three  miles  from  the  land 
by  the  time  I  got  on  board. 

Q.  Did  you  see  the  fish  they  had  taken? — A.  Yes;  the  fish  had  just 
been  previously  taken ;  they  were  actually  alive  at  the  time. 

Q.  Going  up  Bay  Chaleurs,  were  you  aware  that  the  Americana  were 
practicing  seining  in  those  waters  at  that  time? — A.  Not  in  Bay  Cba 
Icurs 

Q.'ln  Gasp6  Bay?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  were  they  practicing  it  ? — A.  On  the  sand  banks  forming 
the  harbor  of  Gasp6. 

Q.  At  that  time  they  did  not  use  purse  seines,  I  believe  ? — A.  I  don't 
think  purse  seines  were  then  in  use;  they  certainly  were  not  general. 
This  was  a  large  seine  for  hauling  to  the  beach  and  could  not  be  worked 
ofll"  the  beach. 

Q.  It  could  not  be  worked  by  taking  it  towards  the  vessel  ?— A.  It 
was  not  fitted  for  that. 

Q.  They  actually  bad  been  seining  on  this  sand  bank  at  Gasp6  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Did  the  inhabitants  complain  of  this  kind  of  fishing?— A.  Yes, 
they  complained  to  me. 

Q.  What  did  they  say  ? — A.  They  said  that  it  did  great  injury ;  that 
small  codfish  were  brought  to  land  when  the  seine  was  hauled ;  that  the 
locality  was  a  favorite  breeding  place  for  the  cod,  and  that  the  seines 
were  round  them  when  fishing  in  their  boats,  and  consequently  tbuj 
had  to  haul  up  their  lines  and  leave. 

Q.  The  seines  not  only  drive  oflf  the  boat  fishers,  but  destroy  the  small 
cod  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  understood  it  in  that  way  from  what  they  told  me. 

Q.  Was  any  complaint  made  of  the  way  in  which  American  fishermen 
deal  with  their  oflfal  ? — A.  Yes ;  oflf  Paspebiac. 

Q.  That  is  on  the  north  shore  of  Bay  Chaleurs  ?— A.  Yes.  They  com 
plained  that  the  oflfal  thrown  from  American  vessels  fed  the  codfish,  and 
the  fishermen  were  unable  to  take  them.  The  cod  fishery,  I  believe,  is 
the  chief  fishery  at  Paspebiac. 

Q.  Paspebiac  fishermen  fish  more  or  less  for  Jersey  houses  f — A.  Yes. 
They  fish  on  the  north  shore,  from  Paspebiac  to  Perce. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


641 


le  eutrance  of 


anks  formiu^: 


Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  the  Jersey  houses  encourage  the  mackerel 
fishery  ?— A.  The  informatiou  I  obtained  was  tbat  they  do  not  encour- 
age flsbing  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Tbey  are  entirely  interested  in  the  Mediterranean  and  Brazil 
(rades?— A.  Entirely  in  the  cod  tisbery. 

Q.  And  the  cod  fishery  they  complained  was  interfered  with  ? — A. 
Yes;  by  the  offal  feeding  the  tisb,  and  the  fish  not  taking  bait  in  con- 
sequence; the  fishing  season  being  comparatively  limited. 

Q.  During  those  twenty  days  you  were  on  the  station,  I  understand 
that,  although  you  frequently  saw  American  vessels  outside  the  three- 
mile  limit,  you  never  saw  one  lying-to  fishing? — A.  Outside  the  limits 
they  were  generally  untler  way,  either  beating  to  windward  or  going  to 
leeward.  I  don't  know  that  1  ever  saw  one  fishing ;  tbey  were  always 
luoving. 

Q.  Di<l  you  learn,  either  from  personal  observation  or  from  the  fish- 
ermen or  inhabitants  on  shore,  whether  the  best  fishing  was  within  the 
tbree-inile  limit  or  without? — A.  Within  three  miles,  witiiout  a  doubt. 

Q.  There  8eeme«l  to  be  no  two  opinions  on  that  point  ? — A.  None 
whatever. 

Q.  As  far  as  your  experience  and  observation  go,  the  outside  fishing 
for  mackerel  is  of  no  account  whatever  ? — A.  That  is  my  opinion,  not 
only  from  my  experience  on  my  own  station,  but  from  information  I 
obtained,  when  detained  at  Charlottetown,  with  respect  to  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island ;  which  was  not,  however,  on  my  station,  and  with  which 
1  had  nothing  to  do. 

Q.  You  did  not  get  any  information  to  the  contrary  ? — A.  None  at 
all;  always  to  that  effect. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  never  returned  to  the  gulf  oflBcially  after  1870  ? — 
A.  Xo. 

Q.  Did  you  discover  that  a  large  portion  of  the  fish  which  was  caught 
either  by  British  or  American  fishermen  that  year,  was  sent  to  Char- 
lottetown and  shipped  from  there  as  American  fish  ? — A.  It  was  gen- 
erally so  understood,  and  it  was  reported  there  that  Nova  Scotia  and 
Islaud  fishermen  got  better  prices  at  Charlottetown  than  anywhere 
else. 

Q.  It  was  shipped  by  some  parties  there.  There  were  two  steamers, 
or  one  at  all  events,  the  Alhambra,  that  ran  direct  from  Charlottetown 
to  some  American  port  ? — A.  Yes,  to  Boston.  I  think  there  was  an- 
other, the  Georgia. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  how  often  they  went  a  week  ? — A.  I  cannot  say 
bow  often. 

Q.  Fish  were  transshipped  by  them  ? — A.  Fish  were  put  on  board 
those  steamers. 

Q.  Did  any  instance  of  transshipping  by  American  vessels  come 
within  your  knowledge  when  yon  were  there  ? — A.  Yes,  one  case  oc- 
curred. The  vessel  was  the  Clara  B.  Chapman,  of  Gloucester.  It  was 
(luring  ray  absence  from  the  port.  She  landed  fish  which  was  trans- 
shipped—100  barrels,  I  think. 

Q.  Where  did  she  land  them  ? — A.  At  Charlottetown.  It  came  to 
ttij  knowledge  by  my  leaving  behind  an  oflicer  with  a  boat  to  watch. 

Q.  It  Wiis  done  during  your  personal  absence  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  any  transshipping  having  taken  place  at 
Canso  ? — A.  No ;  Canso  was  not  within  my  station. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Were  you  engaged  in  the  same  coasting  any  other  year  than 
1870  ?-A.  Only  in  1870. 
41  F 


642 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  You  bave  named  tbe  different  British  vessels  that  were  there ' 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  bow  many  Canadian  vessels  were  there? — A.  Those  I  fell  in 
with  were  the  England,  La  Cauadienne,  Stella  Maris,  and  Ella  o. 
McLean. 

Q.  How  many  others  did  you  hear  were  there  f — A.  I  <lou't  know 
what  others  were  there  except  the  Lady  Head  on  which  was  Ciiptain 
Scott. 

Q.  Have  you  any  means  of  knowing  how  great  was  the  expense  of 
keeping  up  this  watch  on  the  fishing-grounds  f — A.  Do  you  mean  wen- 
of-war  or  Canadian  vessels  ? 

Q.  Take  whichever  you  know  about? — A.  The  expense  of  the  men- 
of-war  must  have  been  extreme,  because  our  orders  were  to  cruise  with 
fires  banked  ready  to  use  steam  at  any  moment.  In  my  own  ship  it  was 
a  case  of  constantly  keeping  up  steam. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  can  estimate  in  round  numbers  the  whole  cost  to  Her 
Majesty's  Government  of  maintaining  vessels  on  the  iishinggiouuds 
that  year  ? — A.  I  cannot. 

Q.  Would  it  be  more  or  less  Ihan  £100,000  ? — A.  I  can  hardly  say;  I 
should  be  sorry  to  commit  myself  to  any  amount. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  would  be  willing  to  make  an  estimate  of  the  outlay 
by  your  own  vessel? — A.  My  own  vessel  was  coaled  twice,  as  far  as  1 
can  remember,  taking  in  each  time  200  tons. 

Q.  Without  giving  the  figures,  you  believe  the  expense  of  maintain- 
ing those  vessels  would  be  an  extreme  one  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  did  not  succeed  in  effectually  driving  outside  fishermen  from 
the  inshore  fisheries  of  the  coast  ? — A.  As  £  passed  along  they  went  out, 
and  when  I  had  passed  by,  I  am  Informed,  they  ran  in. 

Q.  The  efforts  made,  then,  were  ineffectual  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  cost  a  great  deal  of  money  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  will  ask  your  judgment  as  to  whether  it  is  a  thing  which  can  be 
done  without  vast  expense  ? — A.  It  must  be  an  expensive  matter  at  all 
times  to  watch  a  long  coast-line. 

Q.  A  vast  expense? — A.  A  heavy  expense. 

Q.  Then,  if,  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  inshore  fishery,  Her 
Majesty's  Government  or  the  Dominion  Government  undertook  to  guard 
the  coast  in  the  way  the  English  coast  is  guarded  to  prevent  smuggling;, 
it  would  cost  a  great  deal  of  money  ? — A.  Undoubtedly. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  Of  course,  there  was  a  very  large  expense  incurred ;  there  must  be 
that?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  suppose  if  Great  Britain  took  a  less  liberal  view  than  she  has 
done  and  sent  men-of-war  to  the  Gut  of  Canso  to  catch  offending  vessels 
as  they  went  through,  there  would  not  be  much  trouble  or  expense  iu 
seizing  them  ? — A.  Clearly  so. 

By  Mr.  Foster  : 
Q.  They  would  go  round  Cape  Breton  ?— A.  They  might  go  round 
Cape  Breton. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait: 
Q.  You  have  mentioned  that  there  were  American  war- vessels  also  in 
the  gulf.  Do  I  understand  they  were  sent  out  by  the  United  States 
Government  to  co  operate  with  you  iu  preventing  encroachments  ?— A. 
Yes;  and  we  were  ordered  to  co-operate  frankly  and  cordially  with 
them. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


643 


Q.  So  that  the  t\^o  governments  were  in  accord  both  as  to  incurring 
exjiense  and  preserving  the  peace  ? — A.  Yes. 


lere  must  be 


No.  22. 

John  Nicholson,  43  years  of  age,  flsherinan,  Lonisbiug,  Cape  Bre- 
ton, called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Doutre : 

Question.  During  how  many  years  have  you  been  engap,ed  tishingf — 
Answer.  1  may  say  since  I  knew  how  to  go  in  a  boat.  I  have  been  fish- 
ing in  vessels  in  deep  water  for  25  years. 

Q.  Where  have  you  been  fishing  during  that  period  ? — A.  I  have  been 
at  the  Grand  Banks,  Bay  Ghaleurs,  and  all  round  this  coast ;  but  prin- 
cipally at  Grand  Banks  and  Bay  Ghaleurs. 

Q.  Have  you  been  occasionally  at  other  places  ? — A.  All  along  the 
American  coast  fishing  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Have  you  been  commanding  a  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  how  many  years? — A.  Fifteen  years. 

Q.  Did  the  vessel  belong  to  yourself  or  other  parties? — A.  To  other 
parties. 

Q.  Were  they  Ganadian  or  American  vessels  ? — A.  American. 

Q.  Where  from  ? — A.  Provincetowu. 

Q.  Always  from  that  place  ? — A.  I  sailed  from  there  about  every  time 
I  went  fishing. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  tonnage  of  the  vessels  you  commanded? — 
A.  They  would  be  from  45  to  80  tons. 

Q.  Describe  to  the  Gommission  where  you  carried  on  the  fishery  at  the 
coinmencenient  of  the  season  ? — A.  We  fished  on  Grand  Banks. 

Q.  There  you  fished  cod? — A.  God  and  halibut. 

Q.  How  much  time  does  a  voyage  occupy  ? — A.  Sometimes  two  and 
tbree  mouths.    I  have  been  gone  as  long  as  six  months. 

Q.  When  you  have  a  cargo,  what  do  you  do  with  it  ? — A.  Carry  it 
home  and  laud  it. 

Q.  And  then  what  ? — A.  The  owner  takes  the  fish  and  makes  them. 
Then  I  proceed  on  a  trip  for  mackerel,  either  to  American  waters  or  Bay 
Chaleui's. 

Q.  VVliere  have  you  mostly  visited,  Ganadian  or  American  waters? — 
A.  I  have  been  mostly  fishing  for  mackerel  on  the  American  coast ;  but 
I  have  been,  during  about  teu  falls,  in  Bay  Ghaleurs  and  on  the  shores 
arouiul  Cape  Breton,  Sydney,  and  other  places. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  have  you  seen  fishing  with  you  ? — A. 
There  was  always  a  fleet  of  American  vessels,  and  we  went  together. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  have  you  seen  fishing  for  mackerel 
at  oue  time  in  Canadian  waters  1 — A.  I  should  think  as  many  as  300 
sail  in  oue  fleet  distributed  along  the  coast.  I  did  not  count  the  fleet;  I 
am  only  making  an  estimate. 

Q.  That  is  the  number  to  the  best  of  your  knowledge? — A.  I  should 
say  oOl»  sail,  as  far  as  my  eye  could  extend. 

<^.  For  Avhat  was  the  fleet  fishing,  for  mackerel  or  cod  ? — A.  All  for 
mackerel. 

il  At  what  distance  from  the  coast  were  they  generally  fishing? — A. 
They  geuerally  fished  from  close  to  the  rocks  till  they  got  away  off  15 
or  20  miles,  where  they  could  catch  fish. 

Q.  Of  this  fleet  of  300  vessels  how  many  were  fishing  within  three 


644 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


miles  of  the  const,  or  in  any  of  the  bays  ? — A.  About  all  of  us  were 
withiu  three  miles  of  the  shore  —the  whole  fleet. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  when  you  say  that  the  vessels  exteii(l«Ml  as  far 
out  as  15  or  20  miles  f — A.  Sometimes  they  do  when  they  are  fishing; 
they  go  wherever  they  can  get  fish.  If  the  fish  are  inshore,  tliey  ruii 
right  in  until  they  are  obliged  to  get  under  way  to  prevent  going  on  the 
rocks.  Perhaps  at  other  times  the  vessels  will  ha\'  to  go  15  tnilfs  out. 
They  fish  sometimes  ofl'auil  sometimes  on  shore. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  fish  taken  by  the  300  vessels  was  taken 
withi'i  three  miles  of  the  shore  and  what  outside? — A.  1  could  iiotsav 
very  well,  but  we  were  all  catching  fish,  and  I  got  75  barrels. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  coast?— A.  It  was  within  three  miles;  I  sliould 
say  two  miles  oft"  shore. 

Q.  What  catch  of  mackerel  do  you  make  in  one  season? — A.  I  haw- 
been  catching  as  high  as  400  barrels. 

Q.  Out  of  those  400  barrels  how  many  were  caught  within  the  three 
mile  limit? — A.  About  all  of  them  within  three  miles  from  shore. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  catch  made  by  others  was  generally  taken 
within  the  three  miles? — A.  They  were  all  fishing  together,  and  1  could 
not  say  what  they  took  inshore  and  oft' shore;  but  1  will  say  this,  that 
most  of  the  mackerel  is  taken  within  the  three  miles;  that  is,  close  in- 
shore. This  applies  to  the  mackerel  I  have  seen  taken,  t  have  taken 
mackerel  close  inshore,  even  with  seines.  That  is  in  Canadian  waters. 
On  the  American  coast  it  is  dift'erent;  they  go  away  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Within  the  last  eight  or  ten  years  have  the  mackerel  beeu  as 
abundant  as  they  were  previously  ? — A.  Not  so  abundant. 

Q.  Say  up  to  1873,  did  you  see  Americans  fishing  for  mackerel  on  the 
Canadian  coast  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  saw  one  about  ten  days  ago  tishiug  otl 
Flint  Island,  near  Sydney. 

Q.  Did  you  see  them  in  numbers  four  years  ago? — A.  Yes;  abont 
300  sail  fishing  along  the  bay.  Some  days  they  were  together  and  some 
days  not  so.  They  all  sailed  round  Prince  Edward  Island,  Cape  lire 
ton,  and  along  the  shore. 

Q.  How  did  you  generally  fish  mackerel,  with  hook  and  line  or  seine ! 
— A.   Generally  with  hooks. 

Q.  Did  you  see  others  fishing  differently  ? — A.  I  always  fished  with 
hooks  round  here.  I  have  seen  fishermen  using  seines  in  Cauadian 
waters. 

Q.  Is  seining,  such  as  you  witnessed,  of  a  character  to  injure  the  fish 
ing  or  not? — A.  I  don't  see  why  it  should  not  be.  I  think  it  istlie 
biggest  injury  to  the  mackerel  fishery  that  ever  was. 

Q.  How  do  you  explain  the  injury  done  by  seine  fishing? — A.  In  sev 
eral  ways.  In  the  first  place,  say  a  seine  is  taken  and  they  go  round  a 
school  of  mackerel  where  there  are  500,  GOO,  or  800  barrels.  The  fish 
are  all  crushed  together.  The  vessel  can  only  take  250  or  300  barrels; 
they  cannot  cure  more  and  the  fish  will  spoil.  When  they  have  taken 
250  barrels  or  so  they  trip  the  seine  and  away  the  rest  go.  Is  not  that 
an  injury  to  the  fishing  ?  It  will  drive  the  fish  off  certainly ;  I  think  it 
is  a  big  injury.  There  is  not  an  American  seiner  today  who  would 
not  tell  you  that,  although  they  have  to  do  it ;  they  are  all  iu  it,  and 
one  has  to  do  it  as  well  as  another.  It  is  a  plague — it  is  a  bad  thing; 
there  could  not  be  a  worse  thing  for  the  mackerel  fishery. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  American  vessels  fishing  mackerel  this  season  !- 
A.  JSo.  I  spoke  one  off  Flint  Island,  Crest  of  the  Wave,  of  Gloucester, 
a  seiner ;  they  were  trying  for  mackerel  at  the  time,  but  could  not  get 
any ;  the  fish  were  not  there. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


645 


line  or  seine ! 


Q.  Where  was  she  lyin^  f — A.  Off  Flint  iHland,  which  is  about  one 
or  two  miles  otf  shore.  The  season  for  American  vessels  to  go  into  Bay 
Clinleursisjust  beginning. 

Q.  Voii  have  fished  for  mackerel  on  the  American  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Wiiere  is  the  mackerel  generally  taken  there  f — A.  It  is  taken  all 
tlie  way  from  Grand  Manan  to  Uape  Hatteras.  K.irly  in  the  spring 
tbey  will  go  away  sonth  and  catch  mackerel.  They  follow  the  mackerel 
to  (iniml  .Manan.  Then  the  mackerel  goes  west  and  afterwards  south 
a^aiu,  and  the  American  fishermen  follow  them  right  along.  ]^it  they 
are  not  getting  them  so  plentiful,  on  account  of  the  seining  which  has 
ilriveii  tliem  offshore. 

Q.  Do  the  mackerel  keep  along  the  shore  in  American  as  they  do  in 
Canadian  waters? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  are  mackerel  generally  taken  in  American 
waters?— A.  They  are  taken  away  off,  15  miles  sometimes. 

Q.  By  trawlH  ? — A.  Yes. 

(l  Mackerel  are  taken  on  the  high  seas  T — A.  Yes ;  when  they  come 
early  in  the  spring.  On  George's  Hanks  they  are  taken,  and  the  Banks 
are  80  or  90  miles  from  the  nearest  land.  They  are  taken  by  American 
tisherraen  inshore  and  off"  shore,  when  they  can  get  them  on  these  shores 
or  on  the  American  coast.  They  are  always  catching  lish  wherever 
tbey  can  get  them. 

Q,  lu  American  waters,  is  the  largest  portion  of  the  mackerel  caught 
within  three  miles  of  the  coast  or  outside  f — A.  The  largest  quantity  is 
taiteu  outside. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  Americans  fishing  for  cod  in  Canadi.in  waters,  in- 
side the  gulf? — A.  Yes ;  not  long  ago  I  shw  one  up  here,  a  little  to  the 
west  of  Halifax,  close  inshore.  She  was  fishing  for  cod ;  her  dories 
were  out  drawing  trawls.    I  was  on  board  of  p  vessel  going  outside. 

Q.  Is  purse-seining  and  trawling  the  same  process  ? — A.  No ;  the 
trawls  are  long  lines  with  hooks  half  a  fathom  apart. 

Q.  Do  Canadians  fish  much  with  trawls  ? — A.  I  have  seen  but  very  few 
in  these  waters.  I  have  seen  them  used  on  the  George's  Banks  by 
western  vessels,  but  I  never  saw  mauy  round  Cape  Breton  and  Bay 
C'lialeurs.    I  have  seen  a  few. 

Q.  Have  you  any  explanation  to  offer  as  to  why  mackerel  are  not  so 
abundant  now  as  in  years  ago  ? — A.  Yes  ;  I  have.  It  is  due  to  over- 
fishing. The  fish  are  caught  up  so  much  that  there  are  not  so  many  ia 
quantity.  It  is  just  the  same  with  the  cod  and  halibut  fisheries.  I  have 
been  fishing  for  two  months  on  these  shores,  where  as  a  boy  I  used  to 
get  plenty  of  halibut,  and  yet  I  have  not  taken  one  halibut. 

Q.  You  think  overfishing  destroys  the  fishery  ? — A.  I  know  by  ex- 
perience it  is  nothing  else. 

Q.  On  what  ground  do  you  base  the  opinion  you  have  stated  ? — A.  If 
the  fish  were  outside  the  three-mile  limit  yesterday,  perhaps  they  are 
inside  to  day,  and  if  we  want  the  fish  we  go  where  they  are  and  we 
catch  them  wherever  they  are  to  be  found. 

Q.  You  have  been  in  the  habit  of  fishing  for  halibut  ?— A.  Most  of 
my  fishing  for  halibut  has  been  on  the  Grand  Banks  in  connection  with 
cod-fishing.  I  always  went  to  the  Grand  Banks  after  cod  and  halibut, 
and  afterwards  to  Bay  Chaleurs  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Was  it  on  the  Grand  Banks  or  in  Bay  Chaleurs  you  remarked  the 
decrease? — A.  In  these  waters.    In  the  inshore  fisheries. 

Q.  In  the  gulf  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  an  American  vessel  take  a  good  haul  with  seine  or 
otherwise  ? — A.  I  have  seen  one  take  a  fair  haul. 


€46 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHEBY    COMMISSION. 


Q.  Wbat  schooner  was  it?— A.  The  William  T.  Smith  of  Gloucester. 

Q.  When  was  that  ? — A.  I  think  four  years  ago,  in  1873. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  they  catch  at  one  haul  I — A.  Eighty  bar- 
rels the  captain  told  me.  He  was  in  the  harbor  drying  them  and  I  was 
going  out.  I  Kaid,  "  Where  did  you  catch  your  fish  ?"  He  said,  "  Kight 
at  Low  Point,  outside,  close  by."  I  have  also  seen  him  shoot  his  mack- 
erel seine  inside  Low  Point ;  but  he  got  no  catch,  and  I  have  seeu  the 
same  thing  done  by  a  great  many  otliors. 

Q.  Does  a  seiner  carry  more  than  one  seine  ? — A.  Some  of  them  have 
carried  two  seines  of  late  years ;  one  for  deep  water  and  the  otlier  lor 
shoal  water. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  the  seining  on  the  schools  of  mackerel  ?— A. 
It  frightens  the  mackerel.  I  saw  the  Schu.yler  Colfax,  of  Gloucester,  on 
the  same  day  as  the  W.  T.  Smith  took  80  barrels  at  one  haul,  shoot  ber 
seine  eight  or  nine  times  round  fish  and  never  take  any.  The  fish  were 
going  southward,  and  it  is  pretty  hard  to  purse  them  when  in  goiugthat 
direction.  The  fish  were  so  keen  that  they  got  out  of  the  seine  before  tbey 
could  t'>  captured.  That  scared  the  fish  and  was  an  injury  to  the  fisberj ; 
it  would  have  been  better  if  they  had  taken  those  schools,  in  my  opinion. 

Q.  Seining  has  the  effect,  then,  of  breaking  up  schools  of  mackereU- 
A.  Tes ;  and  of  scaring  them  oft'  shore. 

Q.  Where  do  the  Americans  generally  get  their  bait  for  mackerel 
fishing? — A.  They  take  some  from  home,  and  they  get  a  supply  here 
when  they  need  it. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  for  the  bait  or  buy  it  ? — A.  Both ;  they  buy  it  mostly, 
I  should  say. 

Q.  What  bait  is  used  for  taking  mackerel  ? — A.  Herring  and  what  we 
call  slivered  menhaden  or  porgies. 

Q.  Menhaden  is  not  a  Canadian  bait  ? — A.  They  take  it  from  home. 

Q.  I  refer  to  bait  taken  on  our  shores'? — A.  They  are  herring. 

Q.  Which  they  either  fish  or  buy  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  any  American  vessels  transshipping  cargoes  ?— A. 
I  have. 

Q.  Is  it  an  advantage  to  them  to  be  able  to  transship  ? — A.  I  should 
suppose  it  is  a  great  advantage. 

Q.  Describe  in  what  way. — A.  If  a  vessel  comes  into  Causo  from 
I^orth  Bay  with  500  barrels  of  fish,  she  has  her  trip.  The  fish  caD  be 
put  on  board  of  a  steamer  for  Boston,  and  the  fishing- vessel  will  takeiu 
her  outfit  and  go  right  back  to  the  fishing-grounds,  and  before  the 
steamer  arrives  at  Boston  she  will  have  made  another  trip.  That  is 
where  the  advantage  is,  and  it  is  a  very  big  one. 

Q.  How  long  would  it  take  an  ordinary  schooner  to  go  with  a  cargo  to 
Gloucester  or  Boston,  unload,  and  return  ? — A.  That  would  depend  upon 
the  wind  and  weather. 

Q.  How  long,  supposing  she  had  fair  weather  ? — A.  She  could  not  do 
it  in  much  less  than  three  weeks. 

Q.  Is  not  that  suflBciftnt  tinie  sometimes  to  make  another  trip? — A.  Yes. 
If  mackerel  are  plentiful,  with  a  seine  a  vessel  would  take  a  trip  in  one 
day  if  she  did  not  carry  more  than  250  barrels.  In  one  day  she  way 
have  a  trip.  If  the  mackerel  were  plentiful,  and  the  vessel  required  500 
barrels  lor  a  trip,  she  would  take  the  catch  in  three  or  four  days  at 
most. 

Q.  Even  with  hooks  ? — A.  Yes ;  with  jigs.  It  would  not  take  ber 
over  five  days.    They  have  crews  of  18  or  20  men. 

Q.  So  that  if  the  fish  were  abundant,  the  vessel  might  lose  two  or 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


647 


could  not  do 


not  take  'aer 


three  loads  if  she  had  to  return  to  Gloucester  with  the  cargo  ? — A.  Tes ; 
they  would  lose  heavily. 

Q.  Can  tlie  shore  people  in  their  open  boats  fish  to  advantage  with 
American  schooners  alongside  ? — A.  I  have  seen  them  altogether  fishing 
for  mackerel. 

Q.  Are  they  not  sometimes  embarrassed  with  the  American  schoon- 
grgf_A.  Yes ;  I  suppose  so.  When  they  are  together  the  boats  are  in 
danger  of  getting  squeezed,  as  is  any  small  vessel  when  it  gets  into  con- 
tact with  a  large  one. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  trawls  thrown  out  close  to  shore  by  Americans  t 
Have  you  done  it  yourself  ? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  For  your  employers  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  fishermen  in  open  boats  fish  where  trawls  are  laid  out? — 
A.  They  can. 

Q.  Do  not  the  presence  of  the  trawls  prevent  them  ? — A.  There  were 
gome  vessels  fishing  at  one  time  close  to  me,  and  I  went  outside  and  got 
clear  of  them.  I  did  not  interfere  with  them,  still  I  was  on  their  ground. 
The  custom  with  them  was  not  to  set  any  trawls,  but  I  made  some  flying 
shots. 

Q.  Where  is  herring  generally  caught  ? — A.  Herring  is  caught  all 
ronnd  this  coast. 

Q.  Far  away  from  the  shore  ? — A.  No,  close  in ;  in  the  harbors  some- 
times. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  Americans  fishing  for  squid  and  other  bait  ? — A.  I 
have  seen  them  fishing  for  squid. 

Q.  Where  is  the  squid  caught  ? — A.  In  several  places.  A  great  many 
are  caught  at  St.  Ann's  and  a  little  to  the  north  of  Sydney. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  In  the  harbor  and  inshore. 

Q.  Close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  Y'es ;  in  Sydney  Harbor  they  catch  them, 
and  in  some  other  places. 

Q.  Do  mackerel  feed  on  shrimp  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yon  have  seen  the  shrimp  in  splitting  the  mackerel  ? — A.  They 
are  full  of  it. 

Q.  Where  do  the  shrimp  generally  remain  I — A.  They  keep  inshore 
always,  quite  close  to  the  shore. 

Q.  Have  you  see  the  Americans  drying  their  nets  ashore! — A.  Y''es. 

Q.  Is  it  an  advantage  to  them  that  they  are  able  to  do  so  ? — A.  I 
thiuk  it  is  a  good  aivautage.    It  is  an  advantage  I  like  to  see  myself. 

Q.  Otherwise  they  would  have  to  dry  the  nets  on  board  f — A.  Y-^s, 
and  they  could  not  do  it  as  well. 

Q.  Is  the  curing  of  fish  done  at  certain  times  on  board  ? — A.  Yes, 
very  often. 

Q.  When  it  is  done  on  board,  what  becomes  of  the  oflfal  ? — A. 
thrown  overboard. 

Q.  What  is  the  eftect  of  throwing  the  oflfal  into  the  sea  ? — A.  A 
bad  effect  indeed. 

Q.  Describe  what  eflPect? — A.  It  is  an  injury  to  the  fishery. 

Q.  In  what  manner  ? — A.  I  don't  know  but  that  it  will  kill  fish  if  they 
eat  it :  I  suppose  they  go  after  it. 

Q.  When  you  throw  oflfal  overboard,  do  you  generally  find  the  fish 
remain! — A.  It  always  scares  them  away  from  the  place  and  perhaps 
from  the  shore.  I  think  it  is  also  an  injury  to  the  spawn  in  the  spring, 
and  thatit  kills  them.  If  the  oflfal  were  thrown  overboard  when  the  fish  are 
uewly  dressed,  I  don't  think  the  injury  would  be  as  great ;  but  it  is  kept 
OQ  board  and  afterwards  thrown  overboard,  and  the  injury  it  then  does 
8  very  great. 


It  is 


very 


648 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Have  you,  during  the  flft.een  years  yon  have  fished  on  American 
vessels,  seen  many  Canadian  vessels  fishing  in  American  waters  ?— A, 
No,  I  have  seen  but  two  during  that  time. 

Q.  Where  were  they  from?— A.  That  is  more  that  I  can  say.  I 
remember  seeing  thera ;  it  is  fifteen  years  ago.  They  were  tishiug  mack- 
erel with  us  in  the  fleet. 

Q.  Acquainted  as  you  are  with  both  American  and  Canadian  waters, 
do  you  think  it  is  a  valuable  privilege  to  Canadians  to  be  able  to  go  aud 
fish  up  to  390  on  the  American  shore  ? — A.  I  don't  see  it  is  any  to  them  • 
they  have  no  need  to  go  there ;  they  have  their  own  fishing  inshore  liere! 

Q.  What  quantity  of  bait  do  you  take  when  you  leave  Provincetowu 
to  go  mackerel  fishing  ? — A.  It  is  iiccording  to  the  trips  we  fitted  tor.  If 
we  fitted  for  500  barrels,  we  will  want  40  barrels  of  bait;  and  sometimes 
we  take  a  few  clams  with  us  to  help  to  get  the  mackerel  up,  because 
clams  go  to  the  bottom  quickly. 

Q.  When  this  bait  is  exhausted,  you  buy  bait  at  Bay  Chaleurs  or  fish 
for  bait  yourselves  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  if  the  Americans  had  not  the  privilege  of  buying  bait,  wlat 
would  they  have  to  do  ? — A.  Either  to  go  home  or  else  set  their  nets  oft 
shore,  if  the  Treaty  of  Washington  were  not  in  force. 

Q.  So  if  they  could  not  fish  for  bait,  they  would  have  to  go  home  ?— 
A.  Certainly. 

Q.  If  you  were  to  have  the  choice  of  excluding  the  Americans  frou 
fishing  within  three  miles  of  our  shores  and  in  our  bays  and  have  a 
duty  imposed  on  Canadian  fish  in  the  American  markets,  say  of  $12  p'r 
barrel  on  mackerel,  or  of  having  Canadian  fish  admitted  free  into  tk 
States  and  having  Americans  fishing  with  you,  which  would  you  pre- 
fer?— A.  I  don't  want  to  see  the  Americans  excluded  from  these  waten, 
but  I  would  like  to  see  something  more  on  an  equality  than  it  now  u, 
for  I  don't  consider  it  any  benefit  whatever  to  Canadian  fishermen  to 
have  their  fish  go  into  the  American  markets  free  of  duty. 

Q.  Why  ?— A.  They  ship  their  fish  to  Halifax.    The  Halifax  met 
chants  buy  them  and  ship  them  where  they  please,  perhaps  to  IJostou 
American  vessels  fish  from  Cape  Sable  to  Cape  George  and  get  the  ben- 
efit of  the  fisheries. 

Q.  !No  benefit  from  the  free  admission  of  their  fish  into  the  United 
States  ? — A.  1  cannot  see  where  they  get  any  benefit.  They  may  get  it 
somewhere  or  other,  but  I  cannot  see  it.  Only  a  small  quantity  0. 
British  fish  goes  into  the  American  market. 

Q.  Are  the  Canadian  fishermen  whom  you  know  dividing  their  time 
fishing  and  cultivating  the  land  or  to  fishing  exclusively  ? — A.  Mostly 
all  I  know  are  fishermen.  At  Gaberose  there  are  about  100  boats;  at 
Louisburg  there  are  65  boats ;  round  Asque  Bay  and  Ingonish  there  are 
large  fisheries ;  at  these  places  the  people  depend  solely  on  the  fisheries, 

Q.  If  the  fisheries  around  the  coast  were  destroyed  by  overflshiug- 
they  would  be  deprived  of  all  their  resources? — A.  Yes;  and  your  gov 
ernment  would  have  to  support  them. 

Q.  Or  they  would  have  to  live  somewhere  else  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  seen  American  vessels  fishing  from  Cape  Sable  to  Cape 
George  ? — A.  Yes ;  often.  Off  Cape  Sable  is  a  large  fishing  ground  tor 
them. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  coast  are  cod  taken  in  that  part  you  have  men- 
tioned ? — A.  From  inshore  to  15  or  20  miles  off. 

Q.  Where  is  thw  largest  quantity  caught,  inshore  or  outshore  ?— A. 
I  think  off  shore  at  that  part  of  the  coast.  They  have  the  best  cod  fish- 
ing 15  or  20  miles  off  Cape  Sable. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


649 


Q.  Are  there  any  places  where  the  fishing  is  better  inside  than  out- 
side!—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where? — A.  Sometimes  all  along  you  will  find  it  better  inshore 
and  some  days  outside.  Sometimes  you  will  find  the  fish  close  in,  when 
von  could  not  get  anything  offshore.  American  and  Canadian  vessels 
fish  where  they  can  get  the  best  catch. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  have  fished  mostly  in  American  vessels,  have  you  ? — \.  I'es. 

Q.  Do  they  begin  upon  the  mackerel  down  on  the  southern  coast  ? — 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  in  the  sfiring. 

Q.  And  follow  them  up  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  To  Grand  Manan  generally,  past  Cape  Cod.  Then  from  Grand 
Mauau  they  follow  them  through  the  Gut  of  Canso  or  outside  Cape 
Iiieton, don't  they? — A.  No,  sir;  not  that  fleet.  In  my  opinion  they 
are  two  different  fish.  That  which  comes  into  the  gut  or  into  the  bay 
here  is  an  altogether  dilferent  school  offish.  Tho  American  school  goes 
as  far  as  Grand  Manan,  and  generally  the  fish  do  not  go  any  farther. 

Q.  Is  that  the  result  you  have  come  to  with  regard  to  the  school 
iitopping  at  Grand  Manan  ? — A.  I  could  not  tell  you. 

Q."  Is  that  your  opinion  ? — A.  That  is  as  far  as  the  Americans  follow 
at  any  rate  on  that  hitch. 

Q.  You  have  had  a  pretty  large  experience.  What,  in  your  judg- 
meut,  becomes  of  the  schools  of  fish  that  go  to  Grand  Manan  in  thi^ 
Bay  of  Fuudy  ? — A.  That  is  a  hard  matter  for  me  to  decide,  because  I 
don't  know  much  about  that,  only  we  follow  them  in  the  spring  down, 
and  np  again  in  the  fall. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  the  fish,  in  what  you  call  the  Bay  or  Gulf  of  St. 
Lawrence  and  that  neighboriiood  are  different  fish  ? — A.  Well,  I  could 
not  tell  you.    It  seems  that  the  American  mackerel  stand  well. 

Q.  But  1  ask  whether  they  are  or  are  not  the  same  school  ? — A.  I 
cannot  tell  you. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  give  your  opinion  that  the  mackerel  which  the 
Americans  followed  from  Cape  May,  about  there,  to  Grand  Manan  were 
not  the  same  school  that  come  up  here.  I  do  not  refer  to  their  quality  ? 
—A.  Well,  it  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  W^here  do  you  suppose  the  fish  come  from  that  come  into  the  Gulf 
of  St.  Lawrence  and  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  along  the  northwestern 
coast  of  Nova  Scotia  to  spawn  ? — A.  Where  do  they  come  from  ? 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  opinion  ? — A.  No,  I  have  not.  They  come 
somewhere  from  the  South.  Wherever  it  is  1  do  not  know.  I  know  it 
is  very  muddy  in  the  spring  of  the  year,  as  if  it  came  from  the  Gulf 
Stream. 

Q.  You  think  they  come  from  the  southern  part  of  the  United  States 
coast? — A.  Yes,  sir;  somewhere  from  the  southward. 

Q.  If  they  do,  don't  you  think  they  come  through  the  Gut  of  Canso 
or  outside  of  Cape  Breton  ?— A.  Both  ways,  I  think. 

Q.  Are  they  not  followed  by  the  American  fishermen  ? — A.  The  Ameri- 
can fishermen  go  fishing  for  them. 

Q.  They  follow  these  schools  as  well  as  they  can,  don't  they  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  they  go  either  inside  through  the  Gut  of  Canso  or  outside  Oii" 
Cape  Breton  ? — A.  I  have  seen  six  sail  the  day  before  yesterday  going 
through  the  gut  and  going  into  the  bay.    That  was  only  for  one  day. 

Q.  Is  there  a  good  deal  of  mackerel  off  the  coast  of  Mt>ine  ? — A.  There 
used  to  be. 


650 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  When  you  fished  there  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  there  a  good  mauy  British  subjects  from  these  colonies  and 
provinces  engaged  in  the  American  fishing  fleets  1 — A.  Yes,  sir ;  there 
are  some. 

Q.  Can  you  form  any  estimate  at  all  of  the  number  that  will  be  on 
board  f  Suppose  there  are  600  American  schooners  fishing  on  the 
Banks,  or  take  those  that  fish  here  and  on  the  Banks  altogether,  can 
you  estimate  the  number  of  men  from  the  British  provinces? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  proportion  is  there,  in  your  belief? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Should  you  not  think,  from  your  observation,  that  as  many  as  one- 
third  are  from  the  British  provinces,  taking  skippers  and  men  ?— A. 
There  are  so  many  different  classes  of  people  that  go  fishing — Portu- 
guese mostly. 

Q.  And  some  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  some  British  rubjects  ?  Would  it  not  be  very  likely,  if  a  cen- 
sus were  made  fairly  of  all  the  American  vessels  that  fish  for  cod  and 
mackerel  in  these  waters  or  on  the  Banks — would  it  not  be  very  probable 
it  would  turn  out  that  one-third  of  the  men  were  from  the  British  prov- 
inces?— A.  Well,  I  could  not  answer  that  question  very  well.  It  is 
something  that  I  cannot  come  anywhere  near. 

Q.  Now,  you  have  been  in  a  good  many  vessels  or  made  a  great  many 
trips? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  has  it  been  on  board  those  vessels  you  were  in  ? — A.  Well, 
we  mostly  always  had  a  Portuguese  crew. 

Q.  You  were  skipper? — A.  Yes, 

Q.  You  had  some  of  your  own  people ;  were  there  many  of  them  ?— 
A.  Very  few,  sir. 

.Q.  There  were  not  many  native  Americans  ? — A.  No,  sir.  Once  in  a 
while  there  would  be  a  very  few. 

Q.  Now,  haven't  you  had  in  vessels  that  you  were  in  as  many  British 
subjects  on  board  as  you  had  Americans? — A.  Yes,  sir,  and  more;  for 
there  are  but  very  few  Americans  that  go  fishing  on  the  Banks. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  give  your  opinion  that  the  mackerel  catch 
had  been  falling  off  for  ten  years  j  did  1  understand  correctly  ?— A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Has  it  been  pretty  steadily  falling  off— some  years  more  and  some 
years  less,  I  suppose — but  in  the  main  it  has  been  falling  off  ? — A.  Tliey 
are  very  scarce  now ;  you  can  get  but  very  few. 

Q.  Does  it  look  as  if  it  was  going  on  so  ? — A.  I  am  afraid  so,  but  I 
hope  not ;  if  they  continue  those  seines  it  will  keep  on ;  they  are  going 
to  kill  them  here  and  on  the  American  coast. 

Q.  Well,  they  don't  use  them  so  much  on  the  American  coast  as 
here. — A.  I  beg  your  pardon,  they  use  them  altogether ;  there  is  but 
one  vessel  out  of  a  hundred  that  uses  the  jig. 

Q.  In  the  inshore  fishery  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  yourself  with  the  inshore  fisheries  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  use  the  seine  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  the  purse-seine  ? — A.  Yes ;  altogether. 

Q.  Do  you  think  their  inshore  fisheries  of  mackerel  will  be  injured 
very  much  and  you  will  be  injured  similarly  ? — A.  That  is  my  opiuion, 
if  they  continue. 

Q.  It  has  been  said  there  is  a  better  prospect  this  year  than  for  the 
last  many  years ;  do  you  think  so  ? — A.  I  do  not  see  any  better  pros- 
pects, sir.  I  do  not  see  it  so  good.  The  fishermen  on  our  coast  here 
have  not  done  by  one-third  on  an  average  as  well  as  last  year,  so  far. 

Q.  With  reference  to  halibut,  that  is  deep-sea  fishing,  is  it  not  f— A. 


AWARD   OV   THE   JISHERY   COMMISSION. 


651 


It  is  uow ;  they  are  drawn  off  somehow  or  other ;  they  did  not  used  to 
be ;  tbey  used  to  be  caught  very  close  inshore. 

Q.  Well,  cod  are  often  caught  inshore,  but  vould  not  you  say  cod  was 
a  deep-sea  fishery  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  halibut  is  the  same! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  1  believe  one  witness,  a  Mr.  V^ibert,  of  Perce,  in  the  county  of 
Gasp^,  said  that  the  halibut  were  altogether  caught  within  the  three- 
mile  limit,  without  any  ex ..  tiou.  He  says,  "That  is,  I  believe  what  I 
have  understood  from  oui  iishermen ;  they  have  told  me  that  halibut 
could  not  be  caught  in  deep  water"  (reads  from  page  110  of  the  evi- 
dence). Should  not  you  say  that  was  a  mistaken  statement  ? — A.  Yes. 
Tlie  Gloucester  folks  go  every  winter,  in  fact  they  go  tlie  whole  year 
rouud,  to  catch  tliem  ;  in  the  summer  they  get  halibut  in  shallow  water, 
but  iu  the  winter  they  have  to  flvsh  in  100  fathoms  of  water. 

Q.  So  they  are  a  deep-water  fish,  as  a  fish,  but  you  can  catch  them 
iushore  ? — A.  They  may  be  caught  inshore. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  themselves  pursue  the  halibut  fishingexcept  as 
a  deep-see  fishery  ? — A.  O,  yes;  they  take  them  anywhere  where  they 
can  get  them. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  on  this  coast  the  Americans  fish  for  halibut  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  take  them  as  they  find  them,  but  do  they  undertake  its  a 
business  the  fishing  for  halibut  inshore  ? — A.  Certainly ;  the  treaty 
allows  it.    They  will  take  them  iu  our  harbors  if  they  can. 

Q.  Of  course,  wherever  they  can  find  them ;  but  I  speak  of  it  as  a 
business. — A.  As  a  general  thing  they  cannot  get  them  inshore.  They 
are  drawn  off. 

Q.  The  American  fishermen,  when  they  catch  them  in  deep  sea  or  the 
Banks,  or  elsewhere,  put  them  iu  ice,  don't  they,  and  take  them  as 
quickly  as  they  can  into  the  markets  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  a  fish  that  has  to  be  taken  as  quickly  as  possible  into  the 
markets  ? — A.  Yes.  It  is  very  thick  and  fat,  and  it  will  not  keep  very 
long. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  Americans  that  come  here  to  fish.  You  consider 
it  a  very  great  advantage  to  them,  do  you  not,  to  be  able  to  trade  bf  i  e 
to  transship  and  refit  and  to  buy  whatever  they  want  iu  the  way  «»f 
necessaries  ? — A.  Certainly  I  do. 

Q.  Uow  long  has  that  business  been  going  on,  do  you  think  ? — A.  It 
is  not  very  long.    I  could  not  say  how  long. 

Q.  There  has  always  been  a  little  of  it,  perhaps? — A.  I  don't  know 
whether  the  old  treaty 

Q.  I  didn't  ask  you  about  the  treaty,  but  simply  as  to  your  own  ex- 
perience. How  long,  according  to  your  own  belief,  has  it  been  going 
on  ?— A.  Not  before  10  years  ago,  anyhow. 

Q.  It  has  sprung  up  within  the  last  ten  years? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  it  has  increased,  has  it  not  ? — A.  Y^es. 

Q.  Would  it  be  your  judgment  that  the  Americans  would  be  likely  to 
make  that  a  regular  business  instead  of  going  back  home  ?  Consider- 
ing the  facilities  for  transshipping,  and  the  fact  that  it  enables  them  to 
go  back  and  get  another  fare,  do  you  think  it  would  be  likely  that  this 
would  be  a  very  increasing  trade  I — A.  It  would  be  very  advantageous. 
I  should  suppose  tbey  would  do  it,  for  it  gives  them  a  chance  to  go  right 
off  again  for  another  trip. 

Q.  It  has  become  a  pretty  well  established  business  on  shore,  has  it 
not  among  your  own  people  in  the  Gut  of  Caoso  and  along  there  ? — 
A.  Yes,  there  is  where  most  of  it  is  done. 


652 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  merchants  go  there  to  set  up? — A.  Tes. 

Q.  And  as  far  as  you  know  is  it  reasonably  profitable  to  them  also  1— 
A.  You  mean  those  that  come  from  the  States  to  do  business  here  ? 

Q.  Without  respect  to  where  they  come  from,  it  is  reasonably  profit- 
able  to  the  persons  who  engage  in  it  or  they  would  not  be  likely  to  stay 
in  it? — A.  You  refer  to  the  transshipping? 

Q.  All  those  persons  who  own  wharves  or  docks  and  apply  them  to 
this  purpose,  from  whose  wharves  the  fish  are  transshipped,  who  find 
barrels,  bait,  and  such  necessaries  as  are  sought  for,  is  it  reasonably 
profitable  to  them  ? — A.  Well,  I  don't  know.  I  suppose  Americans  and 
Canadians  both  are  interested  in  the  boats.  It  is  done  through  them. 
How  it  is  done  I  could  not  say.  I  know  they  send  them  by  the  boats. 
I  don't  know  who  gets  the  benefit. 

Q.  What  boats? — A.  The  Carroll  and  other  boats  that  run  to  the 
island. 

Q  Take  the  whole  business,  the  refitting  and  supplying,  as  well  as 
the  transshipping,  of  course  you  cannot  state  what  profit  either  side 
makes,  but  still  it  is  probably  a  profitable  business  or  it  would  not  be 
•^  arried  ,>n  by  so  many  persons.  Have  you  ever  heard  any  complaints 
'  tde  against  that  business? — A.  No;  but  there  was  a  time  when  we 
could  not  do  it  at  all. 

Q.  But  now,  since  both  sides  have  become  engaged  in  it,  yon  have 
not  i.«^  ^  1  <^omplaints,  have  yon  ? — A.  No,  sir.  1  don't  have  much  to  say 
!0  any  n"  thi  se  who  are  engaged  in  it. 

Q.  When  you  were  in  an  American  vessel  did  they  transship — when 
you  were  a  skipper  did  you  do  it  ? — A.  No ;  but  I  have  seen  other  ves- 
sels do  it. 

Q.  You  never  transshipped ? — A.  No;  because  I  only  made  a  short 
trip.  I  went  to  the  Banks  for  codfish  first,  and  then  in  the  Bay  Ghal- 
eurs  for  mackerel.    I  did  not  want  to  stop  any  longer  after  I  got  a  fare. 

Q.  What  did  yon  do  with  your  codfish  ? — A.  We  landed  them  for  the 
owners. 

Q.  Where? — A.  We  went  into  Provincetown. 

Q.  How  far  is  it  from  Provincetown  to  the  westerly  or  southwesterly 
edge  of  the  Banks  ? — A.  1,000  miles. 

Q.  The  owners  preferred  to  have  the  codfish  brought  home  ? — A.  0, 
yes ;  we  could  not  do  any  other  way  with  it,  because  the  fish  had  to  be 
cured,  and  there  was  none  of  the  American  firms  down  there  to  cure  it. 
That  is,  mackerel  that  is  transshipped. 

Q.  But  you  were  not  catching  mackerel ! — A.  Of  course,  there  it  was 
not  to  be  had. 

Q.  Now,  when  you  had  gone  to  Provincetown  and  delivered  up  your 
codfish  to  the  owners,  you  then  came  here  on  an  independent  voyage 
for  mackerel — what  I  would  call  another  trip  ?— A.  After  that  we  fitted 
out  at  Provincetown. 

Q.  Yes ;  with  bait,  barrels,  and  all  you  needed  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  made  but  one  mackerel  trip  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  when  you  caught  them  they  were  tatcen  back  in  the  same 
vessel  to  Provincetown  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  you  never  had  occasion  to  engage  in  this  new  business  ?— A. 
No;  I  never  did  it  myself.    I  have  seen  it  done,  that  is  all  I  know. 

Q.  When  you  came  here  did  you  have  bait  enough  shipped  in  Prov- 
incetown for  your  trip  ? — A.  No,  sir ;  many  a  time  I  took  bait  here. 

Q.  You  would  get  some  bait  from  there,  porgies,  and  sometimes  clams, 
I  think  you  told  us? — A.  When  we  went  for  mackerel  I  generally 
brought  bait  from  home ;  that  is  what  I  mean. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


653 


t  rau  to  the 


them  for  the 


:here  it  was 


I  the  same 


Q.  Yoa  landed  your  codfish  and  started  off  ou  a  trip  to  the  Bay  or 
Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  for  mackerel.  The  bait  for  the  mackerel  you  got 
at  Provincetown  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  for  the  cod-fishing  voyage  in  these  har- 
bors, most  of  it.    The  Americans  do  it  mostly  now  for  cod-fishing. 

Q.  When  you  started  from  Provincetown  for  codfish,  had  you  bait 
enough  for  the  season  ? — A.  I  have  stated  that  I  got  it  many  a  time  in 
here.    We  take  some  from  Provincetown,  but  it  is  salt  bait. 

Q.  It  is  not  adapted  to  codfish  as  it  is  to  mackerel ! — A.  We  come 
in  here  for  fresh  bait  and  go  to  the  Bank,  and  then  when  that  is  gone 
we  run  into  Newfoundland  and  get  more  to  finish  our  trip,  and  go 
home. 

Q.  You  come  here  sometimes  to  get  bait  for  codfish ;  that  is,  you  don't 
briug  enough  from  Provincetown  ? — A.  It  is  not  so  good ;  it  is  salt ;  it 
is  nearer  the  fishing  ground  to  get  it  here,  and  therefore  it  will  keep  so 
much  tlie  longer  time. 

Q.  What  parts  of  British  America  do  you  come  to ! — A.  We  run  into 
St.  Ann's. 

Q.  Where  is  that  ? — A.  It  is  in  the  Province  of  Nova  Scotia,  in  the 
couuty  of  Victoria,  a  little  north  of  Sydney.  Sometimes  we  go  there, 
sometimes  to  Louisburg,  and  sometimes  to  Sydney. 

Q.  Then  it  is  Cape  Breton  usually  and  not  Nova  Scotia  that  you  go 
to  tor  bait  ? — A.  It  is  all  one  thing. 

Q.  Well,  I  don't  mean  politically.  It  is  not  within  Nova  Scotia  proper, 
but  iu  Cape  Breton  that  you  get  bait? — A.  Yes,  and  sometimes  we  go 
iuto  Whitehaven,  sometimes  into  Halifax,  sometimes  into  Prospect. 

Q.  Would  you  not  go  into  Halifax,  as  being  the  most  convenient,  un- 
less it  costs  more?  Does  the  bait  cost  any  more  here  than  in  the  places 
you  have  mentioned  ? — A.  No. 

Q,  You  buy  your  bait,  of  course,  if  you  can  get  it,  that  is,  quicker 
and  more  convenient  ?  You  don't  fish  for  it  unless  you  are  obliged  to ; 
is  that  so? — A,  No;  unless  we  have  the  facilities  for  catching  bait. 

Q.  But  if  you  can  run  in  at  once  and  buy  it,  or  ship  it  on  board  at 
ouce,  it  will  save  time? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  it  is  a  correct  statement  that  the  American  vessels  will  buy 
their  bait  if  they  can  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  buy  it  if  they  can ;  that  is 

Q.  Well,  now,  in  taking  bait,  do  they  usually  catch  it  themselves,  or 
make  arrangements  with  people  on  shore,  who  have  the  appliances,  and 
do  the  crews  of  the  American  vessels  take  hold  and  help  them? — A.  Well, 
they  do  both ;  they  buy  and  they  catch  it;  that  is,  they  catch  squid.  I 
never  saw  them  catch  herring  for  bait.  I  have  seen  them  catch  squid 
though  for  bait.  They  have  to  be  caught  by  a  jig;  that  is  what  we 
call  it. 

Q.  As  to  drying  their  nets,  the  Americans  don't  dry  their  nets  on  the 
coast  now,  do  they,  at  all  ?  They  pickle  their  nets  ? — A.  They  dry  them 
too.    Pickling  will  not  always  keep  nets. 

Q.  They  do  that  to  a  very  great  extent,  don't  they  ? — A.  Oh,  they  do 
it  ou  shore. 

Q.  And  in  their  vessels  in  the  harbor ;  and  at  sea  ? — A.  Just  wher- 
ever they  can  get  them  dried. 

Q.  Is  it  customary  tor  the  American  to  land  to  dry  his  nets  merely  ? — 
A.  As  a  general  thing  an  American  does  not  carry  but  very  few  nets. 

Q.  As  a  general  thing,  you  say,  they  carry  very  few  nets? — A.  Yes; 
to  catch  bait  with  I  mean. 

Q.  But  they,  tor  whatever  purpose,  use  their  nets;  is  there  much 
of  lauding  here  by  the  Americans  to  dry  nets  of  any  kind,  or  for  any 


654 


AWARD   OF   TUE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


purpose?    Has  it  not  nearly  passed  out ? — A.  No;  I  think  not.    They 
do  it  now. 

Q.  Is  there  much  of  it  ? — A.  Yes,  sir ;  if  they  are  in  the  harbor  and 
their  nets  need  drying,  they  will  carry  them  on  shore. 

Q.  They  do  not  come  in  for  that  purpose,  do  they  ever  ? — A.  No,  I 
should  think  not. 

Q.  You  told  us  you  thought  the  treaty  in  giving  you  full  right  to  sell 
your  catch  in  the  American  ports  without  duties,  was  not  a  benefit  to 
the  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  it  is  a  benefit  to  anybody  here  the  fisherman  would  get  the  ben- 
efit of  it,  would  he  not,  indirectly  or  remotely  ?  Say  they  are  brought  to 
Halifax.  If  the  Halifax  exporter  who  sends  them  to  the  United  States 
gets  any  benefit  from  them,  the  fisherman  will  too,  won't  he  ?— A.  A 
very  little,  I  think. 

Q.  You  think  the  benefit  would  mostly  stick  in  the  hands  of  the  mer- 
chants ? — A.  The  poor  fishermen  do  not  receive  much. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  is  so  with  all  commercial  relations,  however 
beneficial  it  may  be  to  the  merchants  to  sell,  you  find  that  the  flshermau 
does  not  get  much  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  he  gains  anything  by  the  improvement  of  his  mar- 
ket?— A.  I  do  not  think  it  is  much  improvement  to  the  market. 

Q.  That  is  not  what  I  asked  you.  I  asked  you  whether  the  fisherman 
does  not  gain,  as  a  general  thing,  by  the  improvement  of  his  market.  If 
anything  does  improve  his  market  he  gains  by  it? — A.  I  do  not  ihiuk  it 
improves  it. 

Q.  I  did  not  put  that  question.  I  want  to  know  whether  in  your  opin- 
ion if  the  market  is  improved — I  do  not  speak  of  the  Treaty  of  Washing 
ton  at  all — but  if  anything  happens  that  improves  the  market  and  causes 
a  greater  demand  for  the  fish  caught  in  the  Province,  don't  you  think 
the  fisherman  gets  some  benefit  from  the  improvement  in  the  market!— 
A.  On  the  price  of  his  fish  ?    I  don't  hardly 

Q.  It  is  not  necessary  that  he  should  take  the  fish  himself  in  order  to 
get  the  benefit  of  the  increased  demaud.  They  might  be  sold  through 
the  merchants  and  still  he  might  have  some  of  the  benefit? — A.  But 
they  get  the  cream. 

Q.  Has  that  opinion  been  pretty  generally  disseminated  among  the 
fishermen  ? — A.  Why  they  know  it.  They  do  not  get  enough  to  pay  for 
the  injury  that  is  done  them  by  scaring  their  fish  oft". 

By  Mr.  Doutre: 

Q.  The  gentleman  who  examined  you  asked  about  the  fisheries  ou 
the  coast  of  Maine.  You  were  formerly  there  and  used  to  fish  there  on 
the  coast  of  Maine  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  was  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  mackerel  there  still  ? — A.  It  is  carried  ou  there  now  in 
its  highest 

Q.  You  stated  that  in  their  own  waters  they  were  using  the  seine  for 
catching  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes;  almost  altogether  seines. 

Q.  Well,  you  were  asked  if  the  Americans  were  generally  seining 
inshore,  that  is  to  say  within  3  miles  from  the  shore.  Is  that  the  place 
where  they  catch  mackerel  in  their  own  waters? — A.  No,  notalwajs; 
they  catch  them  ofl:shore  and  inshore. 

Q.  So  that  Mhen  they  are  seining  it  is  everywhere  where  they  can 
catch  the  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  is  the  way  of  fishermen  and  especi- 
ally of  Americans  to  catch  them  wherever  they  can,  provided  the  i»iivi- 
lege  is  allowed.    He  will  come  into  the  harbor  if  they  are  there  aiiJ  he 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


655 


is  allowed.  And  these  shores  give  a  very  good  privilege  to  seines,  be- 
cause tbere  are  25  fathoms  close  to  the  land.  That  gives  plenty  of 
chance  for  the  seine  to  go  to  the  bottom.  So  they  have  a  very  good 
privilege  off  these  coasts. 

Q.  You  mean  that  it  is  a  greater  aiivantage  to  seine  inshore  than  on 
the  high  sea  t — A.  No,  not  at  all.  But  on  the  American  shore  they 
cannot  fish  on  account  of  the  shallow  water ;  it  will  catch  the  seines 
and  tear  them,  but  on  this  coast  the  water  is  very  deep  close  in  to  the 
beach.    That  is  very  advantageous. 

Q.  You  mean  to  say  that  it  is  more  easy  to  use  the  seine  on  our  shore 
than  on  the  American! — A.  Yes ;  there  is  deeper  water. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Is  that  true  of  the  bight  of  Prince  Edward  Island ;  is  it  true  that 
the  water  is  deep  there ;  tbat  there  is  a  bold  shore  there  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  the  water  is  bold  off  the  bight  of  Prince 
Edward  Island  on  the  north  side  ?— A.  Yes ;  it  is  bold. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  bold  ! — A.  It  is  bold  enough,  6  or  7  fathoms. 
We  always  throw  the  seine  in  5  or  6  fathoms. 

Q.  What  distance  from  the  shore  would  7  fathoms  be  off  the  coast  of 
Prince  Edward  Island  ! — A.  Close  in,  very  close.  I  have  been  anchored 
close  to  the  beach  in  7  or  8  fathoms  of  water. 

Q.  What  part  of  the  island  is  that  you  speak  of?  Point  out'on  the 
map  where  you  say  the  water  is  bold  off  the  coast.  A.  (Points  to  map 
of  Prince  Edward  Island  along  the  north  shore,  in  the  neighborhood  of 
the  county  line  between  Queens  and  Kings.) 

Q.  Off  what  harbor  is  it  bold  ? — A.  There  is  no  harbor  there.  Tbere 
is  St.  Peter's  there ;  it  is  a  boat  harbor. 

No.  23. 

John  Maguire,  trader.  Steep  Creek,  in  the  county  of  Guysborough, 
N.  S.,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  tier  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  aud  examined. 

By  Mr.  Wetherbe : 

Question.  You  reside  at  a  place  called  Steep  Creek,  on  the  east  side 
of  tbe  Strait  of  Canso  1 — Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  tbat  about  the  middle  of  the  strait? — A.  It  is  about  midway 
from  Sand  Point  to  Cape  Porcupine. 

Q.  How  wide  is  the  strait  at  your  place  ? — A.  A  mile  and  a  quarter 
across. 

Q.  From  Nova  Scotia  to  the  island? — A.  Yes.  It  is  narrower  in 
some  places. 

Q.  What  is  the  narrowest  part  of  the  strait  ? — A.  It  is  narrowest  at 
Cape  Porcupine;  there  it  is  three-quarters  of  a  mile  wide. 

Q.  You  carry  on  business  there  as  a  merchant? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  have  you  been  in  the  fishing  business? — 
A.  It  is  abouc  38  years  since  I  first  commenced. 

Q.  And  during  that  i)eriod  have  you  been  continually  in  personal 
communication  with  American  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  been  personally  fishing  on  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  At  Port  Hood  ?— A.  Yes. 

<i>.  And  other  places  on  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia  and  Cape  Breton  ? — 
A.  Yes,  aud  one  season  on  the  Newfoundland  coast. 


656 


▲WARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Have  the  American  flsbermen  traded  with  yon  ? — A.  Tbey  lave 
traded  some,  more  or  less,  for  thirty  years,  with  my  father  or  witb  me. 

Q.  With  your  father  and  then  with  you  1 — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Take  the  period  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty ;  about  how  manv 
vessels,  to  your  knowledge,  were  there  passing  through  the  strnit  eu 
gaged  in  the  bay  fishery  ;  what  you  call  the  bay  fishery,  the  Gulf  of 
Saint  Lawrence  fishery  ? — A.  Well,  I  should  say,  to  the  best  of  my 
knowledge,  400  or  500  sail. 

Q.  That  you  knew  of? — A.  Well,  I  did  not  know  of  them  all,  but  to 
the  best  of  my  knowledge  by  what  passed  and  repassed. 

Q.  By  what  passed  that  you  either  knew  of  personally  or  heard  of  !- 
A.  Yes.    I  would  say  that  some  years  there  were  a  good  many  more. 

Q.  How  many  have  you  heard  as  the  highest  number  f — A.  I  have 
heard  of  700  sail,  but  I  do  not  say  that  is  correct. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  American  vessels  fished  for  herring  at 
Magdalen  Island  ? — A.  An  average  of  25  to  75  sail,  some  years. 

Q.  Now  do  you  know,  from  what  you  have  heard  from  Americans  or 
what  you  know  yourself,  how  many  American  vessels  have  beeu  in  the 
habit  of  fishing  for  codfish;  what  you  call  the  codfish  fleet?— A.  I 
should  say  300  sail  have  touched  our  shores  from  what  I  have  heard. 

Q.  The  cod-fishing  fleet  1 — A.  Yes ;  some  years  more  and  some  years 
less. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  of  mackerel  would  these  vessels  you  have 
spoken  of  take  ?  How  many  barrels  of  mackerel  would  they  take  in  tU 
course  of  the  season,  according  to  your  best  knowledge  and  iuforraatioD, 
on  an  average?— A.  Well,  I  have  known  them  to  catch  over  1,000  bar 
rels,  some  seasons,  down  to  300. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  know  what  you  would  put  down  as  a  fair  estimate 
of  the  number  of  barrels  per  season,  taking  the  large  number  of  trips, 
that  is  three  trips  down  to  one  trip. — A.  Well,  taking  from  three  trips 
down  to  one,  I  think  I  would  be  safe  in  saying  600  barrels  for  the 
season.    That  is  for  an  average.    I  don't  mean  to  say  all  seasons. 

Q.  Now,  I  think  you  gave  me  a  memorandum  from  your  book.  You 
made  a  memorandum  from  your  book  for  one  year,  1864.  Was  tbat  a 
good  year  ? — A.  That  was  a  fair  year  for  mackerel  fishing. 

Q.  I  believe  there  were  certain  years  that  were  better  ? — A.  I  think 
there  were  full  as  good,  and  some  probably  worse. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  know,  because  I  want  to  know  exactly  what  the 
state  of  the  matter  is.  Do  you  take  1864  to  be  the  best  year  or  not  ?- 
A.  I  am  not  aware.    I  don't  think  1864  was  any  better  than  1865. 

Q.  Then  were  there  other  years  nearly  as  good  ? — A.  Yes ;  1863  was 
nearly  as  good. 

Q.  Then  were  there  a  number  of  other  years  when  there  was  very 
little  difference  ? — A.  There  was  a  number  of  other  years  when  tbere 
Avas  not  much  difference. 

Q.  You  have  taken  those  names  on  the  memorandum  referred  to  your 
self  from  your  books  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  cover  25  vessels  where  the  parties  dealt  with  you  ?— A.  Yes, 
those  were  the  names  where  the  parties  dealt  with  me. 

Q.  Now  you  have  made  this  up,  and  there  is  an  estimate  at  the  bot- 
tom, giving  the  names  of  the  vessels  and  the  number  of  trips  that  they 
made  each  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  are  25  vessels ;  14  of  these  25  made  two  trips  that  season, 
1864,  and  eleven  made  three  trips  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  one  took  both  fares  home  ?— A.  Yes ;  she  sent  one  fare  and 
took  two  home. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


657 


Q.  Yoa  jast  took  them  as  they  came  from  your  books  ? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  I  am  uot  aware  whether  yoa  took  tbe  number  of  barrels  they  can  j;ht 
„f  iiotf—A.  No,  I  did  not,  becaase  we  did  not  put  the  number  down. 
We  never  thought  we  would  have  to  be  called  here. 

Q.  No.  I  wish  to  ask  you  whether  the  American  fishermen  formerly 
dealt  more  largely  with  our  traders,  with  men  in  your  position,  than  they 
(io  now  If — A.  They  dealt  formerly  a  f;reat  deal  more  than  now. 

Q.  At  the  present  time,  how  do  they  get  their  supplies,  their  sails, 
bait,  and  stores  generally  T — A.  Well,  they  almost  always  send  for  bait 
and  sails  to  be  landed  here  for  them  in  the  strait,  wherever  they  stop. 
They  often  get  their  beef,  pork,  and  stores  of  different  kinds  from  home. 

q'.  Que  witness  told  us  of  their  having  brought  them  from  the  south 
to  north  side  of  Prince  Edward  Island  by  rail.  Do  I  understand  you 
to  say  that  they  bring  those  things  here  from  the  States  and  land  them 
at  the  strait  I — A.  To  my  knowledge. 

Q.  How  do  they  come  from  the  States  I — A.  Sometimesin  the  steamer, 
sometimes  in  their  own  sailing-vessels  bound  to  the  bay,  sometimes  iu 
our  coasters. 

Q.  They  are  landed  at  the  strait,  and  the  fishermen  come  from  the 
gulf  and  get  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  ever  land  those  things  at  your  wharf? — A.  Yes;  20  bar- 
rels of  bait  were  landed  there  last  week  from  one  vessel  and  10  from 
another.    They  bring  sails  also. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  another  instance? — A.  Every  year  this  occurs. 

Q.  Tliis  year  they  have  landed  stores  at  your  wharf? — A.  They  have 
laniled  sails  and  bait. 

Q.  Are  there  some  of  those  stores  on  your  premises  now  ? — A.  Those 
stores  I  spoke  of  are  all  there. 

Q.  Have  similar  supplies  been  landed  at  other  wharves  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  formerly  dealt  with  you  a  great  deal  more  than  at  present  ? 
—A.  Yes ;  a  great  deal. 

Q.  Do  they  deal  at  all  with  you  ? — A.  To  a  small  extent. 

Q.  Ill  anything  but  necessaries  ? — A.  Nothing  more  than  necessaries. 

Q.  Which  they  could  not  get  from  home  conveniently? — A.  That 
tliey  could  uot  send  home  for ;  some  little  stores.  Oftentimes  they 
would  have  to  go  home  to  get  these  things  if  they  were  not  landed  in 
that  way.  About  three  or  four  weeks  ago  a  cod-fishing  vessel  came  in 
there  and  refitted.  If  she  could  not  land,  she  would  have  to  go  home. 
They  came  back  here  for  her  bait  and  sails. 

Q.  Why  did  not  she  send  home  for  those  things  ? — A.  She  had  sent 
home  for  sails  and  bait. 

Q.  But  other  things  they  got  from  you  ? — A.  They  got  the  balance 
from  me,  and  the  crew  got  some  little  outfit. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  those  American  mackerel  vessels  are  or 
have  been  in  the  habit  of  transshipping  their  cargo? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  At  what  place  do  they  transship  ? — A.  Well,  they  land  at  Port 
Hastingti  and  Port  Hawkesbury  on  one  side  of  the  strait,  and  at  Port 
Mulgrave,  Pirate  Cove,  and  Steep  Creek  on  the  other. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  it  any  advantage  to  them  to  be  allo.ved  to  trans- 
8bi|)? — A.  It  is  a  great  advantage. 

Q.  To  make  an  estimate,  what  do  you  consider  that  it  saves  them  ? — 
A.  Fifty  per  cent.  They  can  make  another  trip  by  having  the  privilege 
of  landing. 

Q.  Now,  I  believe  you  owned  a  small  vessel  yourself,  engaged  in  the 
mackerel  fishery ;  is  that  correct? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage  ? — A.  Forty-four  tons. 
42  F 


658 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   C0HMIS8I0N. 


Q.  Do  jou  recollect  in  what  year  joii  owned  her  f — A,  Yes ;  1803. 

Q.  WuH  she  new  at  the  time  f — A.  Yea. 

Q.  In  what  year  did  yon  first  send  her  flshing  f — A.  1803. 

Q.  Did  you  use  her  as  a  fishing- vessel  solely  or  entirely?— A.  Wp 
used  her  in  the  spring  of  the  year  commonly.  We  went  to  Boston  and 
then  traded. 

Q.  1  understand  you  used  her  as  a  trading- vessel ;  bat  during  any  of 
these  years,  from  the  time  you  first  owned  her  "'^  you  ever  use  her 
solely  as  a  fishing- vessel  or  a  mackerel  vessel?—  o,  not  tliu  whole 

season. 

Q.  Not  solelyas  a  fishing-vessel  during  any  yea'  T  You  used  her  more 
or  liiss  for  other  purposes  f — A.  Yes ;  in  the  coasting  trade. 

Q.  Now,  1  would  like  to  know  in  what  year  you  used  her  more  for 
fishing  than  any  other  years  T — A.  Some  seavSous  we  would  not  go  oil 
until  August;  sometimes  we  would  go  in  July. 

Q.  Take  the  years  1805,  'CO,  and  '07 ;  did  yon  use  her  more  in  those 
years  than  in  any  others  as  a  mackerel  vessel  ? — A.  I  think  in  1804,  if 
ray  memory  serves  me,  we  used  her  longer  for  other  purposes  than  in 
any  other  year. 

Q.  What  year  did  you  use  her  more  for  the  mackerel  flaherj- ?— A. 
Well,  I  think,  to  my  knowledge,  1  never  knew  her  to  go  for  mackerel 
before  July. 

Q.  Take  1805.  What  time  did  she  go  in  1805,  and  how  many  months 
did  she  fish  in  that  year? — A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say. 

Q.  Well,  I  do  not  want  the  exact  dates,  but  as  n'  -  as  you  can  recol- 
lect ? — A.  I  think  that  either  in  1804  or  1805  she  eleven  weeks. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  she  netted! — A.  In  year  she  netted 

|!2,200. 

Q.  That  i«  the  year  she  was  that  number  of  weeks,  whichever  year 
that  was!  A.  Yes.  The  crew  took  half,  and  paid  for  half  the  barrels 
and  half  the  bait.  The  vessel  pays  for  the  salt,  the  provisions,  half  the 
bait,  and  the  hooks  and  lines. 

Q.  Well,  the  next  year  after  that,  whatever  year  that  was,  how  many 
weeks  was  she  there! — A.  I  think  she  was  a  little  longer. 

Q.  What  did  she  net  that  year?— A.  About  $1,800. 

Q.  What  did  she  net  next  year  again  ! — A.  About  $1,400. 

Q.  How  long  was  she  that  year? — A.  1  am  not  prepared  to  say.  She 
was  trading  the  first  part  of  the  season. 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  wishes  to  know  whether  the  sums  you  have  given  were 
the  results  of  the  fishing-voyage  alone  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  this  is  irrespective  of  what  she  made  at  trading  ? — A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  That  is  the  actual  division  of  the  fish  between  you  as  owner  and 
the  other  persons  engaged  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  they  engaged  on  the  same  principle  as  the  Americans !— A. 
Yes ;  they  paid  for  half  the  bait. 

Q.  If  there  was  any  other  year  when  she  was  engaged  about  the  same 
time  in  fishing,  you  will  mention  it. — A.  Other  years  she  was  probably 
not  so  long.  Some  years  she  did  not  go  until  August.  I  do  not  know 
exactly.    I  could  tell  if  I  looked  at  the  dates. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  sums  you  have  mentioned  give  a  fair  estimate 
of  what  she  could  make  in  good  years  fishing  for  that  period  of  time?— 
A.  Yes,  fishing. 

Q.  You  never  had  her  for  a  whole  season  ! — A.  No.  You  would  need 
to  go  from  the  15th  of  June  to  go  into  mackerel  fishing  for  the  whole 
season. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


659 


Q.  WImt  was  she  doinpr  last  year  f— A  She  was  trading  until  July. 
She  wiw  ttsliiiig  a  little  while. 

Q.  How  longf — A.  Probably  a  mouth  or  six  weeks. 

Q,  Dill  Hhe  do  anything  at  all  f — A.  They  got  about  80  barrels.  Last 
veur  WHS  the  poorest  year  she  ever  made. 

Q.  Tlie  year  before  what  did  she  net? — A.  About  $000. 

Q.  How  long  was  she  trading  out  of  thatf — A.  She  did  not  go  into 
the  bay  until  August. 

p  Q.  When  you  give  that  sum  of  $600,  do  you  mean  the  actual  profit  to 
yoiirHelf  f — A.  I  mean  the  actual  profit  to  the  vessel. 

Q.  The  other  half  went  to  the  crew  f— A.  $600  went  to  the  crew  and 
$C()0  went  to  the  vessel.    I  did  not  speak  of  the  crew's  half  at  all. 

Q.  Did  the  crew  get  $2,200  in  that  best  year ! — A.  Yes.  I  only  speak 
of  the  net  profits  to  the  vessel. 

Q.  Had  you  any  other  vessel ! — A.  We  had  the  J.  M.  Maguire  in  18G5, 
I  think. 

Q.  For  one  year ! — A.  The  autumn  of  one  year.  I  had  vessels  pre- 
vious to  this. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  any  account! — A.  No ;  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  jose  or  make  by  them  ? — A.  We  made  by  them.  I  never 
lost  but  one  year. 

Q.  You  have  mentioned  some  other  year  ?^— A.  In  18G5  we  had  the  J. 
M.  Mafjnire. 

Q.  What  did  you  net  by  her!-— A.  We  did  not  lose.  She  got  300 
barrels  of  mackerel. 

Q.  How  long  was  she  out? — A.  She  came  in  about  the  middle  of 
October. 

Q.  What  time  did  she  go  out  f— A.  In  August. 

Q.  Wbat  did  you  get  ? — A.  Tliree  hundred  barrels  of  mackerel. 

Q.  Wliut  did  it  net  the  vessel  ? — A.  Three  hundred  barrels. 

Q.  You  made  money  by  it  ? — A.  I  made  money  by  it. 

Q.  Wbat  was  her  tonnage! — A.  One  hundred  and  fourteen  or  115 
tons.  I  bad  her  the  next  year.  She  got  500  barrels.  1  had  her  no 
other  year. 

Q.  Was  she  trading  part  of  this  time! — A.  She  was  coasting  part  of 
the  season. 

Q.  Well,  now,  will  you  tell  us  are  there  many  other  of  your  people  en- 
gaged in  this  way  fishing  ! — A.  Keating  has  two  vessels. 

Q.  Ju8t  state,  are  tliere  many  ! — A.  There  are  a  good  many. 

Q.  From  your  experience,  was  that  a  fair  average  or  not  that  you 
made  ? — A.  Well,  that  is  a  good  fair  average. 

Q.  You  think  your  experieuce  is  a  good  fair  average  of  the  profits  of 
the  mackerel  fishing  ! — A.  Yes ;  that  is  a  good  average. 

Q.  You  have  been  all  these  years  to  some  extent  dealing  with  the 
Americans.    I  suppose  you  dou't  object  to  it ! — A.  Not  at  all. 

Q.  Give  the  Oommission  a  fair,  candid  opinion  as  to  whether  that 
part  of  your  business  has  been  profitable  or  not! — A.  I  certainly  came 
here  to  give  a  good  candid  opinion. 

Q.  Well,  did  the  trade  that  you  had  with  the  American  fishermen — 
have  you  always  considered  that  you  were  making  a  good  profit  on 
that?— A.  No,  sir;  not  at  all,  in  all  seasons. 

Q.  Wbat  has  been  the  trade  of  late  years  ! — A.  It  has  not  been  worth 
looking  after,  that  is  with  me,  auyhow.  I  speak  from  personal  experi- 
ence. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  others  ! — A.  As  far  as  my  knowledge  goes,  they 
are  not  making  much  money  any  way. 


660 


▲WARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


!  I 


Q.  Is  it  or  is  it  not  becaase  the  Ammcans  simply  now  take  \rl)at  is 
a  necessity,  and  don't  trade  generally  with  you  ! — A.  The  Americans 
don't  trade  very  much. 

Q.  Is  or  is  not  that  the  reason  why  it  is  not  worth  having  ? — A.  Well 
the  profits  never  were  very  large  in  my  opinion.    In  the  first  place  you 
had  to  have  a  very  large  supply.    If  you  didn't  have  it  you  couldn't 
trade,  and  if  you  had  it  and  they  didn't  take  it,  you  had  to  carry  it 
along. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  think  it  is  an  advantage  to  them  to  be  able  to  get 
what  they  require — what  is  a  necessity  to  them  ? — A.  If  I  have  a  ves 
sel  in  the  bay  fishing,  and  she  wants  $50  or  $100  worth  of  stores,  it  is 
certainly  an  advantage  to  her  to  get  what  she  wants  there,  aud  uot 
have  to  go  home. 

Q.  Or  sending  home  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have,  of  course,  conversed  with  a  very  large  nnraber  of 
Americau  fishermen,  and  have  been  in  constant  intercourse  with  tbem 
throughout  this  period,  I  presume  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  know,  from  your  experience  of  your  own  vessels, 
and  from  your  knowledge  derived  from  the  Americans  themselves,  at 
what  distance  from  the  shore  the  fish  are  caught? — A.  Most  of  the 
American  captains  I  have  been  in  conversation  with  say  inshore. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  you,  as  a  practical  man,  engaged  in  tbe  busi- 
ness to  some  extent,  whether  you  would  engage  in  the  mackerel  flshinj; 
business  if  you  were  deprived  of  the  fisheries  within  three  miles  of  tlie 
land? — A.  If  I  had  this  hall  full  of  gold  I  would  not  invest  $100 iru 
vessel  that  could  not  fish  inshore,  inside  of  the  three-mile  limit ;  to  be 
harassed  by  the  cutters,  I  would  not  do  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  American  captain  whose  opinion  was  ever 
expressed  who  would  come  in  if  not  allowed  to  come  witiiin  three  miles 
of  the  shore? — A.  1  think  at  least  three-fourths  of  them  would  uot 
come  if  they  were  deprived  of  the  privilege  of  coming  in. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  any  of  them  ? — A.  I  have  heard  tbem  sav 
time  and  time  again  it  was  no  use  to  come  if  they  could  not  fish  witliin. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  any  American  captains  say  they  would  come  if  I 
they  were  shut  out? — A.  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  I  Lave  never 
heard  a  man  say  so.    I  could  tell  you  something  I  probably  ought  not 
to.    I  have  told  my  own  captain,  when  at  Margaree,  to  hoist  a  Hag  | 
when  he  was  there  to  let  the  Americans  know  when  they  could  come  in- 
shore. 

Q.  You  have  always  been  on  the  best  terms  with  the  Americans!-] 
A.  Yes.    They  are  my  friends,  many  of  them. 

Q.  Now,  I  believe  you  owned  a  drag-seine  ? — A.  I  have  owned  one  for  | 
the  last  20  years. 

Q.  What  is  the  cost  of  a  seine  like  that  ? — A.  That  cost  nie,  landed  j 
here  from  England,  £110. 

Q.  What  has  it  been  used  for  during  these  20  years  ? — A.  Herring. 

Q.  Who  used  it  for  18  years;  how  has  it  been  nsed  for  18  years  ?— A.l 
The  Americans  had  it,  or  they  had  the  fish  caught  with  it  j  sometimes 
the  seine  itself. 

Q.  For  about  18  years  they  used  that  seine ;  what  for  ?— A.  To  haul  | 
fish. 

Q.  Where  ?— A.  At  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  In  their  vessels,  or  where  ? — A.  To  haul  herring  on  shore. 

Q.  They  could  not  haul  them  in  the  vessels? — A.  Ilhey  had  to  baalj 
them  on  shore  first.    It  was  once  used  on  Labrador. 

Q.  Uy  whom  ? — A.  By  the  American  fishermen. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


661 


Q.  Now,  of  late  years,  what  has  been  the  practice  with  regard  to  the 
Americans  using  seines  Y — A.  The  same  as  it  was  before. 

Q.  How  did  they  engage  in  this? — A.  They  gave  so  much  for  the  use 
of  the  seiue. 

Q.  Do  tbey  ever  employ  the  owner  ? — A.  Most  owners  have  to  send 
meo  with  the  seine. 

Q.  Did  you  always  send  a  man  with  that  one  ? — A.  All  but  to  Lab- 
rador. 

Q.  Who  were  the  other  persons  that  used  it  ?  Did  they  hire  our  own 
people  or  use  their  own  crew  ? — A.  They  hire  two  boats  aud  two  men  ; 
gometitues  a  large  vessel  hires  three  boats. 

Q.  Is  it  managed  in  that  way,  or  do  they  use  their  own  crew  ? — A. 
Tliey  use  their  own  crew. 

Q.  Do  they  invariably  ? — A.  Invariably.  If  they  are  in  a  hurry  they 
hire  uieu  from  the  Magdalen  Islands  or  keep  a  man  for  a  few  days. 

Q.  Well,  now,  this  is  in  catching  what  sort  of  fish? — A.  Herring. 

Q.  Of  late  years,  do  you  know  where  those  herring  are  exported  ? — A. 
For  the  last  two  years  they  have  been  to  Sweden. 

Q.  Is  that  a  growing  tra«'.e? — A.  It  is. 

Q.  Is  it  likely  to  be  profitable? — A.  1  can't  answer. 

Q.  Well,  so  far  as  you  understand  I — A.  They  have  got,  I  beliave,  as 
ligh as  $8  a  barrel. 

Q.  As  far  as  you  have  been  informed,  is  it  likely  to  be  a  growing  and 
profitable  business  ? — A.  I  can't  answer  that. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  have  no  information  on  the  subject  ? — A.  I  have  no 
ioforinatioii. 

Q.  You  told  us  the  codfish  fleet  amounted  to  300? — A.  About  that,  to 
he  best  of  my  knowledge. 

1.  Do  they  take  them  in  Canadian  waters  ? — A.  They  get  bait  always 
aroiid  the  shore,  from  Grand  Manan  to  the  bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  .'»  Canadian  waters? — A.  Yes;  they  also  procure  bait  around 
Cape  L>  Men. 

Q.  Do  Ilv^v  catch  any  of  it? — A.  They  sometimes  catch  squid  for  bait. 

Q.  Do  they  IniyWit  as  well? — A.  They  purchase  herring,  mackerel, 
and  squid. 

Q.  Would  it  be  poc^'ble  for  the  American  codflsbing  fleet  to  carry  on 
that  business  if  they  counl  'lot  procure  bait  iu  Canadian  waters? — A. 
Id  my  opinion  it  would  not. 

Q.  In  your  opinion,  that  is  an  essential  eieuicm, ;..  IL^  *„_„■_..:,!  A. 
Bait  aud  ice  are.    It  would  be  no  nse  to  take  fresh  bait  without  ice. 

Q.  Are  you  av^are  whether  codfishing  vessels  have,  in  any  particular 
season,  employed  cheir  lime  iu  catching  mackerel  ? — /  .  iSometimes  they 
do  so.    I  know  of  three  or  four  that  have. 

Q.  And  have  you  heard  of  others  doing  so  ? — A.  Yes. 

i].  Numbers  of  others? — A.  I  have  beard  of  some  doing  so. 

Q.  I  tliink  you  told  us  that  50  and  some  lower  number  engaged  in  the 
herriugf  lishery  ?— A.  I  think  I  stated  from  25  to  70  engaged  in  catching 
herring  during  the  season  ;  probably  more  do  so. 

Q.  Do  they  use  the  shores  in  any  other  way  besides  drawing  herring 
on  them  as  you  have  mentioned  ?  Do  they  use  the  shores  of  Magdalen 
Islands  in  any  other  way  ? — A.  Tbey  land  barrels  on  the  shore,  and  some- 
times they  salt  their  fish  there.    I  have  seen  them  do  so. 

Q>  Is  that  a  convenience  in  connection  with  the  carrying  on  of  the 
herring  flsbery  ? — A.  If  a  large  vessel  goes  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  she 
caDuot  salt  her  cargo  aboard  the  vessel— she  has  to  laud  the  barrels. 


662 


AWASD   OF  THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Toa  spoke  of  a  vesRel  that  caaght  500  barrels  oi'  herring ;  do  yoo 
know  what  profit  she  made  ? — ^A.  I  could  not  say. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  For  how  many  years  have  you  personally  fished  ? — A.  I  cannot 
exactly  say.    I  have  fished  for  a  good  number  of  years. 

Q.  I  do  not  know  whether  you  have  chiefly  si)ent  your  life  in  trading 
or  fishing? — A.  I  commenced  to  fish  and  went  to  sea,  and  afterward  I 
began  to  do  business  as  a  merchant. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  in  American  vessels  ! — A.  No. 

Q.  Which  was  the  last  year  when  you  were  personally  fishing— was  it 
the  year  when  you  were  to  Newfoundland  ? — A.  No ;  I  went  to  tbe 
Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Did  you  not  say  that  you  went  to  Newfoundland  one  year  ?— A. 
Yes ;  that  was  about  twenty  years  ago. 

Q.  What  did  you  go  for  ! — A.  Herring. 

Q.  Did  you  go  the  Magdalen  Islands  afterward? — A.  Yes;  tbe  next 
year. 

Q.  In  each  of  these  cases  did  you  take  a  seine  along  ? — A.  During 
two  years  I  d'd. 

Q.  What  tiid  you  do  with  the  herring  you  caught  ? — A.  The  Ameri- 
cans took  them. 

Q.  The  Americans  helped  you  to  haul  the  herring  and  bought  them  ? 
— A.  Yes ;  and  Nova  Scotians,  also. 

Q.  In  both  cases,  how  did  they  pay  you — so  much  for  the  haul,  or  so 
much  a  barrel  ? — A.  They  paid  me  so  much  the  barrel.  I  suppose,  if 
you  come  down  to  the  fine  thing,  that  they  averaged  three  cents  a  barrel. 

Q.  During  some  years,  as  I  understand  it,  you  have  caugbt  herring 
without  the  help  of  Americans? — A.  We  have  always  sent  our  vessels, 
and  they  caught  their  own  herring. 

Q.  How  large  is  your  vessel? — A.  Forty -four  tons. 

Q.  How  many  men  were  in  her? — A.  Six. 

Q.  When  you  sent  your  vessel  with  six  men  did  your  men  or  tbe  Amer- 
icans catch  the  herring? — A.  Our  men  caught  the  herring  and  the 
Americans  also.    They  helped  the  Americans  on  some  occasions. 

Q.  And  they  were  then  paid  by  the  barrel? — A.  Not  at  all  times. 
Yes,  I  think  that  for  four  or  five  years  the  Americans  seined  themselves, 
and  our  folks  got  n  >ne. 

Q.  When  they  had  the  seine  themselves  did  your  boats  go  up  with 
it  ? — A.  Our  men  and  boats  went  up ;  either  one  man  or  two  men  went 
>vith  a  seine. 

Q.  But  with  no  boats  ?—  A.  With  one  or  two  boats. 

Q.  Would  there  be  two  of  them  t — A.  There  would  be  sometimes  two 
and  sometimes  one. 

Q.  Then  you  always  contributed  your  seine  and  one,or  two  seine- 
boats? — A.  One  seine-boat  is  all  you  want  with  a  seine. 

Q.  And  never  two? — A.  Not  for  the  seine.  I  said  that  the  Ameri- 
cans hired  two  boats  sometimes,  and  sometimes  three. 

Q.  Of  you  ? — A.  Of  me  or  anybody  else. 

Q.  Have  you  bad  more  than  one  seine  to  a  boat  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  With  reference  to  the  circumstance  that  tbe  Americans  are  bay- 
ing a  less  quantity  of  supplies  from  your  people  than  they  did  formerly, 
and  ])articularly  to  the  cod-fisherman  who  refitted  there  and  sent  borne 
for  his  bait  and  seines,  you  do  not,  of  course,  have  the  bait  here  that 
they  want,  unless  it  comes  from  the  States?— A.  They  buy  some  herring 
and  other  bait  of  us,  but  they  chiefly  send  home  for  it. 


AWAKD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


663 


one  year  ?— A. 


Q.  What  do  they  send  for  ! — A.  Fogies  and  dams. 

Q.  And  these  you  do  not  have  for  sale  unless  they  are  imported  ? — 
A.  Undoubtedly ;  we  import  all  the  pogies  we  sell. 

Q.  Is  there  any  large  place  for  the  manufacture  of  sails  in  your  vi- 
ciuity  ?— A.  Two  sail-makers  are  there,  one  at  Hawkesbury  and  one  at 
Port  Mulgrave. 

Q.  Is  it  convenient  for  Americans  to  get  them  there? — A.  Undoubtedly 

not. 

Q.  Why  not  ? — A.  Because,  in  the  first  place,  the  owners  send  down 
lioine,  and  almost  every  owner  has  a  sail  maker  at  home,  and  certainly 
it  would  be  better  to  buy  canvas  at  home  and  make  the  sails  there. 

Q.  Does  the  canvas  come  chiefly  from  the  States  ? — A.  The  cotton 
chiefly  does. 

Q.  During  what  years  did  this  business  of  selling  supplies  to  the 
Americans,  in  which  you  have  been  engaged  so  long,  prove  most  profit- 
able?— A.  It  was  most  profitable  for  a  few  years  during  the  war. 

Q.  And  how  was  it  before  the  war  ? — A.  It  was  not  then  so  profit- 
able. 

Q.  But  during  the  war  f — A.  For  a  few  years  during  the  war  it  was 
better. 

Q.  And  how  was  it  after  the  war  was  over,  in  1866, 1867,  or  1868  ?— 
It  was  fair.  When  the  Americans  were  buying  licenses,  a  great  many 
mackerel  were  caught. 

Q.  When  did  the  number  of  American  vessels  engaged  in  mackerel 
tishing  begin  to  diminish  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  within  your  observa- 
tion ?— A.  From  1874, 1  think.  There  was  a  large  fleet  iu  the  bay  in 
1873;  during  August. 

Q.  In  August H — A.  When  the  August  gale  took  place. 

Q.  That  was  a  very  disastrous  year  for  these  vessels,  was  it  not  ? — A. 
Yes,  but  there  was  a  good  catch  of  mackerel  that  year. 

Q.  In  1874  a  great  deal  smaller  number  of  vessels  came  to  the  bay  ? — 
A.  I  think  that  their  number  was  smaller  that  year. 

Q.  And  in  1875  it  was  smaller  still  f — A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say 
that  it  was  much  smaller. 

Q.  How  was  it  last  year? — A.  There  were  not  so  many  last  year. 

Q.  How  many  would  you  think  there  were  last  year  ! — A.  1  am  not 
prepared  to  say. 

Q.  How  many  were  there  according  to  your  judgment  ? — A.  I  kept  no 
estimate  of  them.    I  could  not  do  so. 

Q.  How  did  you  happen  to  keep  that  list  of  the  number  of  vessels  and 
their  trips  in  1864,  which  you  mentioned  f  You  said  you  made  it  up 
Iroin  your  books  I — A.  There  are  other  lists  with  which  we  could  com- 
pare that  one. 

Q.  How  did  you  happen  to  keep  itt — A.  We  have  the  name  of  every 
vessel  trading  with  us  on  our  books. 

Q.  Those  are  the  vessels  with  which  your  firm  traded  that  year  I — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  the  way  in  which  you  knew  how  many  trips  they  made  was 
ovviiig  to  your  trading  with  them  each  trip  ?— A.  Undoubtedly. 

Q.  They  did  their  business  at  your  wharf! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  they  send  fish  from  your  place  to  Boston  when  they  do 
not  take  them  themselves? — A.  Sometimes  they  do  so  by  steamer  and 
sometimes  by  sailing-vessels.    The  latter  are  preferred  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  Are  these  sailing-vessels  American  or  British  ? — A.  A  good  many 
of  thein  were  then  American. 

Q.  When  ?--A.  In  those  years. 


664 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Id  1864  f — A.  Atoerican  vessels  were  so  loaded  in  1873. 

Q.  Is  mo8t  of  the  trausshippiDg  doue  in  American  or  in  British  sail- 
ing-vessels!— A.  Formerly  I  think  it  was  mostly  done  by  Aiuerieau 
vessels. 

Q.  What  is  the  case  now  f — A.  It  is  now  chiefly  done  in  British  ves- 
sels. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  number  of  years  since  many  American  sailing-vessels 
engaged  in  that  trade  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  is.  American  vessels 
are  allowed  to  come  at  any  time  and  take  away  fish. 

Q.  But  do  they  now  come  for  this  purpose  ? — A.  They  do. 

Q.  I  thought  that  trading  of  that  sort  had  chiefly  fallen  into  tlie 
hands  of  British  trading-vessels  of  late  years  ? — A.  When  freight  is  to 
be  got  Americans  come  there  frequently. 

Q.  Have  they  done  much  in  this  direction  since  the  American  war  ?— 
A.  In  1873  I  know  that  they  came,  because  they  brought  stoves  for  us 
and  took  a  load  back.  I  «to  not  remember  that  they  have  come  siuce 
1873.    In  1873  one  man  lost  his  cargo  oflf  deck  while  going  home. 

Q.  Will  you  name  as  many  of  the  firms  engaged  in  this  business  of 
furnishing  supplies  to  the  Americans  in  your  vicinity  as  you  canf— A, 
There  was  McKeen,  who  has  been  succeeded  by  Lawrence.  I  do  not 
think  that  the  Paints  do  much  at  it.  At  Port  Mulgrave  there  were 
Hart  and  Cunningham,  and  George  J.  or  J.  J.  McKeen  and  Levi  Hart 
at  Port  Hawkesbury.  The  latter  is  dead  and  gone.  Peter  Paint  I  do 
not  think  has  done  much  in  this  business.  1  do  not  believe  that  he 
would  be  bothered  with  it.  There  was  a  man  by  the  name  of  Alexan- 
der Fraser,  but  he  is  dead.  Then  there  is  Keatings  and  Gompauy; 
and  there  were  the  Elliotts,  an  American  house,  but  they  are  gone. 
Mr.  Wylde  comes  next,  at  Port  Mulgrave,  and  Mr.  Hartley,  in  Pirate 
Cove. 

Q.  How  long  is  the  Strait  of  Canso  from  end  to  end  ? — A.  We  call  it 
21  miles  from  Cape  Bed  Head  to  Cape  Jack. 

Q.  And  all  these  men  are  established  in  that  length  of  21  miles?— A. 
These  men  did  business  within  a  less  distance  than  21  miles;  between 
Port  Mulgrave  and  our  place. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 
Q.  Are  there  any  other  persons  engaged 
neighborhood  ? — A.  Not  that  I  am  aware  of. 
our  place  to  Port  Mulgrave. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  How  many  are  enga^,  ^.  in  the  outfitting  business  in  Bouche?— A. 
Mr.  Christian  lives  there,  but  I  do  not  know  whether  he  is  engaged  iu 
this  business  or  not.  There  are  no  others  so  occupied  from  Buuche  to 
Second  Point,  at  the  entrance  to  the  strait,  and  no  others  besides  tbose 
1  have  mentioned  on  our  own  side  of  the  Strait  of  Canso. 

Q.  How  about  Cape  Breton  f — A.  McKeen  did  business  there,  where 
Lawrence  is  now. 

Q.  Where  ?— A.  At  Port  Hastings. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  person  engaged  in  this  business  in  any  othev 
jilaceon  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  Mr.  Hart  was  at  Hawkesbury,  but  he  is  goue. 

Q.  I  thought  that  there  were  others  outside  of  the  strait  ?— A.  I  do 
not  know  of  anybody  outside  of  the  Gut  of  Canso  to  the  north  except 
Webb  and  Crispo. 

Q.  And  north  of  that  there  are  nonef — A.  No. 

Q.  Where  is  Port  Hood  ? — ^A.  In  Cape  Breton. 


in  this  business  in  that 
We  call  it  6  miles  from 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


665 


I.  We  call  it 


Q.  Tell  ns  all  yon  know  abont  people  engaged  the  same  business  in  Gape 
Breton  f — A.  I  do  not  know  of  a  man  there  so  occupied  save  one — John 
Smitb. 

Q.  Where  ?— A.  At  Port  Hood. 

Q.  He  is  the  only  one  you  so  know  of  outside  of  the  Strait  of  Ganso  T 
-A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tbey  advertise  that  the  same  business  is  done  here  at  Halifax,  do 
they  not !— A.  Probably. 

Q.  And  they  invite  Ashing- vessels  to  stop  here  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
flttiug?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  yourself  have  never  been  engaged  in  cod-fishing  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  say  you  thought  that  if  American  cod- 
fisbernien  could  not  come  and  fish  in  Ganadian  v/aters  they  would  not 
be  able  to  prosecute  the  cod  fishery  ? — A.  It  could  not  be  done  success- 
fully otherwise. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  this  could  be  done  by  them  if  they  were  allowed 
to  go  to  Newfoundland  ? — A.  They  might  do  so  to  some  extent. 

Q.  Why  could  they  not  prosecute  them  successfully  at  Newfound- 
lamH — A.  I  do  not  think  that  they  could  make  it  pay  all  the  season. 

Q.  Why  not? — A.  They  could  not  get  bait  easily  enough  if  they 
could  not  get  inshore. 

Q.  What  bait  would  they  require  ? — A.  Squid  and  herring. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  they  could  get  along  pretty  well  with  her- 
v'mg  without  squid? — A.  The  fishermen  would  sooner  have  squid.  It 
makes  better  bait.  Two  vessels  may  go  to  the  Banks — one  with  herring 
and  tbe  other  with  squid  for  bait — and  the  one  which  has  the  herring 
will  not  catch  half  as  much  fish  as  the  other. 

Q.  Suppose  that  a  particular  American  cod-fisherman  were  to  con- 
clude tbat  he  would  not  go  to  Newfoundland  or  Ganada  for  bait,  but  to 
St.  Pierre  and  Miquelon,  why  could  he  not  get  along  there  ? — A.  If  they 
obtained  the  herring  from  Nova  Scotia  and  Newfoundland  they  could 
do  80. 

Q.  The  French  people  do  not  require  compensation  for  the  privilege 
of  having  the  Americans  to  trade  with  them ;  they  like  to  have  this 
trade;  they  do  not  object  to  commerce;  and  this  is  nearly  a  free  port, 
the  duty  being  only  two  per  cent;  and  I  want  to  know  why  an  Ameri- 
can  cod  fisherman  could  not  then  go  to  St.  Pierre  and  buy  what  he 
wanted  without  resorting  either  to  Newfoundland  or  to  Ganada? — A.  To 
what  sort  of  supplies  do  you  refer? 

Q.  What  is  there  that  they  could  not  buy  at  the  French  Islands  ? — 
A.  The  French  come  here  after  squid. 

Q.  Certainly ;  but  you  allow  them  to  buy  squid,  and  you  take  it  there 
and  sell  it  ?— A.  Undoubtedly. 

Q.  Your  boats  go  over  to  the  French  Islands  in  great  numbers  and 
sell  squid  to  the  value  of  £40,000  or  £60,000  a  year;  and  this  large  trade 
existing,  which  your  people  seem  willing  to  carry  on,  because  they 
actually  take  the  bait  over,  why  could  not  the  American  cod  fishermen 
go  to  St.  Pierre  and  buy  their  bait  there? — A.  They  would  have  to  pay 
more  for  it  there  than  here. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  Because,  in  the  first  lace,  the  Frenchmen  have  to  buy 
their  bait  from  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Have  they  not  a  good  deal  of  bait  there  to  begin  with  ? — A.  They 
may  have  some,  but  not  as  much  as  have  Newfoundland  and  Nova 
Scotia. 

Q>  If  the  squid  was  for  sale  there  as  reasonably  as  in  Newfoundland  and 


":f'4i ;  !<>,. 


666 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


liTova  Scotia,  it  would  be  jast  as  good  a  place  to  go  to  for  itf— A.  Yes; 
but  tbey  migbt  then  have  to  pay  from  $8  to  $10  a  barrel  for  their  bait! 

Q.  Suppose  you  were  to  put  a  fence  around  the  Island  of  Newfound. 
land  and  the  coasts  of  Nova  Scotia  and  not  allow  the  Americao  vessels 
to  come  there,  but  Btill  keep  up  your  commercial  relations  with  the 
French,  why  could  not  an  American  cod-fisherman  go  to  St.  Pierre  aud 
trade  there,  and  still  prosecute  his  voyage  successfully? — A.  If  it  is  uot 
profitable  he  cannot  do  so. 

Q.  Why  would  it  not  be  profitable? — A.  I  do  not  know;  but  there 
would  then  be  no  competition,  and  the  French  could  charge  the  Ameri- 
cans for  bait  what  they  had  a  mind  to.  They  could  charge  $10  or  $20 
a  barrel  for  herring  or  squid. 

Q.  But  it  is  a  place  that  would  answer  the  purpose  ? — A.  The  Ameri- 
cans would  have  to  pay  for  the  privilege. 

Q.  To  the  government? — A.  The  owner  of  the  vessel  and  the  crew 
would  have  to  do  so. 

Q.  Then  the  only  difference  that  would  exist,  if  the  Americans  were 
so  excluded,  would  be  that  the  market  price  for  bait  wouhl  be  raised? 
Would  that  be  the  only  difference  ? — A.  Undoubtedly,  but 

Q.  Would  that  be  all  ? — A.  But  then  they  probably  would  not  be  able 
to  get  bait  either  from  Newfoundland  or  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  Why  not? — A.  Do  you  suppose  that,  if  this  was  going  to  do  an 
injury  to  the  people  of  Newfoundland  and  Nova  Scotia,  they  would 
then  sell  their  bait  to  the  French  ? 

Q.  You  think  that  if  the  Americans  did  so  it  would  be  an  injury  to 
the  people  of  Newfoundland  and  Nova  Scotia  ? — A.  I  am  not  saying  so, 
but  I  am  just  putting  to  you  this  question:  if  that  produced  such  an 
injury,  do  you  suppose  that  they  would  sell  their  bait  to  the  French  ? 

Q.  They  sell  their  bait  there  because  it  brings  in  a  profit  and  does 
not  cause  an  injury  ? — A.  If  you  folks  had  to  go  there  for  bait,  you 
would  then  see  whether  it  was  profitable  or  not  to  be  obliged  to  pay 
from  $15  to  $20  a  barrel  for  herring  and  squid. 

Q.  You  would  rather  that  the  Americans  would  be  driven  there  ?— A. 
We  want  fair  compensation. 

Q.  You  want  us  to  pay  you  compensation  ? — A.  We  want  to  do  what  is 
right. 

Q.  And  this  for  the  privilege  of  buying  bait,  which  could  be  pur- 
chased at  St.  Pierre  ? — A.  You  would  have  to  pay  for  it  there. 

Q.  You  want  us  to  pay  your  price  for  bait,  and  to  pay  the  government 
too  for  the  privilege  of  doing  so  ? — A.  Yon  would  then  have  to  pay  the 
price  that  we  asked,  and  the  price  the  French  demanded  as  well. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe: 

Q.  If  I  understand  you  aright,  the  Americans  have  paid  yon  by  the 
barrel  for  the  fish  caught  in  the  seine  ? — A.  Yes,  during  some  seasons. 

Q.  Why  so  ? — A.  Because  we  would  not  hire  the  seine. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  price  would  amount  to  three  cents  a  barrel,  but 
this  was  not  buying  the  fish  from  you.  Their  agreement  was  that  they 
were  to  give  you  three  cents  a  barrel  for  all  the  herring  caught  iu  the 
seine? — A.  They  have  to  pay  three  cents  a  barrel  for  all  they  get. 

Q.  As  remuneration  for  the  use  of  the  seine? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Whatwasthenatureof  the  contract  on  other  occasions?— A.  Then 
to  much  was  given  for  the  use  of  the  seine. 

Q.  In  a  lump  sum? — A.  Yes. 
.  Q.  Whether  they  caught  anything  or  not? — A.  Yes;  sometimes  two 
men  aud  sometimes  one  man  went  with  the  seine. 


^WABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


667 


Q.  Did  tbey  give  three  ceots  a  barrel  for  tbe  use  of  the  seine  and  the 
services  of  the  British  fishermen  f — A.  They  paid  me  so  much. 

Q.  Tbey  paid  you  separately? — A.  They  paid  me  a  lump  sum. 

Q,  When  they  paid  by  the  barrel  did  this  include  the  hire  of  the  men 
as  well  f — A.  That  was  all  they  had  to  pay.  These  men  helped  to  drag 
tlie  seine. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  When  they  obtained  the  use  of  the  seine  alone,  what  did  they  then 
pay  f~A.  They  always  had  a  man  or  two  with  the  seines. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait: 

Q.  Who  paid  this  man  or  these  two  men  f — A.  I  did. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Tliey  paid  you  three  cents  a  barrel  for  the  services  of  the  men  and 
the  use  of  the  seine  ? — A.  I  beg  your  paidon.  When  they  went  to  haul 
herring  and  dipped  them  out  of  the  seine,  the  Americans  paid  three 
cents  a  barrel  and  helped  to  haul  the  herring,  and  when  I  hired  one 
man  or  two  men  to  go  with  them  they  gave  so  much  in  a  lump  sum, 
say  $00  or  $70  for  loading  the  vessel. 

Q.  And  they  took  the  seine  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  men  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  I  understood  you  aright  when  you  named  the  persons  who  trade 
with  the  Americans  between  the  two  capes  mentioned,  you  said  that 
Hart  &  Cunningham  carried  on  this  business,  and  that  Paint  did  not 
do  much  at  it  ? — A.  Hart  &  Cuuniugham  do  business  at  Port  Mulgrave. 

Q.  Were  those  you  mentioned  for  these  21  miles  all  contemporaries! 
Were  tbey  all  trading  at  tbe  same  time  ? — A.  Yes.  I  do  not  know, 
however,  whether  Eraser  was  dead  before  Hart  and  Cunningham  came 
there  or  not. 

Q.  Were  Webb  &  Crispo  engaged  in  furnishing  Americans  with  sup- 
plies ?— A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Then  we  have  three  or  four  of  whom  you  are  not  sure.  Was  Smith 
also  a  contemporary  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  sure  about  five  for  the  whole  distance,  but  you  are  not  cer- 
taiu  about  Eraser  or  Webb  &  Crispo  f — A.  I  think  tbey  furnished  sup- 
plies to  a  limited  extent. 

Q.  How  many  of  these  men  failed  in  the  business  ? — A.  Three  failed. 

Q.  Three  out  of  that  number  1 — A.  I  think  so. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  When  did  they  fail  ? — A.  The  last  one  failed  two  years  ago. 

Q.  When  did  the  others  fail  ? — A.  I  could  not  give  tbe  years  exactly. 
The  American  Co.  failed,  but  I  do  not  know  when.  If  I  looked  at  my 
boolcs  I  might  tell  you. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  With  reference  to  this  transportation  of  material  by  American 
schooDers,  you  say  that  they  bring  up  sails.  Now,  I  want  to  know 
whether  they  have  sails  made  and  sent  up  here  by  land  ? — A.  No;  they 
come  by  sea. 

Q.  Tbey  have  such  a  supply  on  hand  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  sail  with  up  here  at  such  a  time T— A.  A  line  of 
steamers  is  running  on  the  route.  One  may  have  an  old  suit  of  sails  on 
a  vessel  with  which  to  come  to  tbe  Bay  of  Cbaleurs,  and  they  may  get 
i^ipped;  and  yon  may  then  telegraph  or  send  home  for  a  new  suit. 


668 


AWABD  OF  THE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


These  are  freqaently  sent  up  with  a  pile  of  riggiog  and  many  ether 
things. 

Q.  Tbey  send  them  ou  beforehand  f — A.  Yes,  and  have  them  landed 
when  they  come  in. 

No.  24. 

William  Brown,  fisherman,  of  Port  Medway,  Qaeen's  County, 
Nova  Scotia,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Brituuuie 
Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  Are  you  master  of  a  vessel  f — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  name  of  the  vessel  f — A.  The  Sweet  William. 

Q.  She  is  now  in  Halifax  f-— A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  branch  of  the  fishery  are  you  engaged  ? — A.  The  cod- 
fishery. 

Q.  Where  are  you  following  it  T — A.  We  come  from  the  Bay  of  Cba- 
leurs,  in  the  Gulf  of  the  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Where  is  the  cod-fishery  prosecuted  in  the  Bay  of  St.  Lawrence  f— 
A.  In  different  places — around  Prince  Edward  Island,  Point  Miscou, 
and  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  in  fact  all  over  the  bay. 

Q.  It  is  carried  on  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  all  over  the  bay?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  been  engaged  in  this  fishing  for  many  years!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  ! — A.  Altogether,  for  about  20  years  or  more. 

Q.  Have  yon  fished  in  American  vessels  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  in  British  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  have  fished  the  Bay  of  St.  Lawrence  f — A.  Yes ;  I  have 
fished  there  for  the  greater  part  of  the  time. 

Q.  I  believe  that  you  have  now  come  straight  from  the  bay  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  From  off  Prince  Edward  Island — how  did  you  leave  the  fislieries 
this  year  ? — A.  God  was  pretty  scarce  when  I  left  there,  but  mackerel 
were  very  abundant — there  was  any  quantity  of  them. 

Q.  Where  were  these  mackerel  to  be  found  ? — A.  All  about  the  shore. 

Q.  How  far  off  from  the  shore? — A.  They  were  right  against  the 
shore. 

Q.  In  what  abundsince  were  they  to  be  fonnd  ? — A.  I  never  saw  them 
more  plentiful  in  my  life  than  they  are  this  year. 

Q.  You  refer  to  an  experience  of  twenty  years  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  never  saw 
them  so  plentiful  as  they  are  this  year  on  the  American  coast  aud  in  the 
bay. 

Q.  You  never  saw  the  like  of  this  year  in  this  relation  ? — A.  No ;  a 
vessel  can  get  about  what  she  wants  now ;  at  least  this  was  the  case 
when  I  left. 

Q.  Are  there  many  Americans  in  the  bay  ? — A.  When  I  left,  about 
seventy-five  sail  of  seiners  were  there. 

Q.  On  the  Prince  Edward  ^Island  coast?— A.  Yes.  A  good  many 
hookers,  besides,  are  also  there. 

Q.  There  are  75  seiners  besides  vessels  that  fish  with  the  hook  ?— A. 
Yes ;  some  have  two  seine  boats  and  some  one  seine  boat. 

Q.  That  was  off'  the  island  coast? — A.  Yes;  down  from  Eist  Point. 
I  was  up  as  far  as  New  London,  which  is  situated  about  60  miles  from 
East  Point. 

Q.  Some  have  two  seine  boats  ? — A.  Yes. 
.  Q.  And  some  have  one  .seine  boat  ?— A.  The  Panama  had  two. 

Q.  Do  they  always  have  boats  to  use  with  the  seine !— A.  Yes. 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


669 


Q.  Tbey  mnst  have  boats  for  seioiof^  parposes  f — A.  They  have  a 
seiiit)  boat  to  each  seine,  and  aconple  of  small  boats,  dories,  besides. 

Q.  Were  they  actually  engaged  in  seining  an<l  fishing  off  the  island 
coast  t— A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore? — A.  Jast  right  against  the  shore.  They 
had  seines  on  purpose  for  it.  They  had  seines  of  different  sizes.  Some- 
tiines  tbey  seined  in  twelve  fathoms,  sometimes  in  fifteen  fathoms,  and 
sometimes  in  eighteen  fathoms  of  water. 

Q.  How  far  off  from  the  shore  ? — A.  About  two  miles. 

Q.  Was  that  the  nearest  the  American  vessels  caiue  to  the  coast  ? — A. 
0, 110.  Our  schooner  was  right  in  against  the  shore.  She  had  a  shoal 
seiue.  This  was  the  Panama.  She  got  a  load  first  and  went  home  with  it . 
She  is  a  big  two  topped  schooner. 

Q.  She  has  already  got  a  loud  of  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  returned  to  tbe  States  ? — A.  Gloucester.    Yes. 

Q.  Sbe  is  a  large  two-topped  schooner  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  was  she  in  getting  a  load  ? — A.  I  think  about  two  or 
three  weeks.    She  was  not  long  there.         , 

Q.  Have  any  other  vessels  as  yet  taken  fares  ? — A.  O,  yes.  I  could 
not  tell  the  names  of  many  of  them,  however,  because  I  did  take  partic- 
ular notice  of  them. 

Q,  Give  the  names  of  as  many  as  you  can. — A.  The  David  F.  Low  has 
just  arrived  there,  and  the  first  day  she  was  there  she  got  150  barrels. 

Q.  How  far  off'  from  the  shore  was  this  ? — A.  A  couple  of  miles,  or  a 
mile  or  so:  I  could  not  exactly  tell  the  distance,  but  it  was  not  over  two 
miles  from  the  shore.  The  trouble  with  the  mackerel  this  year  is  that 
they  are  too  close  to  the  shore,  and  tbe  vessels  have  to  watch  for  an  op- 
portunity to  get  them  out  from  the  shore. 

Q.  They  are  too  close  to  the  shore  to  permit  of  the  use  of  large  seines  1 
—A.  Yes ;  and  those  who  have  not  small  seines  have  to  watch  until 
they  can  attract  the  fish  away  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Have  the  other  vessels  secured  large  catches? — A.  Yes ;  the  Fred- 
eric Garou  caught  200  barrels  in  one  day.  I  was  alongside  of  another 
vessel,  a  big  two-topped  schooner,  and  sbe  had  a  big  deck-full.  I  forget 
her  name.  I  do  not  know  exactly  what  she  had  taken,  but  I  think  it 
was  a  couple  of  hundred  barrels.  The  other  vessels  had  obtained  very 
large  decks. 

Q.  You  should  judge  so  from  looking  at  the  fish  ? — A.  Yes;  I  asked 
the  captain  what  he  had  got,  and  be  said  he  hud  taken  a  few  of  them. 

Q.  And  you  would  judge  that  he  bad  caught  200  barrels? — A.  Yes. 
They  do  not  make  much  account  of  tbat  number,  for  they  call  400  or  500 
barrels  only  a  few. 

Q.  You  know  tbe  Prince  Edward  Island  coast,  and  the  Cape  Breton 
coast,  and  tbe  west  coast  of  New  Brunswick  pretty  well  ? — A.  Yes ;  I 
have  traveled  about  the  whole  of  these  shores. 

Q.  You  have  done  so  for  many  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  oft'  from  ♦he  shore  do  you  generally  catch  mackerel  ? — A. 
0,  as  a  general  thing,  we  catch  them  right  in  against  tbe  shore.  I  have 
CHugbt  trips  of  mackerel  away  up  at  Batburst,  in  the  Bay  of  Cbaleurs. 
We  laid  at  anchor  and  took  them  between  that  point  and  Port  Daniel. 
We  obtained  500  barrels  there  one  year  in  a  Boston  vessel.  She  was  au 
English  bottom,  but  sbe  was  owned  in  Boston.  Sbe  Hew  tbe  English 
flag,  and  had  English  T^)apers;  but  still  sbe  was  owned  in  Boston.  I 
caught  that  trip  of  mackerel  at  Batburst  and  in  Port  Daniel  Harbor. 

Q.  How  far  from  tbe  shore  did  you  catch  them  ? — ^A.  We  took  them 
iu  about  five  fathoms  of  water. 


670 


AWABD   OF  THE  FISHERY  C0MMI8SI0K. 


Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  T — A.  I  shonhl  think  half  a  mile. 

Q.  It  was  within  half  a  mile  f — A.  Tea;  bat  I  coald  not  give  the  dig. 
tance  exactly. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  have  fished  in  American  vessels  in  the  bay  ?_a. 
Yes. 

Q.  Give  the  names  of  some  of  them. — A.  I  was  in  the  Diadem  and 
the  AnsterlitK. 

Q.  In  what  year  were  yon  in  the  Diadem  f — A.  That  was  a  good  spell 
ago.    She  was  the  first  American  vessel  in  which  I  ever  fished. 

Q.  How  many  years  ago  was  thisf — A.  I  should  say  it  was  20  odd 
years  ago. 

Q.  Where  did  she  hail  from  ? — A.  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her  ? — A.  Two.  Her  captain's 
name  was  Welsh. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  amount  of  her  catches  ? — A.  We  got  full 
fares. 

Q.  What  were  they  ?— A.  400  barrels,  and  360  or  370  barrels. 

Q.  That  would  make  760  barrels  for  the  season ;  where  did  you  catch 
them  f — A.  We  secured  the  most  of  the  first  trip  on  what  we  call  the 
west  shore. 

Q.  Oti  the  New  Brunswick  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  From  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  to  Miramicbi  f — A.  Yes.  From  Point 
Miscou  to  Escumeuac. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore? — A.  Bight  along  the  shore ;  we  caught 
the  best  part  of  them  off  Shippegan  and  Tracadie,  along  the  mndm. 

Q.  Within  one  or  two  miles  ^  the  shore  ? — A.  One  and  two  miles, 
and  half  a  mile;  probably  three  miles  was  the  farthest  we  were  from 
the  shore. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  your  second  trip  ? — A.  At  Malpeque. 

Q.  Off  Prince  Edward  Island? — A.  Yes.  We  took  the  most  of  tliem 
there,  over  200  barrels,  and  the  remainder  we  took  down  at  Gbeticamp, 
Gape  Breton. 

Q.  How  far  off  shore  ? — A.  We  hove  to  at  Malpeque  as  soon  as  we 
came  out  of  the  harbor. 

Q.  That  was  about  half  a  mile  from  the  shore  ? — A.  I  think  so,  and 
hardly  that.    It  is  a  bar  harbor. 

Q.  In  what  other  American  vessel  were  you? — A.  The  Austerlitz, 
from  Gloucester,  was  the  next  in  which  I  was  in  the  bay.  I  was  iu 
other  vessels  on  George's  Bank. 

Q.  You  have  fished  for  cod  on  George's  Bank  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  bow  many  seasons  were  you  in  the  Austerlitz? — A.  Four. 

Q.  Four  consecutive  seasons  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  she  hail  from? — A.  Gloucester.  She  was  owned  during 
the  first  two  years  by  Steel  and  Glover;  then  Glover  left  the  6rm  and 
Steel  alone  owned  her. 

Q.  Was  she  a  large  or  a  small  vessel  ? — A.  In  those  days  she  was  a 
60-ton  vessel.    The  tonnage  is  now  measured  in  a  different  manner. 

Q.  Did  you  go  in  the  same  vessel  to  George's  Bank  ?— A.  Yes,  in  the 
winter.    I  also  went  to  LaHave  Bank. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  that  you  made  trips  to  George's  Bank  and  two 
trips  to  the  bay? — A.  Yes;  we  generally  make  trips  to  George's  Bank 
every  fortnight  or  three  weeks,  at  the  outside,  out  of  Gloucester.  We 
make  a  trip  about  every  three  weeks. 

Q.  How  many  mackerel  trips  did  you  make  in  the  bay  besides  ?— A. 
We  used  to  make  usually  only  one  trip. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERT  COMMISSION. 


671 


Q.  What  did  yoa  catch  during  these  four  years  f— A.  Oa  the  average 
about  300  barrels. 

Q.  Kach  trip  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When ;  in  the  spring  or  in  the  fnll  T — A.  We  used  to  flsh  for  hali- 
bnt  and  cod  until  the  maclterel  were  fat.  We  never  flsbed  for  i)oor 
mackerel.  We  used  generally  to  come  into  the  bay  about  the  first  of 
August  and  go  out  about  the  first  of  October. 

Q.  This  is  what  they  call  the  autumn  trip! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  other  vessel  were  yon  in  f — A.  The  next  American  vessel  in 
which  I  was  in  the  bay  was  a  little  schooner  called  the  Fairy  Queen,  Cap- 
tain  M(!Leod. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  ? — A.  We  had  a  good  trip. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  take  f — A.  200  barrels.  She  was  a  small  boat, 
H  market  boat,  but  a  good-sized  vessel  of  her  kind.  She  would  be  a 
big  schooner  here  in  Nova  Scotia,  but  there  she  was  only  a  boat. 

Q.  I  suppose  she  was  about  45  tons? — A.  I  think  she  was  50  tons  and 
over.  She  was  very  deep.  1  believe  she  was  CO  tons.  They  do  not 
carry  like  our  vessels. 

Q.  In  what  other  American  vessels  were  you  ? — A.  When  I  left  the 
Fairy  Qneen  I  came  home  to  Nova  Scotia  and  went  into  a  Nova  Scotia 
vessel.    I  then  had  vessels  of  my  own. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  were  you  in  vessels  of  your  own? — A.  For 
five  or  six  years. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  in  the  bay  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  made  one  trip  every  year, 
and  some  years  we  made  two  trips. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  ? — A.  We  always  made  good  trips. 

Q.  These  were  your  own  vessels? — A.  I  owned  shares  in  some  of 
tbeiu,  and  in  others  I  did  not. 

Q.  You  devoted  yourself  exclusively  to  mackerel-fishing,  or  trad- 
ing?— A,  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  do  any  coasting  trade  ? — A.  No.  We  do  not  do  a  coast- 
ing trade  until  after  the  fi.Hbing  season  is  all  over.  After  the  season  is 
over  we  generally  make  a  trip  to  the  island  or  somewhere  else  iu  our 
vessels. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  when  fishing? — A.  We  always  obtained  good 
fares. 

Q.  What  did  you  take  each  trip  ? — A.  One  year  I  was  in  a  little 
schooner  called  the  Emeline.  We  went  to  the  bay  in  July,  and  I  landed 
at  Keating's,  in  the  Gut  of  Canso,  300  barrels.  1  went  back  and  caught 
250  barrels  more. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  the  schooner  ? — A.  She  was  small,  of  about 
50  tons. 

Q.  For  a  vessel  of  that  size  this  was  a  fair  trip? — A.  It  was  a  good 
trip. 

Q.  In  what  other  vessel  were  you  ? — A.  I  was  in  the  Bell,  and  in  one 
called  the  Fashion. 

Q.  Did  you  have  equally  good  trips  in  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  took  full  fares?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  after  being  for  some  years  in  English  bottom.s  yon  again  went 
into  American  bottoms?— A.  Yes.  The  Charles  H.  Hilareth  was  tho 
first  American  vessel  into  which  I  then  shipped. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  in  her? — A.  We  made  two  trips. 

Q.  What  did  yon  take  each  trip  ? — A.  300  barrels. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  a  fair  average  ? — A.  That  was  all  she  would 
carry.  We  loaded  her  up  on  the  first  trip  and  returned  to  Gloucester, 
jast  within  a  month  to  the  day  from  the  time  we  left.    I  left  home  on 


672 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION 


the  20th  of  Jaly,  and  on  the  2-lth  of  Angast  I  was  in  Gloucester  with 
300  barrelH  of  tish.  The  crew  waa  sinall.  1  think  there  were  teu  wen 
on  board,  or  eleven,  all  told.  We  filled  her  full  and  had  some  on  deck. 
Q.  Were  you  in  any  other  American  vessels  f — A.  Not  on  t\x\»  coant, 
Q.  You  go  to  George's  Bank  every  winter  f — A.  Not  now.  I  tbiuk 
too  much  of  my  crow-bait  to  go  there. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  What  is  that  t — A.  My  body.  I  would  rather  be  food  for  crows 
than  go  there  and  let  the  fish  eat  me. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  You  mean  that  you  do  not  want  to  risk  your  life  by  going  there  ?— 
A.  I  would  Hooner  have  the  crows  eat  me  than  the  fish. 

Q.  In  what  vessels  were  you  in  18G9  and  '70  ? — A.  I  was  in  a  schooner 
called  the  Abby  Alice. 

Q.  Was  she  an  American  or  a  British  schooner  f — A.  She  was  a 
British  vessel.  She  flew  the  British  flag,  but  she  was  owned  partly  jq 
Boston  by  Clark  &  Woodworth.    I  was  in  her  for  two  years. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  of  your  catches  in  that  vessel,  in  18G9  and 
1870  ?_A.  In  1869,  we  landed  I  think,  about  900  barrels,  between  8U0 
and  900  anyhow.  We  sent  home  the  trip  from  Cbarlottetowu  to  Bostoa 
by  steamer. 

Q.  You  transshipped  them? — A.  Yes;  we  did  not  get  a  full  faro  the 
last  time.  I  think  that  we  then  took  about  500  and  380,  or  soinuwbere 
about  that  number. 

Q.  You  caught  between  830  and  900  barrels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Or,  between  830  and  900! — A.  It  was  along  about  there.  I  can- 
not say  exactly  how  many  we  took. 

Q.  You  had  a  pretty  fair  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  them  i — A.  We  caught  the  first  trip  in  the 
Bay  of  Chaleurs,  inside  of  Point  Miscou  ;  North  Bay  and  the  Bay  of 
Ghalenr$4  are  two  different  places;  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  lies  iusideof 
Poitit  Miscou,  and  is  a  bay  of  itself. 

Q.  You  caught  them  all  there? — A.  Yes;  in  the  bay. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  them  near  the  mouth  of  or  far  up  in  the  bay  ?— A. 
We  got  them  up  the  bay. 

Q.  How  far  up  ? — A.  We  took  the  heft  of  them  as  far  up  as  Batburst. 

Q.  How  far  from  Bathurst  ? — A.  Bight  against  the  shore. 

Q.  Half  a  mile  from  it  ? — A.  About  that,  I  should  think.  We  laid  to 
anchor  springing  up  most  of  the  time,  and  after  the  flsh  loft,  we  went  to 
Port  Daniel,  on  the  north  side  of  the  bay,  nearly  >p])u  L'oiut  Miscou. 
We  anchored  there  and  finished  up  our  tri 

Q.  With  reference  to  all  these  year.*- 
your  experience ;  how  far  from  land  <. 
well,  two  or  three  miles  I  suppose.    Yo 
outside  of  three  miles  from  the  shore.    0< 
outside  sometimes ;  but  as  a  general  thing 
a  mile  or  two  miles  from  the  land. 

Q.  The  heft  of  them  are  caught  within  a  mile  or  two  miles  from  tl 
shore  ? — A.  Yes ;  this  year  the  mackerel  when  I  left  St.  Peters  were  so 
thick  and  so  apparent,  that  you  might  walk  on  them. 

Q.  This  was  off  Prince  Edward  Island  !— A.  Yes ;  if  yon  had  a  smart 
Indian  with  snow-shoes,  he  would  nearly  travel  on  them. 

Q.  If  this  is  the  case,  the  seiners  will  make  a  good  haul  ? — A.  Tl 
did  not  happen  to  get  right  inshore.    I  met  some  while  coming  do\MJ) 
and  I  told  them  that  the  fish  were  there. 


.1,  what  is  the  result  of 

L  catch  mac'    reU— A.  0, 

)ii't  get  them  oi  any  account 

course,  yon  may  catch  a  few 

they  1  re  taken  along  al)out 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


673 


;bero.    I  can- 


Q.  Bat  you  do  not  know  what  destraction  followed? — A.  The  Fred- 
eric Oaron  oanght  200  barrels  that  day.  I  saw  the  captain  afterward, 
and  be  told  me  so. 

Q.  Suppose  that  yon  were  not  allowed  to  fish  within  three  miles  of 
the  shore,  what  woald  be  the  good  of  the  bay  fishery  to  you  f — A.  If  [ 
was  not  allowed  to  fish  within  three  miles  of  the  shore,  I  would  leave 
the  bay;  I  would  not  go  there. 

Q,  You  give  that  evidence  as  the  result  of  thirty  years'  experience  in 
this  fishery !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  yon  were  in  American  vessels,  at  times  you  transshipped? — 
A.  No. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  were  in  the  Abby  Alice  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  not  then  find  transshipment  to  be  a  great  advantage? — 
A.  Yei.    1  do  not  call  her,  however,  an  American  vessel. 

By  Mr.  Kellogg: 

Q.  What  did  you  mean  in  your  remarks  about  being  crow-eaten  ? 
I  did  not  understand  you. — A.  The  George's  Bank  is  considered  to  be  a 
very  dangerous  place  to  frequent  in  the  winter.  Almost  everybody  that 
has  been  there,  shudders  when  he  thiuks  of  going  again,  although  num- 
bers do  return  again  and  again  to  the  place. 

Q.  You  are  in  great  danger  of  being  drowned  there  ? — A.  Yes.  Thou- 
sands of  Gape  Ann  fishermen  have  been  drowned  on  George's  Banks.  It 
is  a  regular  burying-grouud — a  regular  cemetery  for  Gape  Ann  fisher- 
men. 

Q.  I  thought  you  were  speaking  of  crows  ?— A.  I  would  sooner  have 
the  crows  carry  me  away  than  have  the  fish  eat  me  up. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Where  does  your  vessel  hail  from  ? — A.  From  Port  Med  way. 

No.  25. 

Monday,  August  20, 1877. 
The  Conference  met. 

James  W.  HiaELOW,  merchant,  of  Wolfville,  N.  S.,  was  called  on 
behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  exam- 
ined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  You  were  born  and  yon  lived  for  a  long  period  at  the  Strait 
of  Oanso? — Answer.  I  was  born  at  Gape  Ganso,  and  I  lived  there  until 
1869. 

Q.  And  did  you  do  business  there  ? — A.  Yes.  My  business  was  to 
prosecute  the  fisheries  and  furnish  the  fishermen  with  supplies. 

Q.  Where  did  you  do  business  afterward  ? — A.  I  moved  from  there 
to  Wolfville. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  so?— A.  In  1869. 

Q.  And  have  you  lived  there  ever  since  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  own  vessels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  While  you  were  at  Gape  Ganso  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  did  you  own? — A.  Five  or  six  during  that 
time. 

Q.  And  did  yon  supply  any  number  of  American  fishing-vessels  ? — 
A.  Yes ;  I  did  so  very  largely  during  the  war. 

Q.  I  believe  that  yon  were  not  a  practical  fisherman  ? — ^A.  No. 

Q.  Daring  the  whole  time  yon  were  in  business  there,  were  yon  so 
engagedctmtinaoasly?— A.  Yes. 
43  F 


674 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  were  you  then  in  coDtinual  commanicatioo  with  Ainericaa 
fiMiiermeu  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  was  while  you  resided  at  Cape  Ganso  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  have  yuu  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  cod  and  mackerel 
fisheries'? — A.  I  have,  from  the  fact  that  I  was  not  only  trau^sacting 
business  with  these  fishermen,  but  my  father  being  collector  of  light 
dues  during  all  that  period  up  to  confederation,  I  was  in  the  boat  luost 
of  the  time,  in  his  place,  collecting  these  light  dues. 

(j.  ^luce  that  time  have  you  studied  the  matter  and  kept  yourself 
inlormed  regarding  the  fisheries'? — A.  No;  not  to  any  extent.  I  have 
had  no  particular  interest  in  the  catching  of  the  fish  since  1SG9. 

Q.  With  the  exception  of  the  catching  of  the  fish,  have  you  kept  your- 
self informed  with  reference  to  the  fish  trade  ? — A.  Yes ;  that  is  part  of 
my  business  and  has  been. 

Q.  Since  you  left  Cape  Canso  ? — A.  Yes;  up  to  the  present  time. 

Q.  Part  of  your  business  is  devoted  to  speculation  iu  fish  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Buying  and  selling? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Judging  from  ^our  general  knowledge  of  the  fisheries,  suppose 
that  the  American  fishermen  were  to  be  excluded  actually  and  practi- 
caliy  from  fishing  within  three  miles  of  our  shores,  would  you  consider 
that  they  would  be  able  to  carry  on  the  fisheries  along  our  coasts  witli 
profit? — A.  I  believe  that  if  they  were  really  so  excluded  they  could 
not ;  but  they  have  never  been  so  excluded. 

Q.  But  if  this  were  accomplished,  what  would  be  the  case  ? — A.  Then 
I  believe  that  they  would  not  prosecute  the  fisheries  at  all;  but  that  has 
never  been  done. 

Q.  Would  it  then  be  a  profitable  business  ?— A.  I  should  think  not. 

Q.  Do  you  thus  sptak  from  your  own  knowledge  of  the  fisheries,  and 
also  from  the  result  of  your  communication  with  American  captains?— A. 
Yes;  from  their  own  version  of  the  matter,  I  might  say — I  am  speakiug 
])articularly  with  regard  to  the  mackerel  fishery — it  was  only  the  pros 
pect  of  catching  the  fish  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  that  has  imUiced 
them  to  come  and  fish  on  our  shores.  They  have  never  been  excluded 
from  this  limit  at  any  time. 

Q.  What  was  the  practice  of  American  fishermen  during  the  periods 
when  the  cutters  were  on  our  coast? — A.  It  was  to  catch  as  many  tisli 
within  the  three  mile  limit  as  they  could,  with  safety.  The  whole  British 
fleet  would  not  keep  the  American  vessels  out  of  this  limit,  if  they  wished 
to  fish  inside  of  it. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  It  would  be  iujpossible  to  guard  the  extent  of  the  coast 
which  we  have,  with  any  number  of  vessels. 

Q.  When  the  marine  police  were  gone,  they  would  come  iu  and  ruu 
the  risk  f — A.  Yes;  certainly. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  they  would  run  such  a  risk  ? — A,  They  would 
just  make  up  their  minds  as  to  whether  it  was  possible  or  not,  and  theu 
they  would  either  abandon  the  fishtiry  or  ruu  the  risk. 

Q.  As  a  person  having  a  knowledge  of  the  business,  would  you  your- 
self put  money  in  it,  if  you  were  excluded  from  fishing  within  three 
miles  of  our  shore  ? — A.  As  to  mackerel  fishing,  certainly  not. 

Q.  What  would  be  about  the  number  of  the  American  cod-flaliiiig 
fleet! — A.  It  is  impossible  to  distinguish  between  the  two  fisheries  iu 
this  respect,  because  these  vessels  most  invariably  make  one  trip  for 
mackerel  and  one  trip  for  cod ;  a  vessel  will  fish  early  in  the  spriui;  for 
cod,  and  in  August  and  September  for  mackerel — so  the  same  fleet,  to 
some  extent,  is  employed  iu  both  branches  of  the  business. 

Q.  So  the  one  fishery  to  a  certain  extent  depends  on  the  other  f— A. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


675 


nt  of  the  coast 
aie  iu  and  ruu 


le  other !— A. 


Most  certainly ;  when  they  prosecute  the  business  for  the  whole  season, 
they  tarn  tbeir  attention  to  the  different  kinds  of  fishing,  as  the  time 
for  thetn  coiues  round. 

Q.  It'  you  were  engaged  with  your  capital  in  the  mackerel  or  cod-fish- 
ing business,  would  you  consider,  if  you  were  to  be  excluded  from  fish- 
ing for  mackerel  within  three  miles  of  our  coast,  that  this  would  affect 
the  cod-tisbing  business  ? — A.  We  would  then  have  to  abandon  mack- 
erel-fishing and  devote  our  time  entirely  to  the  taking  of  cod,  whether 
the  cod  season  was  a  good  or  bad  one ;  mackerel-fishiug  is  supposed  to 
be  the  most  important  and  profitable  trip  for  a  certain  part  of  the  year. 

Q.  How  many  hours'  sail  is  it  from  Gape  Canso  to  tbe  cod-fishing 
grounds  on  this  coast  ? — A.  For  the  spring  fishery,  to  the  Western  and 
LeHave  Banks  it  is  some  60  or  80  miles,  or  from  8  to  10  hours'  sail ;  and 
for  tbe  summer  and  autumn  fisheries,  they  go  to  the  Grand  Bank  and 
Banqnereau  Bank,  a  distance  respectively  of  about  100  and  GO  miles. 
Tbey  fish  for  cod  in  the  months  of  March  and  April  in  tbe  spring. 

Q.  At  what  times  do  the  Americans  fish  for  cod  in  these  places  1 — A. 
The  spring  fishery  on  Western  and  LeHave  Banks  last  until  along  in 
May ;  the  fishermen  then  follow  the  cod  up  tbe  Bank  Banqnereau  iu 
May  and  June;  on  Grand  Bank  they  fish  during  June,  July,  and 
August,  and  all  the  season. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  of  vessels  engaged  in  that  fishery  !  At  what 
time  do  they  commence  operations,  and  what  do  they  do  I — A.  Wo  first 
iiinow  of  them  fitting  out  iu  the  American  ports  in  March  for  one  trip 
on  the  George's  Bank ;  iu  April  and  May  the  fishermen  move  to  the 
Western  Bank  and  LeQave  Bank ;  in  June  and  July  they  follow  the 
fish  eastward  to  Bank  Banqnereau  and  the  Grand  Bank.  The  cod-fish- 
iug  fleet  fish  during  the  months  of  July  and  August  in  North  Bay. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  cod  fishing  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  of  cod  fishing 
only. 

Q.  When  they  have  loaded  their  vessels,  what  do  they  do  with  the 
fish  f— A.  The  cod  fishernzen  then  return  home. 

Q.  About  what  time  does  it  take  them  to  cure  the  fish  ? — A.  In  olden 
times,  during  the  bounty  period,  they  were  not  allowed  to  return  home 
until  four  months  bad  elapsed  ;  but  since  that  bounty  has  been  removed 
they  usually  make  a  trip  in  about  two  months  or  six  weeks.  They  do  so 
as  quickly  as  they  can  to  get  home  with  the  fish. 

Q.  And  then  they  return  to  the  grounds? — A.  Yes;  perhaps  two 
mouths  would  bo  a  fair  average  for  the  trip. 

Q.  flow  many  trips  do  they  make  during  the  season  1 — A.  They  oc- 
cu|)y  the  whole  season,  from  March  to  i^ovember. 

Q.  How  many  trips  do  they  make? — A.  Probably  three  or  four. 

Q.  Do  they  ever  make  five? — A.  I  think  thut  is  very  rarely  the  case. 

Q.  Do  they  do  so  sometimes? — A.  Yes;  and  sometimes  far  more,  with 
fresh  fish. 

Q.  In  what  manner  has  the  fishery  changed  during  the  past  ten 
years?— A.  In  the  salt  fish  business  they  make  three  trips  a  season. 

Q.  And  sometimes  four? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  with  fresh  fish,  how  is  it? — A.  These  fish  are  saved  in  ice, 
and  the  object  to  be  gained  has  not  reference  so  much  to  quantity  as  to 
quality  and  the  getting  of  them  to  the  American  market  iu  a  good  state 
iu  the  ice;  consequently  they  make  as  many  trips  as  they  can,  without 
regard  to  quantity. 

Q.  How  many  do  they  make  ? — A.  If  we  exclude  the  fishery  on  the 
American  coast  from  consideration,  from  six  to  eight  or  ten,  and  perhaps 
twenty  trips  a  year. 


676 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Is  the  cod  fishing  business  on  oar  coasts  a  pretty  certain  bngj. 
ness  ? — A.  The  bank  cod  fishery  is  considered  to  be  the  most  certain  we 
have. 

Q.  Is  it  a  certain  business  T — A.  I  think  so.  I  think  I  might  be  borne 
ont  in  saying  that  it  is  a  certain  business. 

Q.  Is  it  a  profitable  business  f — A.  It  is. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  mode  in  which  the  American  fishermen  pro 
cure  their  bait  and  ice  for  the  carrying  on  of  the  cod  fishing  busir' j^; 
— A.  On  fitting  out  at  home,  they  lay  in  a  stock  of  bait  and  ice,  which 
will  last  for  a  week  or  ten  days,  as  long  as  the  bait  will  remain  in  ice, 
and  after  this  is  exhausted  they  frequent  the  ports  of  Nova  Scotia  aod 
Gape  Breton  for  bait  and  ice. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  they  always  bring  their  bait  from  home  ?— 
A.  Frequently  it  is  not  to  be  bad  at  home. 

Q.  And  then  they  frequently  come  to  our  ports  without  it? — A.  Yes; 
they  then  depend  on  securing  bait  on  this  coast  betore  they  gu  out  to 
fish. 

Q.  What  kinr  of  bait  do  they  procure  for  cod  fishing  at  home?— A. 
During  the  monthof  March  they  procure  herring  saved  in  ice  and  brought 
from  Newfoundland  to  the  United  States.    It  is  called  frozen  herring. 

Q.  Do  they  bring  ar>y  other  kind  of  bait  ? — A.  They  also  bring  salt 
clams  and  pogies. 

Q.  Is  this  a  proper  kind  of  bait  for  cod  fishing  ? — A.  It  is  noi:  so  un- 
der the  present  system,  because  they  now  use  trawls,  and  for  these  they 
must  have  fresh  bait. 

Q.  It  is  now  necessary  to  have  fresh  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Under  the  present  system  salt  bait  will  not  suit  their  purpose  ?— A. 
Salt  bait  is  used  now,  but  to  a  very  small  extent. 

Q.  Could  it  now  be  used  effectually  or  profitably  ? — A.  No ;  if  one 
vessel  used  salt  clams  on  the  trawls,  and  another  fresh  bait,  the  latter 
would  make  the  best  voyage. 

Q.  Under  the  present  system,  in  order  to  carry  on  the  fishery  profit- 
ably, bait  must  be  procured  on  our  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  it  be  carried  on  at  all,  save  by  securiug  bait  and  ice  ou  these 
coasts  ? — A.  That  question  covers  a  great  deal  of  ground. 

Q.  Speaking  as  a  merchant,  say  whether  it  could  then  be  carried  on  un- 
less this  were  so  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  that  it  could  so  be  carried  on ;  but 
vessels  can  and  do  take  nets  with  them,  and  at  some  seasons  of  tbe  year 
they  catch  bait  on  the  banks. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  Americans  catch  bait  on  our  shores  ?— 
A.  They  frequently  do  so. 

Q.  If  they  were  excluded  from  catching  or  buying  bait  on  our  coasts 
or  in  out  ports,  you  consider  that  the  Americans  could  net  carry  ou  the 
fishery  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  that  it  could  be  profitably  carried  ou  under 
those  circumstances. 

Q.  How  do  you  consider  that  the  business  of  cod-fishing  has 
changed? — A.  The  same  remark  applies  not  only  to  cod  fishing  but  to 
all  branches  of  the  fishery.  Within  the  past  ten  years,  the  consumers 
have  been  using  fresh  instead  of  salt  fish.  The  salt-fish  business  ou 
this  continent  is  virtually  at  an  end. 

Q.  Do  yon  state  that  from  practical  knowledge  of  this  business  ?— A. 
I  am  sorry  to  say  that  I  do. 

Q.  And  you  find  that  the  salt-fish  business  on  this  continent  is  at 
end? — A.  Salt-fish  business  of  all  kinds  is  at  an  end.  That  remark 
applies  to  mackerel  as  well  as  cod-fishing,  and  indeed  all  kinds  of  fish- 
ing. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


677 


rom  borne  ?— 


1  ice  ou  these 


ur  shores  ?— 


Q.  How  are  fish  supplied  to  the  great  market  of  the  United  States? — 
A.  From  Gloucester,  Portland,  and  New  York ;  but  from  Boston  prin- 
cipally. 

Q.  And  the  fish  is  sent  where! — A.  To  every  town  in  the  West. 

Q,  All  over  the  Onion  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  way  ! — A.  In  ice ;  the  fish  is  principally  boxed  in  ice. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  it  to  be  more  profitable  to  carry  it  from  there  to 
the  places  where  it  is  sold  in  the  States,  or  to  transmit  it  thence  directly 
from  our  own  ports! — A.  We  have  only  had  the  advantage  of  having 
direct  transmission  to  these  markets  by  rail  within  the  past  year.  This 
is  an  entirely  new  business. 

Q.  Connection  was  never  made  in  this  relation  until  this  year? — A. 
Ko;  it  is  an  entirely  new  branch  of  the  business,  and  it  must  be  a  suc- 
cess, from  the  fact  that  Halifax  is  bound  to  be  the  principal  fish-shipping 
port.  Boston,  Gloucester,  or  any  American  port  where  vessels  are 
owned  will  see  the  advantage  of  shipping  fish  from  Halifax,  which  is 
situated  within  six  hours'  sail  of  the  fishing-grounds,  and  in  direct  sail 
communication  with  every  market  in  the  West.  A  vessel  can  probably 
catch  double  the  quantity  in  a  year,  by  shipping  the  fish  from  here, 
compared         the  quantity  which  she  can  now  possibly  catch. 

Q.  Owing  to  the  connections  which  are  now  being  made,  you  consider 
that  it  would  be  more  profitable  for  the  American  vessels  to  carry  on 
their  business,  which  you  consider  to  be  the  bulk  of  the  business,  by 
shipping  directly  from  Halifax  by  railway? — A.  Yes;  from  the  fact  that 
we  are  here  within  six  hours  of  the  fishing-grounds. 

Q.  Have  you  made  particular  inquiries  on  this  subject  ? — A.  Yes;  and 
contemplate  going  into  a  business  of  that  kind. 

Q.  And  you  contemplate  putting  your  capital  in  it? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  you  conceive  to  be  the  prospects  for  that  business  during 
the  next  eight  years,  to  the  best  of  your  judgment? — A.  1  cannot  see 
how  it  can  possibly  fail.  We  have  to  supply  the  fish,  and  we  now  have 
access  by  rail  to  every  market  in  America,  and  an  easy  access  besides. 

Q.  I  forget  whether  you  stated  the  number  of  the  American  cod-fish- 
ing fleet? — A.  I  answered  that  by  saying  that  these  vessels  were  en- 
gaged alternately  in  catching  cod  and  mackerel.  The  fleet  numbers 
probably  600  sail. 

Q.  Why  will  not  these  cod-fishing  vessels  carry  their  fish  to  the 
American  ports,  and  there  transship  the  fresh  fish  in  ice? — A.  They 
have  to  do  so  now,  from  the  fact  that  the  business  to  which  I  have 
alluded  is  not  as  yet  organized. 

Q.  Why  will  they  not  continue  to  do  so? — A.  Because  it  would  be  far 
more  to  their  advantage  to  discharge  here. 

Q.  Explain. — A.  For  instance,  a  vessel  may  secure  a  trip  to  the 
Western  Banks;  she  comes  here,  four  hours'  sail,  and  discharges  her 
cargo,  and  is  back  there  again  in  24  hours.  She  can  come  in  here  in  4 
or  5  hours  with  fresh  fish,  or  at  any  rate  in  6, 8,  or  10  iiours. 

Q.  Would  it  then  be  necessary  to  have  an  establishment  here? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  ice? — A.  Yes;  and  the  means  of  shipping  the  fish  in  refrig- 
erated cars,  as  is  possible,  from  the  American  market. 

Q.  And  the  vessels  can  run  in  close  alongside  of  the  railway! — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Or  of  other  places  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  different  points? — A.  From  any  point  in  the  harbor. 

Q.  And  to  different  points  it  the  provinces  ? — A.  The  railway  facili* 
ties  are, of  course,  now  accessible  here  and  at  Pictou  in  seaports. 


678 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEST   COMMISSION. 


Q.  But  what  will  be  the  case  in  the  near  futuref  When  will  the  East- 
ern Extension  Eailway  be  finished  as  far  as  the  Strait  of  Causo!— a. 
That  is  to  be  done  in  a  very  few  months. 

Q.  This  will  then  be  an  important  place  for  such  transshipping  pnr. 
poses  ? — A.  It  will  be  the  most  valuable,  because  it  is  the  nearest  to  the 
fishing  grounds. 

Q.  Then  the  mode  to  be  followed  would  be  to  run  in  from  the  fishing 
grounds,  in  about  four  hours,  and  transship  the  fresh  fish  to  all  poJDts 
west? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you,  as  a  practical  man,  believe  that  this  is  the  prospect  for 
the  fish  business  in  the  future! — A.  I  may  be  too  sanguine,  tor  of  course 
I  speak  of  a  probability  only,  but  I  believe  that  within  the  next  ten 
years  the  whole  fishing  business  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  will  con- 
sist in  the  transshipment  of  fresh  fish  from  Dominion  ports  to  the 
western  markets  by  rail. 

Q.  And  you  do  not  believe  that  the  American  fishing  vessels  will 
carry  their  fish  to  American  ports  at  all ! — A.  The  American  vessels 
will  find  it  to  their  interest  to  ship  from  British  ports. 

Q.  The  calculations  which  you  have  made  with  the  view  of  going  into 
this  business  have  convinced  you  that  it  will  be  very  much  more  profit- 
able than  the  present  mode  of  carrying  on  the  business  ?--A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  these  railway  connections  have  only  been  made  this  year!— 
A.  Yes ;  and  they  are  not  complete  yet. 

Q.  The  railway  leading  to  the  Strait  of  Causo  is  only  under  contract 
and  is  in  progress  now  f — A.  Yes.  I  might  say  in  this  relation  that 
even  now  the  railway  from  Shediac  is  very  largely  utilized  by  American 
fishermen  transshipping  their  fish  to  the  United  States  markets  in  the 
salt  state.  A  large  quantity  of  American  fish  go  over  that  road  every 
year. 

Q.  If  the  American  vessels  are  allowed  to  come  inshore  and  fish  as 
they  do  now,  do  you  consider  that  this  interferes  with  your  profits  as  a 
British  fisherman  with  capital  invested  in  the  business? — A.  O,  I  think 
that  the  fishery  will  never  be  prosecuted  efficiently  by  British  interests 
while  the  Americans  have  the  right  so  to  fish. 

Q.  I  believe  that  you  were  the  consular  agent  for  the  United  States 
at  Canso  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  was. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  During  what  years  ? — A.  I  think  up  to  the  time  I  left  Cape  Canso, 
from  some  10  years  previously  probably.  I  cannot  just  now  remember 
the  exact  period. 

Q.  You  left  Cape  Canso  in  1869  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  business  to  which  you  have  refeired,  when  once  established, 
will  conduce  i  omewhat  to  the  prosperity  of  Halifax,  would  it  not  ?— A. 
Most  decidetl^y  it  would  ;  that  is  the  object  of  it. 

Q.  Is  it  not  likely  to  make  Halifax  the  shipping  port  for  the  fish  busi- 
ness instead  of  Gloucester  or  Boston? — A.  LFnder  the  present  arrange- 
ments we  never  can  draw  American  enterprise  and  capital  into  these 
provinces;  matters  are  in  a  too  uncertain  situation  to  have  such  a  result. 

Q.  But  you  think  that  it  would  be  better  for  Americans  to  come  with 
their  vessels  here  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  should  not  American  capital  establish  itself  here  if  yon  must 
have  more  capital  than  you  yourselves  possess? — A.  Just  from  the  fact 
of  this  very  meeting;  the  whole  business  is  left  in  an  uncertain  condi- 
tion. Some  years  the  Americans  are  allowed  to  fish  in  our  waters,  and 
some  years  they  are  not  so  allowed ;  and  again  some  years  there  is  a 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


679 


uited  States 


reciprocity  treaty  and  some  years  there  is  not.  Things  are  in  such  s\ 
shiftless  state,  that  no  prudent  man  in  the  States  would  so  invest  his 
money  here. 

Q.  But  if  permanent  arrangements  were  effected  in  this  regard? — A. 
That  would  alter  the  question. 

Q,  Why  would  not  Halifax  be  for  eight  years  to  come  the  center  of 
the  fishing  business? — A.  I  think,  that  if  I  were  in  the  fishing  business 
in  Gloucester  I  certainly  would  remove  to  Halifax  in  my  own  interest. 

Q.  And,  inasmuch  as  vessels  can  be  built  here  a  good  deal  cheaper 
than  in  the  United  States,  when  once  American  capital  was  here,  would 
it  not  be  employed  in  building  British  vessels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  one-half  of  the  fishermen  employed  on  American  vessels  are 
from  these  provinces? — A.  Yes;  I  should  think,  that  with  fully  one-half, 
this  is  the  case. 

Q.  Then  the  result  of  such  an  arrangement  as  the  present  one  being 
maiie  permanent,  would  be,  that  these  Provinces  would  attract  Ameri- 
can capital  here,  and  that  Halifax  would  be  built  up,  that  the  fishing 
business  would  be  done  in  British  bottoms,  and  that  the  great  markets 
of  the  West  would  be  supplied  from  here  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  any  business  in  this  part  of  the  world  now,  anything  like 
as  great  as  that  will  be  ? — A.  We  have  a  permanent  fishing  business 
here,  but  it  is  an  entirely  different  business  from  that;  it  is  the  old 
business  in  salt  fish. 

Q.  Is  it  anything  like  as  great  and  valuable  as  it  will  be  once,  that 
the  business  to  which  you  refer,  is  fully  organized? — A.  Decidedly  not. 

Q.  Then  if  this  arrangement,  such  as  will  exist  for  eight  years  to 
come,  is  made  ]>erpetnal,  it  will  make  the  fortune  of  the  British  Ameri- 
can i)rovince8? — A.  It  may  make  the  fortune  of  the  people  engaged  in 
the  fishing  business. 

Q.  But  the  prosperity  of  one  class  of  men  with  large  capital,  generally 
is  to  some  extent  distributed  about  in  their  vicinity,  is  it  not? — A.  Cer- 
tainly. 

Q.  What  is  the  fresh  bait  that  the  Americans  have  to  get  in  these 
provinces  ? — A.  It  depetids  on  the  season.  The  first  bait  used  in  the 
spring  is  herring.  During  the  summer  squid  are  so  used  to  a  very  large 
extent;  herring  and  squid  are  principally  used  for  bait. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  reasf^n  why  they  cannot  bring  their  herring  and 
squid  from  the  States,  except  that  it  would  not  be  fresh  ? — A.  Well, 
there  is  not  a  sufficient  quantity  of  bait  to  be  obtained  on  the  American 
coast.    There  is  always  a  scarcity  of  it  in  that  quarter. 

Q.  Is  there  not  an  immense  quantity  of  squid  found  there? — A.  Yes, 
at  certain  seasons ;  but  the  supply  is  very  uncertain. 

Q.  They  come  on  the  American  coast  to  spawn  ? — A.  I  do  not  think 
so. 

Q.  Why  do  you  think  that  they  come  on  our  coast? — A.  They  came 
there  as  every  fish  does ;  their  habits  lead  them  there. 

Q.  Tliey  do  not  stay  here  permanently  ? — A,  They  stay  nowhere  per- 
manently, apparently. 

Q.  Do  they  not  come  on  the  American  coast  in  vast  quantities,  ex- 
•ictiy  as  they  do  on  this  coast? — A.  I  suppose  that  they  strike  the  coast 
in  the  same  way. 

Q.  Do  you  happen  to  know  anything  about  the  way  in  which  the 
French  carry  on  this  fishery? — A.  I  do  to  some  extent,  but  I  am  not 
very  familiar  with  it. 

Q.  It  is  carried  on  prosperously  by  them  ? — A.  Yes ;  but  they  have 
the  advantage  of  a  very  large  country.  The  French  fleet  at  Saiut  Pierre 


im 


680 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


is  a  school  for  the  French  navy.  The  men  and  vessels  are  both  very 
heavily  subsidized. 

Q.  Aside  from  that,  they  are  prosperous  and  snccessfal  ? — A.  Yes  ■ 
they  secure  a  good  catch  of  fish,  and  they  live  very  economically.  Tbey 
conduct  the  business  in  a  more  economical  manner  than  we  do,  and 
they  make  money  where  we  would  starve. 

Q.  Do  you  happen  to  know  that  they  do  not  use  fresh  bait  at  all  ?— A, 
That  is  not  a  fact.  They  draw  their  supplies  of  bait  from  Newfouud- 
land. 

Q.  Do  they  not  salt  the  bait  they  use  ? — A.  They  do  to  some  oxteut, 
but  they  are  using  fresh  bait  now.  During  the  spring  they  used  to 
prosecute  the  fishery  with  frozen  herring,  which  they  got  on  the  New- 
foundland coast. 

Q.  Frozen  herring  are  not  only  obtained  in  Newfoundland,  but  also 
from  various  other  coasts  ? — A.  Yes.  Grand  Mauau  Island  in  the  bay 
of  Fundy,  is  a  large  herring  depot. 

Q.  And  they  are  also  obtained  from  the  Magdalen  Islands  ?— A.  Xo 
frozen  herring  camci  from  there.  The  season  is  too  late  there  fur  the 
purpose.  Herring  are  not  caught  around  the  Magdalen  Islands  until 
the  last  of  April. 

Q.  Is  there  no  ice  and  snow  up  there  in  which  to  pack  herring !— A. 
It  has  never  been  tried,  I  think.  These  fish  are  caught  there  after  the 
ice  season  is  over ;  after  the  frost  is  over  and  the  weather  is  not  cold 
enough  to  freeze  them,  when  they  are  taken.  The  bulk  of  the  frozen 
herring  brought  into  the  market  is  winter  caught. 

Q.  And  have  they  no  facilities  at  the  Magaden  Islands  to  freeze  the 
herring  caught  there  ?  Is  this  not  done  with  snow  and  ice  ? — A.  Nu.  No 
herring  are  caught  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  until  the  frost  is  out  of  the 
earth. 

Q.  And  you  know  that  no  snow  and  ice  are  to  be  secured  there  ?— A. 
No.  The  herring  fishery  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  does  not  comiuence 
until  the  last  of  April  or  the  1st  of  May,  when  there  is  no  frost  in  the 
air. 

Q.  And  don't  they  have  snow  and  ice  there  f — A.  Certainly  during 
the  winter,  but  not  when  the  herring  are  taken.  I  have  sent  vessels 
there  for  ten  years,  and  such  a  thing  as  snow  and  ice  is  not  procurable 
at  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Then  to  say  that  they  freeze  herrings  there  would  bo  incorrect  ?— 
A.  Not  at  all.  They  can  have  ice-houses  there  as  well  as  anywhere  else, 
and  cure  the  fish. 

Q.  But  do  they  do  so  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  that  they  do  to  any  ex- 
tent ;  but  they  can  do  so.  What  we  know  as  the  frozen-herring  busi- 
ness is  not  prosecnted  at  the  Magdalen  Islands ;  but  American  vessels 
may  go  there  and  get  herring  for  their  trips  and  keep  them  in  ice. 

Q.  Where  is  Grand  Entry  Harbor  ? — A.  At  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  One  witness  has^stated ''  a  portion  of  the  Island  is  of  the  Bed  Sand- 
stone formation  ;  the  sea  has  made  large  holes  of  the  nature  of  cnves 
into  it,  and  snow  which  has  drifted  and  ice  which  has  formed  in  these 
places  in  winter,  are  found  there  until  the  whole  of  the  summer."  Is  that 
correct ! — A.  Yes ;  but  it  is  not  utilized  for  the  freezing  of  herring. 

Q.  Then  you  say  that  snow  and  ice  are  not  found  there  ? — A.  I  think 
that  you  misunderstand  me ;  do  you  think  that  they  would  have  a  nat- 
ural supply  of  snow  and  ice  on  the  Magdalen  Islands  up  to  September  i 
What  I  say  is,  that  the  herring  fishery  commences  at  the  Magdalen 
Islands  during  the  last  week  in  April,  and  that  what  we  know  as  the 


AWABD   OF  THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


681 


frozen-fish  basiness  cannot  be  followed  there,  where  the  herring  are  not 
caught  iu  the  winter  season. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say,  that  what  is  commonly  known  as  the 
frozen -b erring  business  is  a  winter  fishery  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  do  you  or  do  you  not  know,  that  at  the  time  herring  are  at 
the  Magdalen  Islands,  there  is  also  to  be  found  natural  supplies  of  snow 
and  ice  with  which  to  freeze  those  herring  which  are  caught  in  the 
spriog  and  summer  mouths,  and  preserve  them  1 — A.  To  preserve  them 
would  be  a  better  term ;  you  cannot  freeze  them  then. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  snow  and  ice  are  to  be 
found,  with  which  the  herring  there  caught  can  be  preserved  ? — A. 
Most  decidedly  I  do ;  the  same  thing  might  be  said  of  New  Orleans, 
where  snow  and  ice  can  be  had  for  preserving  fish. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  agree  with  the  statement  that  at  the  Magdalen 
Islands  is  to  be  found  a  supply  of  snow  and  ice  any  more  than  is  the 
case  with  regard  to  New  Orleans  or  anywhere  else  f — A.  It  would  cost 
more,  of  course,  to  take  it  to  New  Orleans ;  but  at  the  time  the  herring 
fishery  is  prosecuted  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  the  weather  is  not  such 
as  will  produce  frozen  fish  such  as  we  understand  them  to  be  in  com- 
merce. 

Q.  Are  facilities  to  be  had  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  for  preserving 
fish  there  taken  ? — A.  Decidedly  so ;  very  great  facilities  iu  this  rela- 
tion exist  during  the  summer  months. 

Q.  And  those  facilities  consist  of  snow  and  ice  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  the  fish  caught  in  the  winter  are  sent  to  the  United  States? 
Explain  how  this  is  done. — A.  The  fish  are  caught  and  spread  out,  be- 
ing divided  so  that  the  air  will  get  to  them.  During  the  cold  winter 
ni{;hts  they  are  frozen  solidly  through,  and  iu  that  state  they  are  taken 
ill  bulk  to  the  different  markets.  Strange  to  say,  they  will  keep  for  a 
great  length  of  time  without  packing,  and  the  less  ice  placed  among 
them  the  better. 

Q.  Explain  bow  they  take  herring  and  preserve  them  for  bait  during 
the  summer. — A.  They  are  then  taken  and  packed  in  ice. 

Q.  And  snow  1 — A.  Snow  will  not  do  for  the  purpose.  Snow  supplies 
too  much  liquid  to  be  suitable  for  such  preservation. 

Q.  Ice  must  be  used  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  bait  used  being  chiefly  herring  and  squid ;  would 
not  frozen  herring  do? — A.  Yes;  but  the  difficulty  is  to  keep  them  long 
enough. 

Q.  Until  what  season  of  the  year  will  they  do  ? — A.  They  will  not  do 
after  the  middle  of  April. 

Q.  Then  they  can  use  salt  fish  and  bait  packed  in  ice  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  their  using  menhaden  as  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  they  good  bait  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  All  through  the  season  ? — A.  No.    This  is  salt  bait. 

Q.  How  late  do  you  consider  them  to  be  good  ? — A.  They  are  not 
good  while  you  can  procure  fresh  bait.  No  fisherman  will  use  salt  bait 
when  he  can  use  fresh  bait,  at  any  price  j  that  is  ray  experience.  Men- 
haden are  used  during  the  scarcity  of  fresh  bait. 

Q.  Do  they  use  them  to  a  certain  extent  during  any  other  season  ? — 
A.  They  are  kept  as  a  stand-by  on  board  of  the  vessels. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  manner  in  which  the  cod-fishery 
was  pursued  in  former  times? — A.  During  the  bounty  period  American 
fishermen  would  fit  out  for  a  four-months'  trip,  taking  an  enormous 
quantity  of  clams,  pogies,  and  menhaden.    A  large  bounty  was  given 


682 


AWABD   OF   THiS   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


them  by  the  United  States  Government ;  they  went  on  the  Grand  Banks 
laid  there  for  fonr  months,  and  then  returned  home.  ' 

Q.  Did  they  then  use  any  fre«h  bait  at  all  f — A.  I  do  not  thiuk  that 
fresh  bait  was  then  known. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  was  the  cod-flshery  thus  carried  on  ?— A.  it 
was  so  prosecuted  long  before  my  recollection. 

Q.  And  during  the  last  200  years  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  it  is  very  possible  that  the  cod  would  not  escape  the  Ameri- 
can fishermen,  if  they  had  to  use  that  bait  again  ? — A.  Tiie  advuuce  of 
improvement  in  the  fishing  business  has  killed  that  kind  of  bait. 

Q.  And  is  not  seining  likely  to  supersede  all  other  modes  of  fishing?— 
A.  Seining  will  destroy  the  fishery  in  the  end. 

Q.  But,  as  a  means  of  fishing,  it  is  likely  to  supersede  all  other  ways 
of  fishing?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  any  difficulty  experienced  in  using  seines  on  the  Banks?— 
A.  Cod  can  never  be  caught  there  in  seines.  They  are  not  a  schooling 
fish ;  every  one  goes  on  his  own  hook.  We  do  seine  for  cod  on  the 
Labrador  coast,  where  they  are  known  to  school ;  this  is  done  while 
they  keep  along  the  shore,  but  it  is  the  only  time  when  it  is  known  to 
be  possible. 

Q.  Suppose  that  you  put  a  fence  around  all  your  coasts,  and  ports, 
and  harbors,  so  that  no  American  could  get  there  to  fish  at  all,  and  that 
in  return  the  Americans  were  spiteful  enough  to  close  their  own  markets 
to  your  fishermen,  would  Halifax  then  grow  as  you  have  described  ?- 
A.  We  wonld  then  be  thrown  entirely  on  onr  own  resources,  and  we 
would  have  the  four  millions  residing  in  the  Dominion  of  Canada  to  de- 
pend on  for  a  market. 

Q.  Would  not  that  answer  just  as  well?— A.  Not  as  well  as  a  market 
of  40  millions. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Did  you  understand  the  permanent  trade  to  which  Mr.  Foster  al- 
luded to  be  the  trade  for  ciglit  years  ?  Do  you  consider  that  there  could 
be  any  permanent  investment  of  American  capital  here  except  a  treaty 
was  negotiated  for  a  very  much  longer  period  than  eight  years  ?— A. 
Most  certainly  not.  No  prudent  man  would  change  his  business  with 
only  an  eight  years'  prospect  before  him;  this^was  the  case  even  during 
the  ten  years  of  the  Iteciprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  The  information  which  we  are  getting  from  you  now,  and  which 
the  Commission  wish  to  have  on  this  subject,  relates  to  the  privilege  it 
is  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  to  have  access  to  our  fisheries  for 
these  eight  years ;  this  is  the  only  question  we  are  discussing ;  and  von 
do  not  consider  that  we  would  be  benefited  if  the  Gloucester  people 
moved  over  to  our  shores  ? — A.  I  do  not  see  that  we  would  be. 

Q.  During  this  treaty  of  eight  years? — A.  No. 

Q.  Yon  do  not  think  that  they  wonld  build  up  establishments  and 
towns  here  ? — A.  Not  during  the  existence  of  a  treaty  for  only  eight 
years. 

Q.  What  you  mean  is,  that  they  could  run  their  vessels  in  here  ?— A. 
Yes ;  and  utilize  our  means  of  conveyance. 

Q.  With  regard  to  landing  at  the  Magdalen  Islands,  do  you  under- 
stand that  the  Americans  had  a  right  to  land  there  previous  to  the 
Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  I  thought  that  these  islands  came  under  the 
Bame  jurisdiction  with  our  own  provinces. 

Q.  You  consider  that  their  right  to  land  there  for  ice  or  snow,  as  for 
aoything  else  they  require,  in  order  to  carry  on  the  fishery,  is  obtained 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


683 


Canada  to  de- 
ll as  a  market 


iu  here  ?— A. 


under  tbis  treaty  ? — A.  Yes ;  these  Islantls  are  included  in  the  same  ar- 
rangement with  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  You  were  asked  something  about  a  very  long  and  a  very  high 
fence;  but  if  the  Americans  were  confined  to  their  rights  under  the  pre- 
vious treaty,  and  If  they  were  practically  and  effectually  restricted  from 
coming  within  the  three-mile  limit  to  fish,  do  you  think  that  this  would 
be  an  advantage  or  a  disadvantage  to  us? — A.  O,  certainly  it  would 
be  an  advantage.  It  would  assuredly  build  up  the  fishery  interests  of 
these  provinces. 

Q.  It  the  American  vessels  were  absolutely  shut  out  from  the  three- 
mile  limit  you  do  not  think  that  they  would  engage  in  the  prosecution 
of  our  flsberies  at  all  ? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  said  something  to  you  about  the  possibility  of  the 
Americans,  from  spite  or  some  other  motive,  imposing  a  very  heavy 
duty  ou  our  fish ;  but  where  would  they  obtain  their  mackerel  if  this 
was  done  from  spite,  provided  this  could  enter  into  any  such  question 
at  all  ? — A.  They  would  get  their  mackerel,  if  they  got  it  outside  of  their 
own  waters  at  all,  from  these  provinces.  Tlie  duty  of  $:i  a  barrel,  im- 
posed on  it  at  one  time  by  them,  did  not  prevent  such  shipments. 

Q.  Where  do  the  American  fishermen  have  to  go  for  mackerel?  As- 
suming that  they  were  to  have  their  mackerel  fresh  during  the  summer 
ami  the  autumn,  how  would  they  supply  the  enormous  demand  for  it? — 
A.  Their  own  supply  would  be  drawn  from  their  own  waters  if  they  were 
excluded  from  our  waters. 

Q.  Have  they  sufficient  in  their  own  waters  to  supply  the  demand? — 
A.  Sometimes  sufficient  mackerel  all  told  are  not  caught  to  supply  the 
demand.  This  depends  on  the  catch.  I  think  that  their  catoh  would 
not  be  sufficient  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  Would  it  be  possible  for  them  to  impose  a  duty  on  mackerel  enter- 
ing the  United  States  which  they  would  not  have  to  pay  themselves? — 
A.  If  they  were  entirely  excluded  from  fishing  in  British  waters  1  think 
that  they  would  have  to  pay  any  ordinary  duty  in  addition  to  the  regu- 
lar cost  of  the  fish. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  There  never  has  been  a  duty  imposed  on  fresh  fish  in  your  mem- 
ory ! — A.  The  fresh-fish  business  is  entirely  a  new  one. 

Q.  There  never  has  been  a  duty  levied  on  it  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Has  there  ever  been  a  considerable  amount  of  fresh  mackerel  sent 
to  the  United  States  from  these  provinces  ? — A.  That  is  a  new  business. 

Q.  It  is  done  chiefly  by  railway  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Prior  to  railroading,  was  it  possible  to  do  this  business? — A.  Yes; 
large  quantities  were  sent  by  steamer  to  New  York  and  Boston. 

Q.  How  were  the  fish  preserved  ? — A.  They  were  boxed  iu  ice. 

Q.  Were  they  got  through  in  good  condition  ? — A.  Yes.  Mackerel 
or  any  other  fish  will  keep  safely  for  a  fortnight  if  boxed  in  ice.  This 
is  the  case  with  salmon. 

Q.  And  mackerel  will  keep  as  well  as  salmon? — A.  Yes;  I  think  that 
sahnon  are,  perhaps,  the  most  tender  fish  we  have. 

Q.  What  did  1  understand  you  to  say  about  contemplating  going  into 
the  fresh-fish  business  ? — A.  I  think  that  an  opportunity  for  doing  a  very 
profitable  fresh-fish  business  from  this  port  is  now  presented. 

Q.  And  you  are  contemplating  going  into  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  not  going  to  wait  eight  years  before  doing  so  ? — A.  I  am 
not  au  American. 

Q.  And  you  think  that  you  can  safely  engage  in  the  business  of  send- 


684 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


ing  fresh  fish  to  the  United  States  f — A.  Tes ;  because  I  have  the  ad- 
vantage of  securing  the  fish  within  the  three-mile  limit,  and  of  railway 
communication,  whatever  treaties  may  say. 

Q.  And  do  you  expect  to  supply  the  American  market  with  mack- 
erel f — A.  That  would  be  a  part  of  the  business. 

Q.  How  would  yon  send  them  T — A.  By  rail  altogether,  packed  in  ice, 
except  when  it  would  be  necessary  to  supply  some  seaport  towns  in  tbe 
States. 

Q.  Where  would  you  find  your  shipping  places  in  the  States  1— A.  I 
would  ship  directly  to  the  American  market  from  here. 

Q.  Where  to! — A.  To  the  whole  West — Saint  Louis,  Chicago,  &c.;  it 
would  be  almost  imiiossible  to  enumerate  them. 

Q.  And  what  kinds  of  fish  do  you  intend  to  send  there?— A.  All 
kinds  of  fresh  fish ;  even  lobsters.  A  very  largo  business  is  to  be  doue 
from  this  province  in  fresh  lobsters  packed  in  ice. 

Q.  And  you  think  that  this  business  is  tolerably  independent  of  any 
treaty  ! — A.  It  can  be  doue  by  us,  if  we  are  not  crowded  ofl:'  the  grouud 
by  American  fishermen. 

Q.  There  will  be  no  duty  for  eight  years,  and  at  the  end  of  eight 
years  you  fancy  that  duty  will  not  hurt  you  f — A.  There  is  no  duty 
imposed  on  fresh  fish,  and  there  never  has  been. 

Q.  But  there  may  be,  I  suppose  T — A.  Yes.  I  would  expect  to  drav 
my  supplies  very  largely  in  this  business  from  American  fisberinen ;  it 
would  be  to  their  interest  to  come  here. 

Q.  Does  not  all  that  depend  on  having  the  freedom  of  tbe  fishery  oq 
the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other  hand  the  freedom  of  the  markets  ?— A, 
Most  decidedly  it  does. 

Q.  And  it  will  be  to  the  mutual  advantage  of  both  parties  1 — A.  Yon 
may  make  any  treaty  or  impose  any  tax  you  like,  but  trade  will  find  Its 
own  level. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  that  an  unjust  exclusion  can  effect  it?  CanDot 
duties  graded  from  prohibitiou  to  a  low  duty  do  so  ? — A.  Trade  will 
naturally  find  its  own  level ;  of  course,  a  wall  of  tarift'  will  exclude  it. 

Q.  You  never  have  thought  of  going  into  the  business  you  mention 
until  within  tbe  last  year  ? — A.  I  have  thought  of  it  since  our  railway 
facilities  for  communication  with  America  have  improved. 

Q.  Do  you  labor  under  the  impression  that  there  is  any  difference  be- 
tween the  rights  possessed  by  Americans  on  tbe  Magdalen  Islands  pre- 
vious and  subsequent  to  tbe  Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  I  always  thought 
that  the  Magdalen  Islands  came  under  tbe  same  restrictions  in  common 
with  our  own  province. 

Q.  You  have  testified  under  the  impression  that  the  Americans  ac- 
quired new  rights  on  the  Magdalen  Islands  by  this  treaty  ? — A.  Yes. 

No.  26. 

John  Stapleton  ;  64  years  of  age ;  hotel  keeper,  and  formerly  a  fish- 
erman. Port  Hawkesbury,  Cape  Breton,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  How  many  years  have  you  been  engaged  in  tbe  fishing 
business  ? — Answer.  I  went  fishing  very  young ;  it  is  about  36  years 
since  I  went  for  the  first  time. 

Q.  You  have  bad  about  36  years'  acquaintance  with  the  fisheries  ?'-A. 
Yes. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


685 


isheries  ?— A. 


Q.  And  yoar  acquaintance  with  the  bnsiness  has  continued  more  or 
lesH  ever  since  f — A.  I  was  flshiuf;  from  that  time  till  1851. 

Q.  Ton  were  actually  engaged  in  fishing  during  that  time  f — A.  Tes. 

Q.  And  since  then  yon  have  lived  iu  Port  Haw kesbury  t — A.  Yes; 
and  have  been  in  the  coasting  trade. 

Q.  You  were  fishing  from  year  to  year  f — A.  Tes. 

Q.  And  were  connected  with  the  business  all  the  time  T— A.  I  kept 
up  my  knowledge  of  it. 

Q,  Wbtiti  you  commenced  fishing  36  years  ago,  in  what  branch  of  the 
busines8  were  you  engaged  T — A.  In  cod  fishing. 

Q.  Did  you  continue  in  that  business  during  a  number  of  years  T — A. 
1 80  flabed  for  two  or  three  years. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  you  fish — American  or  British  f — A.  I  went  in 
an  American  vessel. 

Q.  Where  did  you  prosecute  the  cod  fishery  T— A.  In  North  Bay. 

Q.  Where  is  North  Bay  T — A.  We  call  it  North  Bay  after  you  go  to 
tbc  northward  of  Port  Hood,  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  ? — A.  We  fished  across  to  North  Gape,  and  off 
North  Gape  in  shoal  water. 

Q.  You  call  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  North  Bay  I — A.  We  call  Prince 
Edward  Island  in  North  Bay. 

Q.  Yott  are  speaking  of  the  years  1836,  1837,  and  1838  ?— A.  Tes ; 
along  there. 

Q.  You  were  in  an  American  vessel  at  the  time? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  fished  off  North  Cape,  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  close  to  the  shore? — A.  About  two  miles  or  one  mile  and  a 
lialf.    We  were  in  shoal  water  fishing  in  the  spring  school. 

Q.  The  bulk  of  the  cod  are  caught  outside  of  three  miles  from  the 
shore  ?— A.  They  catch  them  on  the  Banks  in  trawls. 

Q.  When  you  were  fishing  you  caught  them  inside  the  limit? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  the  boats  caught  them  inside  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  quintals  did  you  get? — A.  I  think  the  last  year  I  was 
tisliiug  for  cod  we  got  600  quintals. 

Q.  That  was  a  good  catch  ? — A.  Yes;  for  the  size  of  the  vessel;  we 
had  only  six  hands  on  board. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  after  1839  ? — A.  I  went  to  the  States  and  fished 
off  the  American  coast  and  in  the  gulf  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  mackerel  in  American  waters? — A.  We  got 
them  on  George's  Bank. 

Q.  That  is  150  miles  from  the  American  shore  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  mostly 
fished  there  in  summer. 

Q.  Do  yon  fish  off  the  American  coast  or  in  Massachusetts  Bay  ? — A. 
We  fished  on  Middle  Bank  in  the  fall ;  it  is  half-way  between  Cape  Ann 
and  Cape  Cod. 

Q.  VVbere  did  the  fleet  catch  fish  there — as  close  to  the  shore  as  in 
North  Bay  ? — A.  They  caught  them  inshore.  There  are  boats  fishing 
there.    I  think,  as  a  general  rule,  the  larger  vessels  go  outside. 

Q.  Where  did  you  then  go  ? — A.  I  fished  on  George's  Bank. 

Q.  And  the  vessels  that  usually  fished  with  you,  where  did  they  go  ? — 
A.  A  big  fleet  would  be  out  on  George's,  Middle,  and  Jeffrey's  Banks, 
and  Cashes'  Ledge,  and  around  there.    Small  vessels  would  fish  inshore. 

Q.  Did  you  flnd  those  waters  prolific  in  fish  ? — A.  About  300  barrels 
in  a  season  would  be  a  pretty  good  catch. 

Q.  You  are  now  speaking  of  George's  Bank  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  does  the  season  last  ? — A.  We  used  to  get  cod  during 


686 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


the  Brst  part  of  the  season,  and  we  fished  for  mackerel  when  tlipy  got 
fat. 

Q.  How  many  years  did  yon  continue  to  fish  in  an  American  vessel 
oft' the  American  coast  T — A.  About  three  years. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  then  ! — A.  The  last  year  we  were  tishing  otl 
there,  we  went  to  George's  Bank,  the  usual  ground.  Wu  couhl  not  timl 
auy  fish  there,  and  we  then  came  down  to  North  Bay.  We  flslied  utl 
Tracadie  on  the  north  shore  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  aiicUored 
there.    We  went  very  close  inshore  and  got  about  150  barrels. 

Q.  That  was  off  St.  Peter's,  Prince  Edward  Island? — A.  Yes;  a 
storm  came  on  and  we  went  into  the  harbor  and  afterward  came  out. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  were  you  there  1 — A.  In  the  Tasso,  of  Lockeport, 
Captain  Storey. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  land  were  you  when  you  caught  those  UA)  bar- 
rels T — A.  About  one  mile ;  we  were  right  off  the  harbor.  We  did  very 
well  there.  The  fleet  afterward  gathered  round  and  kind  of  broke  uji 
the  school.  We  went  from  there  to  Margaree  Island,  and  anchored  at 
night  under  the  island.  The  whole  fleet  was  there,  and  cutters  were  on 
the  coast.  At  that  time  we  were  about  giving  up  and  deciding  to  go 
home.  In  the  morning  pretty  early,  as  soon  as  it  was  light,  we  sprung 
up  the  vessel  and  all  hands  went  fishing.  A  cutter  came  down  to  the 
island  from  Port  Hood  that  night. 

Q.  The  cutters  were  there  f — A.  Yes,  at  the  time. 

Q.  This  was  in  1841  ? — A.  I  think  so.  We  were  fishing  when  a  cut 
ter  came  round  the  point  and  fired  a  shot. 

Q.  The  cutter  caught  you  in  the  act ! — A.  Yes ;  there  were  about  20 
or  30  vessels  on  the  grounds.  They  were  close  inshore ;  a  number  cut 
their  cables  and  cleared  off;  the  cutter  took  five  vessels.  Some  who 
were  farther  out  hauled  to  aud  were  taken,  while  many  of  those  closer 
in  escaped ;  the  cutter  would  not  have  taken  so  many  vessels  if  they  had 
not  hauled  to.  I  afterward  went  to  the  States,  settled  up  my  bnsiuess, 
came  home,  and  bought  a  little  vessel  of  my  own. 

Q.  How  close  were  you  to  the  land  when  the  cutter  came  ?— A.  About 
a  quarter  of  a  mile  from  shore. 

Q.  You  made  a  large  haul  of  fish  f — A.  I  suppose  we  would  bare 
made  a  large  haul  if  the  cutter  had  not  come. 

Q.  All  the  vessels  were  close  inshore  ? — A.  Yes ;  on  the  south  side  of 
the  island. 

Q.  Then  you  went  fishing  in  your  own  vessel,  a  British  vessel  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  How  many  years  did  you  prosecute  fishing  in  your  vessels?— A. 
Three  years.    I  owned  the  Gannet,  Harp,  and  Elizabeth  Ellen. 

Q.  Over  how  many  years  did  that  extend  1 — A.  I  think  up  to  1851. 

Q.  Did  you  do  pretty  well  in  these  vessels  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  did  pretty 
well.  I  did  so  well  I  thought  I  would  knock  off  and  go  into  the  tradlug 
business,  and  then  I  put  my  foot  into  it. 

Q.  During  the  whole  number  of  years  you  were  in  the  business  in 
American  vessels  and  in  your  own  vessels,  where  did  you  fish  ?— A.  I 
fished  pretty  much  all  over  the  bay. 

Q.  Name  the  places.  Were  you  in  Bay  Chaleurs  ?— A.  Yes ;  we  fished 
from  East  Point  up  toward  Georgetown,  aud  from  that  by  the  north  side 
of  the  island  to  North  Gape. 

Q.  You  fished  along  the  island  f — A.  On  the  north  side  of  the  island 
there  is  a  good  fishing  ground,  and  also  from  North  Cape  to  West  (Jape! 

Q.  You  fished,  then,  on  the  northwest  of  the  island  ? — A.  Bight  in- 
shore, near  the  land.    And  also  on  the  west  cqast  of  New  Brunswick  to 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


687 


Escaininac  and  Point  Miscou,  and  from  Point  Miscou  by  Shippegan,  and 
from  that  to  Paspebiac  and  Port  Daniel  and  down  to  <iaiipe,  around 
fiouaventure  Island  and  as  far  as  Gape  Uozior. 

Q.  During  this  time  you  were  brought  into  full  contact  with  the  Ameri- 
can fleet  ?— A.  Yes ;  always. 

Q.  And  did  the  American  fleet  fish  at  the  same  places  as  you  did  ? — 
A.  Ves. 

Q.  During  these  many  years,  how  far  from  the  shore  were  fisli  gen- 
erally taken  ? — A.  The  fish  were  always  some  way  or  other  inshore ;  we 
always  fished  inshore. 

Q.  Talie  Bay  Chalenrs,  for  instance;  where  did  you  find  fish  there! — 
A.  luHiiore. 

Q.  Did  you  find  many  in  theceuterof  the  bay  T — A.  Wo  never  thought 
of  fishing  in  the  center  of  the  bay.  We  fished  on  either  the  north  or 
south  side  of  the  bay. 

Q.  Wliat  proportion  of  the  whole  catch  of  fish  do  you  think  is  taken 
inshore  ?  I  suppose  some  are  caught  outside  on  banks  Bradley  and  Or- 
phan ?— A.  O,  yes  ;  we  have  had  a  great  deal  of  talk  about  the  quantity 
of  lish  taken  inshore  and  oll'shore. 

Q.  You  have  had  conversation  with  American  captains  about  it  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  with  the  officers  of  cutters  ? — A.  Yes.  I  have  talked  it  over 
with  everybody. 

Q.  It  has  been  a  matter  of  general  discussion  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  What  is  the  result  ? — A.  The  result  is  that,  I  think — I  may  be 
wrong  and  I  may  be  right — that  three-fourths  of  the  fish  are  caught  in- 
Bbore. 

Q.  That  is  of  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  As  regards  your  own  catch,  what  do  you  think  is  the  proi>ortion  1 — 
A.  I  caught  all  mine  inshore. 

Q.  You  never  caught  any  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  No; 
never  any  outside. 

Q.  In  1851, 1  think  you  said  you  were  fishing  ? — A.  That  was  the  last 
year  I  was  fishing. 

Q.  That  was  the  year  of  the  great  gale  ! — A.  I  was  in  Tracadie,  on 
the  north  side  of  the  island,  at  that  time.  I  went  in  there  on  the  night 
of  the  gale. 

Q.  You  got  clear? — A.  Yes;  I  was  after  going  out  of  the  bay.  We 
bad  made  two  trips;  I  went  in  for  the  third  trip,  and  was  there  one 
day,  and  then  made  for  Tracadie,  intending  to  fish  off  there;  coming 
'-'^  t  night  and  going  out  in  the  day  fishing. 

Q.  After  the  gale,  did  you  abandon  fishing  for  the  season  ? — A.  I 
fished  ten  days  after  the  gale.  I  assisted  to  bury  some  of  our  neigh- 
bors, \vho  had  been  lost,  on  the  island,  and  afterward  went  to  Margaree 
Island. 

Q.  That  is  off  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  Yes.  I  thought  I  would  make  one 
push  more  to  complete  the  trip  before  going  home.  The  cutters  were 
in  the  bay  at  the  time ;  because  I  recollect  that  at  Magdalen  Island  I 
S'  w  a  schooner  from  Gloucester.  I  asked  the  captain  if  he  had  caught 
any  mackerel ;  he  said,  "  No,"  for  he  thought  1  might  be  a  spy ;  but  I 
saw  from  a  streak  in  the  water  that  mackerel  were  there. 

Q.  You  came  to  the  conclusion  that  mackerel  were  there  ? — A.  Yes ; 
and  anchored. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  7 — A.  About  a  quarter  of  a  mile.  It  was 
the  same  old  place  where  the  vessels  had  previously  cut  their  cables. 


'•*^i 


•'^ 


688 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


The  next  day  it  was  blowing ;  bnt  it  was  not  long  before  fifty  sail  were 
there. 

Q.  All  American  vessels T — A.  Yes ;  I  leebowed  the  Village  Belle 
of  Gloucester,  Captain  Harvey  (he  had  100  barrels  ou  deck  at  the  time)' 
and  took  90  barrels  out  of  the  same  school. 

Q.  Did  all  the  fifty  vessels  fish  within  a  quarter  of  a  mile  of  the 
shore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  they  all  get  good  catches? — A,  Some,  who  had  been  fishing 
before  in  the  bay,  finished  their  trips  by  12  o'clock,  and  hauled  their 
colors  for  home. 

Q.  Did  every  one  of  the  fifty  vessels  get  a  full  fare  ? — A.  They  pretty 
well  filled  up  by  that  time ;  some  remained  afterwards.  I  remained  till 
I  got  180  barrels.  I  got  00  wash-barrels  that  day,  and  made  it  180 
barrels  before  I  left. 

Q.  In  the  same  place  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  all  got  fares  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Near  Margaree  ? — A.  Yes ;  close  inshore  and  around  Cheticarap. 

Q.  What  price  did  you  get  for  your  fish  ? — A.  I  sold  them  next  spring 
in  Boston.,  to  Messrs.  Snow  &  Eich,  for  $21  and  $22  per  barrel.  I 
brought  the  crew  out  in  the  fall  before. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  50  vessels  being  here  and  50  vessels  there ;  what 
was  the  number  of  the  American  fleet  in  1851  ? — A.  I  think,  in  1851— it 
would  be  hard  to  recollect  the  number — it  would  be  over  three  hun- 
dred vessels. 

Q.  Near  Margaree  I — A.  No ;  but  at  and  about  and  along  Eatt  Point, 
there  were  all  300  of  sail  at  the  time  of  the  American  gale. 

Q.  But  about  how  many  vessels  did  the  fleet  ii  the  gulf  that  year 
comprise  ? — A.  I  don't  remember  how  many  were  there. 

Q.  Have  yon  seen  three  hundred  sail  at  one  time  in  the  bay !— A. 
Yes ;  at  Port  Hood  at  one  time. 

Q.  You  are  not  able  to  state  the  number  of  the  fleet  in  the  bay  ?— A. 
No. 

Q.  As  you  have  been  a  practical  fisherman  I  wish  to  ask  you  v  hat 
the  average  catch  of  the  fleet  would  be.  Cai  you  state  that  ? — A.  For 
a  year  ? 

Q,  Yes;  or  any  number  of  years.  Of  course,  only  during  the  time 
you  were  fishing. — A.  The  number  of  barrels?  1  suppose  it  would  be 
an  average  of  500  or  600  barrels.  That  is  what  wo  generally  umier- 
stand.  Some  used  to  get  three  trips.  I  have  known  some  to  get  thne 
trips. 

Q.  On  that  three-trip  question,  what  proportion  would  make  throe 
trips? — A.  I  venture  to  say  one-fourth  cf  the  fleet.  They  would  bring 
in  two  trips  to  the  strait  and  ship  them  in  coasters  or  laud  them  there, 
and  the  third  trip  they  would  take  on  themselves. 

Q.  That  is  to  save  the  time  of  going  home  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  this  present  year  have  ^ou  taken  any  notice  of  the  fleet 
passing  through  the  Gutof  Oanso? — A.  1  have  taken  notice.  1  have 
not  been  interested  in  it.  I  did  not  take  as  much  notice  as  if  I  had 
known 

Q.  That  we  were  going  to  call  you  ? — A.  Yes ;  but  I  hear  the  Ameri- 
can captains.  A  great  many  of  them  call  at  my  place  at  our  harbor, 
and  I  have  a  way  of  seeing  them.  I  am  acquainted  with  a  great  many 
of  them.  They  do  not  find  any  fish  on  their  own  shore  this  year.  We 
find  a  great  many  of  these  seiners  come  down.  The  way  we  know  them 
to  be  seiners  is  that  they  tow  their  seines. 

Q.  Have  they  more  boats  than  usual  ? — A.  Yes.    I  was  si>eaking  to 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


689 


one  captain  tbere,  seeing  that  he  had  a  great  rnmber  of  dories,  and  I 
asked  what  he  was  doing  with  them.  He  said  that  they  found  that  the 
macicerel  whs  close  inshore ;  that  they  could  not  get  in  for  tliem  with 
the  vessel,  and  were  going  to  use  dories. 

Q.  Tliey  find  them  so  close  in  that  they  take  dories  to  enable  thera 
to  catcb  tiieui  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  Do  all  the  fleet  pass  through  the  gut  that  go  to  the  bay  ? — A.  Ifo. 

Q.  How  do  they  go? — A.  Some  of  them  go  around  Soatari,  and  up  off 
Flint  Island.  They  have  very  fine  fisliing  along  that  coast  off  Capo 
i?i)ioky  and  Aspy  Bay.    Aspy  Bay  is  rather  a  fine  fishing  ground. 

Q.  Then  it  is  not  necessary  to  go  through  the  gut  at  all!! — A.  No.  If 
they  itre  going  to  Magdalen  Islands  or  anywhere  there  they  often  go 
tbis  way  (pointing  on  the  map  to  course  outside  of  the  island  of  Cape 
Breton). 

{}.  I  understand  that  a  number  go  that  way  ? — A.  Yes;  some  go  to 
Sydney. 

Q.  Then  it  is  only  a  portion  that  go  through  the  gut  ? — A.  Yes.  In 
ciear  weather  they  find  the  Strait  of  Canso  very  handy  to  go  through, 
l)iit  if  it  is  not  clear  weather  they  go  round,  many  of  them.  I  have 
kuown  several  captains  tell  me,  when  they  were  coming  home  through 
tbegiit,  that  they  had  gone  around  outside. 

Q.  It  depends  uuon  the  weather  to  a  large  extent? — A,  Yes.  If  a 
man  does  not  want  any  fitting  out,  instead  of,  perhaps,  having  to  beat 
up  the  strait,  he  might  run  down  the  eastern  shore  of  Cape  Breton  and 
been  the  fishing  grounds  at  once. 

Q.  Now,  you  have  been  living  for  the  last  fifteen  or  sixteen  years  at  Port 
Hawkesbury;  is  there  bait  caught  there  I  Is  that  a  good  harbor  for 
catching  squid  ? — A.  Yes  ;  they  are  getting  into  it  now  for  a  few  years 
back.  It  is  only  lately  that  they  hava  found  those  squid  there — two  or 
thiee  years. 

Q,  Vvhat  do  they  use  that  bait  for  ? — A.  For  trawling  on  the  banks. 

Q.  For  cod  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  the  Americans  been  there  catching  these  squid  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  yourself? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Numbers  of  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  have  you  seen  with  your  own  eyes  ? — A.  This  year  ? 
I  suppose  15  or  20  sail;  last  year  about  25  or  30  sail;  and  partly  tiie 
rear  before.  They  come  in  and  anchor,  and  put  two  men  in  a  dory,  and 
scatter  over  the  harbor.  Tiiey  are  at  it  night  and  day.  In  the  night 
they  have  a  lantern,  and  the  sqind  come  around  and  are  caught.  In 
two  or  three  days  they  have  got  their  bait,  and  away  they  go  to  the 
Banks. 

Q.  Where  do  tho  trawlers  get  their  bait,  all  of  them  ? — A.  The  whole 
oftlieiu?  Well,  they  get  their  bait  on  all  parts  of  the  Xova  Scotia 
shore;  ihac  is,  when  they  can't  get  squid  on  the  bajdis.  There  is  only 
a  certain  season  on  the  Grand  Bank  that  the  squid  are  there.  When 
it  is  theie  they  get  it  there,  but  when  tii«\y  cannot  they  come  inshore 
aiul  {ret  it.  They  either  buy  herring  or  mackerel,  or  they  catch  stpiid. 
Whatever  they  can  get  by  catching  or  buying  they  put  in  i(!e  and  then 
IJO  back. 

Q.  Why  cannot  they  prosecute  the  bank  fishery  withoi  t  thiii  ? — A. 
Well,  the  fish  won't  bite  without  something, 

Q.  Cannot  they  bring  these  from  their  own  country? — A.  Yes;  that 
is  all  very  true.  It  may  be  that  the  first  trip,  when  they  wont  from 
hoiue,  tliu>  had  bait;  but  that  will  last  for  only  one  or  two  baitings. 
44  F 


mi 


i^mS 


.^WMi     \. 


690 


AWAKD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Au(l  if  they  cannot  get  bait  on  the  Bank  then  they  have  to  haul  up  their 
anchor  and  get  it  inshore. 

Q.  Well,  it  is  necessary  for  them  then  to  buy  bait  from  you  !_a. 
Well,  the  salt  bait  will  not  catch  the  fish  while  there  is  other  bait  there! 

Q.  For  trawling  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to  have  fresh  tish?— a! 
Yes ;  if  it  was  not  necessary  they  would  not  come. 

Q.  And  besides  the  bait  they  must  have  ice  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  large  numbers  get  it? — A.  Yes;  a  good  many  go  into  New- 
foundland shore  and  get  herring.  The  rest  come  to  our  shore;  the 
nearest  place  they  can  get. 

Q.  Without  it  they  could  not  prosecute  the  cod  fishery  at  all  ?— A.  Not 
to  any  success. 

Q.  Now,  as  to  the  American  coast-fishing;  have  you  ever  known 
of  any  British  vessels  going  there  to  catch  mackerel  ?-  A .  I  heard  tell 
of  one. 

Q.  We  have  been  chasing  that  one  now  for  a  Loii^' time.  Can  you  give 
US  the  name  of  her? — A.  No  ;  I  cannot. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  any  one  that  could  ? — A.  I  think  she  is  like  the 
"  Flying  Dutchman." 

Q.  Would  you  yourself  like  to  invest  money  fitting  out  for  that  fish- 
ery ? — A.  I  would  have  no  chance. 

Q.  It  would  be  nonsense  to  talk  about  it  at  all  ? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  It  is  not  feasible  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Supposing  the  Americans  were  not  allowed  to  fist  wiiijcn  3  miles 
of  the  coast,  could  they  make  any  fist  of  fishing  in  the  guli  ;' — A.  I  do 
not  think  they  would  continue  it. 

Q.  Just  give  us  your  candid  opinion. — A.  My  candid  opinion  would 
be  that  they  would  not  send  vessels  for  more  than  one  or  two  years  he 
fore  they  would  give  it  up  altogether. 

Q.  It  would  not  pay  then  ? — A.  It  would  not  pay.  They  want  all  the 
privileges  they  can  get  befoio  it  pays. 

Q.  You  don't  think  the  American  owners  of  these  vessels  would  send 
them? — A.  I  think  it  would  be  a  failure. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  have,  for  a  good  many  years,  been  upon  the  American  coast  ?- 
A.  Yes ;  I  was  a  few  years  fishing  there. 

Q.  Now,  I  suppose  it  is  true,  then,  is  it  not,  that  all  the  Anieiici'- 
coast,  from  Barnstable,  Provincetown,  and  all  the  way  up  to  Boston, 
and  from  there  down  the  coast  of  Maine,  there  are  a  great  many  )oats 
engaged  in  the  day  and  night  fishing  for  mackerel  and  other  fish  1— A. 
That  is  called  the  inside  fleet.    Yes. 

Q.  That  is  dittereut  from  the  vessels  that  do  the  outside  fishing  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Is  not  that  inside  fleet  very  large  in  the  State  of  Massachusetts,  for 
instance  ? — A.  Well,  yes ;  1  have  seen  them  coming  out  of  Proviuce- 
town. 

Q.  Take  Gloucester.  When  there  is  mackerel  close  inshore,  have  you 
not  seen  them  by  hundreds  ? — A.  Sail-boats?    Yes,  I  have  seen  them. 

Q.  By  hundreds? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  How  large  are  those  boats  that  do  this  day  fishing  ?  They  are 
boats  mostly,  are  tliey  not  ? — A.  They  are  from  20  to  30  tons.  1  siiii- 
pose  they  have  huf^e  ones. 

Q.  Then  there  are  those  that  fit  out  to  be  gone  some  length  of  time, 
and  engage  in  deep-sea  fishing  ?— A.  Y'es. 

Q.  What  kind  of  a  craft  did  you  go  in  ?— A.  I  went  aboard  a  vessel 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


691 


ricau  coast  ?- 


flsbinff?-A. 


always.    I  went  in  a  vessel  and  went  to  George's  Banks.    We  went  for 
codfish  in  the  spring  and  mackerel  in  the  summer. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  Ashing  for  mackerel  in  November  ? — A.  We 
tished  on  Middle  Bank.  That  is  between  the  two  capes,  is  it  not? 
Rather  nearer  Cape  Cod,  perhaps. 

Q.  And  off  Cape  Cod  you  hnvo  fished  ? — A.  Yes;  I  could  get  no  kind 
of  mackerel  in  November.     We  never  fished  about  CUathara. 

Q.  Well,  on  Middle  Bank  and  inside  Cape  Cod,  tUe  mackerel  you  got 
there  were  very  good,  were  they  not  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  were  fat  and  large  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  was  it  you  gave  up  fishing ;  that  is,  as  counsel  said,  as  a 
practical  fisherman? — A.  Well,  in  1851. 

Q.  You  have  been  trading,  then,  26 years? — A.  I  went  trading  and 
theu  coasting.    Now  I  am  a  hotel  keeper. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  trading  ? — A.  I  was  from  '51  to  '57,  about  6 
years. 

Q.  What  kind  of  trading  was  it  ? — A.  I  would  buy  fish  and  sell 
gfoods. 

Q.  Did  you  buy  bait? — A.  No;  I  bought  fish  salted  in  barrels.  If  I 
bouglit  the  fish  fresh  I  salted  thera.    I  would  also  buy  them  salt. 

(.>.  Wl)ere  did  you  send  your  fish  for  sale  ? — A.  Generally  to  Boston. 

ij.  Did  you  sell  codfish? — A.  I  did  not  do  anything  with  cod. 

Q.  ]^id  you  buy  American  bait  and  sell  it  again  to  your  own  peo- 
])le?— A.  No.  Those  fishermen  I  traded  with  were  fishing  with  nets 
along  the  coast.    They  were  seiners. 

Q.  The  Americans  did  not  come  in  there  at  that  time  to  refit  ? — A. 
Yes;  but  I  was  not  in  that  business.    I  went  in  my  vessel. 

Q.  At  that  time,  when  you  were  in  business,  they  used  to  refit  there? 
—A.  They  refitted  in  Port  Mulgrave.  I  did  not  do  any  of  that  business. 
I  saw  it  going  on. 

Q.  They  used  to  land  their  cargoes  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Many  would  buy  their  barrels  too? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  would  buy  their  bait  sometimes? — A.  They  would  buy  bait. 

Q.  Well,  you  went  fishing  in  vessels  oft"  the  coast  here.  I  do  not 
mean  in  boats,  but  vessels  off  your  own  coast.  I  suppose  the  habits 
and  modes  of  fishing  in  British  and  American  vessels  are  the  same? — 
A.  Yea. 

Q.  You  would  not  hesitate  to  catch  where  an  American  vessel  was 
catching? — A.  N't ;  we  learned  that  trick  from  them. 

Q.  But  you  improved  on  it? — A.  I  don't  think  it  is  a  fair  trade, 
though. 

Q.  llow  did  you  do  about  the  boats  that  were  out  ?  You  did  not  feel 
bound  to  keep  away  from  a  good  mackerel  catch  because  American 
boats  were  catching  there  ? — A.  I  would  divid..  c'  «  school  with  them. 

Q.  And  with  an  offshore  wind  you  would  he  •  .e  ,o? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  was  a  little  danger  of  drifting  down  upon  them? — A.  We 
could  always  manage  that. 

Q.  They  could  manage  it  too  ? — A.  O,  yes;  they  could  haul  up  the 
killock,  or  pay  out  more. 

Q.  There  is  no  grievance  about  that,  is  there  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Well,  Port  H;*wke»bury  now  has  squid,  has  it  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  comes 
oft"  there  in  the  spring. 

Q.  llow  long  does  tL*^  squid  last  there — how  many  weeks  ? — A.  It 
^ill  come  in  maybe  a  weeU,  and  go  out  again,  and  bo  away,  and  per- 
liiips  the  same  or  another  schca!  will  come  in  again  in  a  week's  time.    I 


i^^- 


4 


692 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


have  seen  them  go  ashore,  and  I  don't  believe  the  fishermen  ever  knew 
they  were  there  until  two  years  ago. 

Q.  What  part  of  the  season  are  the  souid  to  be  had  ? — A.  In  July  off 
and  on  to  the  latter  part  of  October.  Tiie  time  is  quite  uncertain.  You 
may  stay  a  week  inside  for  them,  and  go  away  witiiout  them,  and  per- 
haps the  moment  you  are  gone  another  vessel  may  come  in  and  get 
them. 

Q,  How  do  you  manage,  suppose  there  is  no  vessel  there  when  they 
come  in  ?  Do  you  catch  and  keep  them  ? — A.  No ;  we  don't  botlier  with 
them.  They  were  thinking  of  icing  them — that  is,  of  catching  a  lot 
and  putting  them  in  ice  to  keep,  until  a  vessel  came  in  and  wanted 
them.    But  it  has  not  been  done  yet. 

Q.  When  the  fishermen  buy  them  they  buy  them  fresh  and  ice 
them  ? — A.  Generally  when  they  are  in  they  catch  them ;  tbey  have 
squid-jigs. 

Q.  VVhenever  they  catch  them  they  put  them  in  ice? — A.  Yes; 
they  have  a  place  for  the  bait,  and  they  break  up  the  ice  and  put  it  on 
them. 

No.  27. 


Michael  Wrayton,  of  Barrington,  Shelburne  County,  N.  S.,  ice  mer- 
chant, called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question   You  live  at  Barrington,  Nova  Scotia? — Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  think  that  is  close  to  Cape  Sable? — A.  Yes,  westward  ot  Cape 
Sable  8  or  10  miles. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  lived  there? — A.  I  have  lived  on  the  island 
where  I  reside  now  about  21  years.  I  used  formerly  to  live  at  a  place 
near  that. 

Q.  You  have  been  acquainted  with  the  way  of  American  fishermea 
coming  in  for  bait  for  a  number  of  yesirs  ? — A.  Yes,  I  have  been  dealing 
with  them  now  for  several  years. 

Q.  Well,  before  you  did  deal  with  them,  did  you  know  their  ways  of 
coming  there  ? — A.  Yes,  sir,  they  came  there  occasionally  for  bait,  often, 
very  often  ;  these  vessels  that  fish  on  our  coast  around  Cape  Sable 
Isla'^d,  off  LaHave  Bank,  and  along  there. 

Q.  They  are  cod-fishers,  are  they  not?— A.  Partly.  There  are  some 
halibut  catchers. 

Q.  They  catch  halibut  and  cod? — A.  Yes.  Fresh-halibut  flsliers,  I 
mean. 

Q.  That  is  chiefly  a  deep-sea  fishery,  is  it  not? — A.  Yes 

Q.  Where  do  the  American  vessels,  engaged  in  that  fishery,  get 
bait  ? — A.  They  generally  take  enough  from  home  to  last  them  a  trip, 
but  if  it  spoils  or  if  it  runs  out  then  they  calculate  to  take  a  fresh  sup 
ply.    They  generally  get  that  from  us. 

Q.  They  get  their  fresh  supply  where? — A.  On  our  Nova  Scotian 
shore.    They  frequently  call  in  at  my  place  for  it. 

Q.  Do  they  get  ice  as  well  as  bait  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  very  often  get  ice, 
Last  year  I  supplied  them. 

t^.  Are  you  aware  that  they  sometimes  run  over  direct  from  Glmices 
ter  without  bait  and  get  the  first  bait  here? — A.  Yea;  frequfniiy.  I 
have  had  them  come  directly  from  there  wirhout  any.  Captain  Aitoget, 
from  Gloucester,  came  over  last  year  witiiout  any  at  all.  1  Uiiiik  lif 
came  for  the  whole  season's  bait.    He  tiien  went  to  George'i?  Bank.  I 


AWARD    OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


693 


n  ever  knew 


think  I  lifive  heard  biin  say  he  found  it  better  to  do  so.  He  did  that 
quicker  tbaii  if  be  bad  stopped  there  for  it.  He  was  fresh-halibut  fisb- 
iup  in  deep  water. 

Q.  Do  many  Aniericao  fishermen  come  in  the  course  of  the  season 
there  along  the  south  coast  ?— A.  Yes ;  they  are  coming  in  there  all  the 
time. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  do  they  generally  get  ? — A.  Mackerel  in  the 
spring  and  herring  in  the  summer.  They  come  there  as  soon  as  th«iy 
bear  of  the  mackerel  being  taken. 

Q.  Tliey  buy  the  early  mackerel  for  bait  for  cod-fish  f — A.  Yeu,  dir. 

Q.  Do  they  preserve  that  bait  in  ice  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Does  salt  bait  answer  for  cod-fishing  at  all  I — A.  O,  no ;  fresh  bait 
is  always  used  now. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  there  are  Americans  using  salt  bait  at  all  for 
cod ! — A.  I  don't  know  of  its  being  used  at  all  now. 

Q.  Do  they  get  squid  in  your  neighborhood  for  bait  ? — A.  Not  often. 

Q.  It  is  only  mackerel  and  herring  they  get  ? — A.  That  is  the  chief 
bait  they  get. 

Q.  What  time  do  the  mackerel  come  in  f — A.  About  the  loth  of  May. 
We  get  large  mackerel  then ;  it  is  poor,  however. 

Q.  Tiiey  are  poorer  then,  and  you  sell  them  for  bait  to  the  Ameri- 
cans ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  ever  come  in  themselves  and  fish  for  bait? — A.  They 
only  buy.  I  don't  know  of  their  catching  any ;  they  don't  think  it 
would  be  worth  their  while.  They  would  lose  time,  I  suppose.  I  have 
heard  tliem  say  it  was  not  worth  their  while  to  catch  it,  and  that  they 
would  sooner  come  in  and  buy  it. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  size  of  the  American  vessels  that  come  in 
there  for  bait  ? — A.  From  fifty  to  one  hundred  tons. 

Q.  How  much  bait  does  a  fifty  ton  vessel  generally  require  ? — A.  They 
take  from  10  to  15,  20,  or  50  barrels  for  bait.  I  think  some  take  over 
50.    It  depends  upon  the  size. 

Q.  They  take  ice  also  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  use  ice  for  preserving  bait,  do  they  not  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  it  ever  come  under  your  notice  on  any  occasion  that  they 
threw  over  the  bait  that  they  had  themselves  caught  on  their  own  coast 
and  bought  fresh  bait  ? — A.  Yes;  their  bait  very  often  spoils  when  they 
area  little  while  out  They  lose  it;  it  sours  and  is  no  good.  I  have 
known  one  vessel  come  into  ray  wharf  once;  I  think  she  threw  over  17 
or  IS  barrels  of  bail;  alongside  the  wharf  and  took  a  fresh  supply  of  her- 
rinsj-hiiit  and  ice.    That  was  in  the  summer. 

Q.  Had  she  been  fishing  ? — A.  I  understood  that  she  had  not  been 
more  than  eight  days  from  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  did  it  happen  that  the  bait  was  destroyed  ?  What  was  the 
tronl)le  f— A.  I  do  not  know  what  was  the  cause,  but  it  soured  on  them 
and  was  no  good. 

Q.  Is  there  any  bait  as  good  as  th.at  got  on  the  Nova  Scotian  shores  ? — 
A.  No ;  it  won't  catcb  a  half  or  a  quarter  of  thd  tish  that  our  herring- 
bait  catches.    They  all  admit  it  is  not  as  good. 

^..  What  bait  do  they  take  with  them  generally  ? — A.  Generally  the 

may, 

Q.  It  does  not  answer  for  cod  fishing? — A.  It  is  not  so  good. 
Q  These  porgies  do  >iot  keep,  fresh  any  length  of  time  ? — A.  No. 
(i.  Tliey  are  a  very  fat  fish,  are  they  not  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Is  that  the  reason  'i     They  do  not  keep  any  time  in  the  ic3,  accord- 
ing to  your  experience  ? — A.  No ;  not  long.    They  admit  that  the  her- 


694 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ring  tbey  get  along  the  Nova  Scotian  shore  is  the  best  bait.    Tliey  found 
that  out  lately. 

Q.  Can  they  get  any  herring  on  their  own  coast? — A.  Well,  I  nm  not 
aware  of  it  unless  they  get  it  at  Matinicus,  in  the  State  of  Maine. 
Sometimes  they  go  up  there  and  get  some,  and  sometimes  they  go  to 
Gra'ul  Ma  nan. 

Q.  Well,  now  you  say  they  get  ice  from  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  La.it  year  they  got  considerable  ice  from  you ;  that  is,  not  only 
from  you  personally,  but  along  the  coast  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  did.  Every 
one  of  them  got  a  good  deal  more  last  year  than  this ;  that  is  on  account 
of  a  great  icehouse  being  established  there  at  Gloucester.  The  ice 
company  have  contracted  with  the  merchants  at  Gloucester  to  talte  ice 
for  ten  years,  at  $2.50  per  ton.  The  merchants  are  bound  to  take  it. 
But  there  are  a  good  many  outsiders  again  that  do  not  take  it  from 
Gloucester,  and  they  take  it  from  me. 

Q.  I  sui)po8e  they  are  bound  to  take  the  ice  from  this  company ;  but 
do  they  take  enough  to  complete  their  trip  ? — A.  They  most  frequently 
run  out. 

Q.  But  then  cannot  they  go  back  to  this  company  in  Gloucester  ?— A. 
Well,  it  is  much  nearer  to  come  to  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  do  they  take  time  to  go  back? — A.  No;  they 
get  it  on  our  coast. 

Q.  Then  the  fact  is,  that  this  company  only  compel  them  to  take  their 
first  supply  of  ice  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  are  obliged  to  take  the  first  supply, 
and  there  are  a  great  many  that  don't  take  any  more  than  tbey  are 
obliged  to  even  at  that. 

Q.  But  there  are  some  outside  of  that  arrangement  altogether  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  those  that  are  obliged  to  take  it  only  get  the  first  supply,  and 
come  to  our  coast  for  subsequent  supplies? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  After  the  Eeciprocity  Treaty  expired,  in  1866,  down  to  the  Wash- 
ington Treaty,  in  1871,  did  they  come  in  surreptitiously  at  all  and  get 
ice  on  the  Nova  Scotian  coast  ? — A.  Well,  they  used  to ;  yes. 

Q.  In  spite  of  the  cutters  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  used  to  come  in. 

Q.  Tbey  would  run  the  risk  in  order  to  get  their  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Since  I'^Tl,  there  being  no  trouble,  do  they  come  in  great  num- 
bers ? — A.  Yes ;  they  used  to  come  in  whenever  they  could.  I  used  to 
sell  ice  to  them  whenever  I  could. 

Q.  Before  this  Treaty  of  Washington  ? — A.  Yes,  even  when  the  cut- 
ters were  in  the  harbor  I  would  do  it. 

Q.  They  would  run  the  risk  even  then  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  say  themselves  about  that  privilege  o'  getting  ice 
and  bait?  Could  they  carry  on  the  cod-fishery  without  it? — A.  I  don't 
think  they  could  carry  it  on  successfully. 

Q.  Well,  no  man  carries  on  an  unsuccessful  business  if  he  can  help 
it. — A.  Well,  they  might  carry  on  the  business,  but  if  you  excluded  them 
from  coming  in  to  our  shores  they  would  have  to  get  it  somewhere  •'Ise, 
and  I  don't  know  any  other  place  to  get  it  unless  they  would  go  borne. 

Q.  Tbey  would  lose  a  great  deal  of  time  in  doing  that  ? — A.  Well,  you 
can  judge. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  possible  to  carry  on  the  deep-sea  fishery 
without  coming  to  the  British  coast  for  ice  and  bait  ? — A.  I  do  not  think 
they  could  carry  it  on  successfully. 

Q.  Is  that  the  opinion  of  the  American  shipowners  and  ship-masters, 
those  with  whom  you  dealt? — A.  That  is  tlieir  opinion. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  a  contrary  opinion  ? — A.  No.    I  know  from  ex- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


695 


heu  the  cut- 


periencp  that  they  could  not  do  so.  They  hiive  taken  as  much  as  two  and 
sometimes  as  high  as  three  baitings.  I  can  show  you  drafts  for  two 
baitinga  in  the  same  trip. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  that? — A.  They  will  get  ice  and  bait  to  last 
for  a  certain  time.  Perhaps  they  will  not  make  up  their  trip,  and  will 
come  in  for  another  supply.  I  mean  that  they  will  get  two  baitings  for 
the  same  trip  from  home.  They  will  come  in  perhaps  two  or  three 
times. 

Q.  How  many  trips  will  they  make  from  Gloucester  ? — A.  They  gen- 
erally make  a  trip  in  3  or  4  weeks.  I  have  known  a  vessel  go  to  New- 
fonndland  and  get  a  full  load  of  halibut,  100,000  or  over,  and  come  in 
along  the  shore  to  my  place.  They  have  gone  even  to  Seal  Islands  and 
back,  and  taken  ice  from  me  to  cover  their  halibut,  so  as  to  have  them 
iu  good  order  to  go  in  to  Gloucester. 

Q.  It  is  your  opinion,  from  your  own  experience,  that  they  could  not 
prosecute  these  fisheries  without  the  privilege  of  getting  ice  and  bait, 
aud  they  admit  it  themselves  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  You  have  been  iu  the  business  of  supplyihg  bait  and  ice  for  7  years. 
Can  they  get  from  your  neighborhood  the  other  supplies  that  they  need  I 
—A.  No ;  they  do  not  require  many  other  supplies. 

Q.  There  is  no  place  where  they  could  buy  provisions  and  things  of 
that  sort? — A.  There  are  places,  but  they  are  generally  provided  them- 
selves.   Bait  and  ice  are  what  tliey  want  chietly. 

Q.  You  sell  them  what  bait  they  require? — A.  Well,  if  we  haven't  it 
at  our  harbor,  we  are  generally  in  commutiication  with  other  harbors, 
and  if  they  haven't  the  money  I  have  given  them  cash  to  buy  bait,  aud 
sent  them  to  other  harbors  to  get  it. 

Q.  Then  either  from  your  establishment  or  in  your  neighborhood  they 
can  get  all  the  bait  they  need  for  the  summer,  can  they  ? — A.  Yes,  un- 
less there  happens  to  be  a  total  IVilure. 

Q.  Well,  usually  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  bait  you  sell  them? — A.  We  sell  them  mackerel  bait 
in  the  spring,  during  the  mackerel  season,  while  the  mackerel  last. 
Tbey  don't  last  a  long  time,  only  from  the  15th  of  May  to  the  last  of 
June.    Then  the  herring  strike  in. 

Q.  Can  they  get  along  with  mackerel  and  herring  all  through  the  cod- 
fishing  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  they  get  along  without  squids  ? — A.  They  don't  require 
tbem.  Tiiey  sometimes  fall  in  with  squids  to  the  eastwanl.  They  catch 
the  squid. 

Q.  Well,  they  can  get  along  with  herring  aud  mackerel  without  any 
squid  and  caplin  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  it  happened  that  they  were  not  allowed  to  go  to  Newfoundland, 
they  could  get  along  just  as  well  by  coming  to  Nova  Scotia  ? — A.  Yes ; 
tbey  could  get  bait  and  ice. 

Q.  There  is  nothing  that  the  cod-flshermen  cannot  be  supplied  with 
liere  in  Nova  Scotia  without  going  to  Newfoundland,  is  there  ?  They 
don't  have  to  go  to  Newfoundland  to  get  anything  that  they  cannot  get 
on  your  coast  ? — A.  Well,  they  can;  it  they  are  bound  to  Newfoundland 
they  sometimes  prefer  taking  their  bait  down  there;  l»ut  it  is  so  uncer- 
tain—the bait  being  found  sometimes  in  one  harbor  and  not  in  the  next — 
that  they  will  take  it  here  in  case  they  can't  get  it  afterwards. 

Q.  You  have  been  in  this  business  for  some  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  advertiseil  f — A.  Yes. 


w 


696 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  I  hope  the  business  is  profitable? — A.  Well,  it  is. 

Q.  You  get  along  pretty  well  1 — A..  Yes,  until  this  year.  That  big 
icehouse  has  kno(;keil  me  up  a  little. 

Q.  You  own  an  ice  house  ? — A.  Yes,  and  the  island  it  is  on. 

Q.  I  rather  think  you  are  near  enough  here  to  get  your  share  of  this 
business  with  the  Gloucester  ice-house? — A.  Well,  I  try.  They  ottir 
their  ice  for  82.50  a  ton,  and  I  offer  mine  for  $1.50.  It  will  not  bo  my 
fault  if  I  do  not  get  a  share. 

Q.  You  advertise  in  the  Gloucester  papers  I — A.  Yes  ;  I  put  it  in  a 
paper  there. 

Q.  (Reads from  witness' advertisement.)  This  is  your  advertisement  !— 
A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  That  advertisement  shows  how  thoroughly  you  can  supply  those 
fishermen  ? — A.  I  do  not  supply  them  all ;  not  one-quarter  of  them.  I 
wish  I  could  supply  them  all. 

Q.  You  were  asked  whehther  the  cod  fishery  in  Newfoundland  could 
not  be  carried  on  witliout  going  there  for  bait.  I  suppose  you  don't 
know  the  extent  of  the  cod  fishery  on  the  Banks? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  at  random  when  you  say  that  they  could  carry 
on  all  the  cod  fishery  there. — A.  I  do  not  know  about  Newfouncllaii(i. 
I  only  know  they  sometimes  get  bait  from  us.  And  sometimes  they 
store  it  at  Canso. 

Q.  Do  you  undertake  to  say  that  the  Newfoundland  cod  fishery  could 
be  carried  on  without  squid  or  caplin  ?  Do  you,  of  your  own  knowl- 
edge, say  that? — A.  No ;  I  do  not  know  anything  about  it.  I  cannot 
certify  anything  about  that. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  You  know  that  some  American  vessels  fish  for  cod  without  going 
near  Newfoundland  for  bait? — A.  Yes;  plenty  of  them. 

Q.  There  are  a  number  you  say  that  get  their  bait  and  go  to  George's 
for  cod  fish  ? — A.  Yes  j  they  take  their  ice  from  here  and  go  right  baclc 
to  the  George's. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 
Q.  Where  are  the  George's  ? — A.  They  are  on  the  American  coast. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  They  are  farther  oft'  than  the  Newfoundland  Bank  ? — A.  No ;  I  do 
not  know  exactly  the  distance.    They  are  not  more  than  90  or  100  miles, 

Q.  How  far  is  it  from  you  to  the  Newfoundland  Banks  ? — A.  It  is  a 
long  way  oft". 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  These  American  vessels  that  go  to  fish  on  the  Banks  of  Newfound- 
land, the  Grand  Bank  i)articularly,  they  would  not  come  to  you  for  bait ! 
That  would  bo  out  of  their  course  ? — A.  No ;  they  would  not  come  un- 
less it  was  that  they  could  not  get  it  there.  Tiiey  prefer  taking  it  donu 
there.  I  have  heard  them  say  they  would  take  it  down  there  as  it  would 
not  spoil. 

Q.  You  say  that  several  vessels  have  come  to  you  to  get  ice  and  gone 
oft"  to  George's  to  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


697 


without  going 


srican  coast. 


et  ice  aud  goue 


No.  28. 

Daniel  Stuart,  of  Halifax  City,  hotel-keeper,  on  behalf  of  the  Gov- 
erument  of  her  Britaiiuic  Majesty,  sworu  aud  exaiuiued. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  What  is  the  name  of  the  hotel  you  keep? — A-uswor.  The 
Mansion  House. 

Q.  You  were  a  roaster  mariner  for  some  years? — A.  Twenty-three 
years. 

Q.  And  you  also  were  engaged  in  the  fishing  business? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  years  ?— A.  In  18G1,  18G2,  and  1863. 

Q,  What  vessels  were  they  ? — A.  The  Julia  Ann,  from  Portland,  in 
1801 ;  the  W.  H.  Rogers,  from  Portland,  in  18G2,  and  the  Northwester, 
of  Gloucester,  in  18G3. 

Q.  Were  there  any  other  vessels,  or  any  other  years,  that  you  were 
engaged  in  fishing? — A.  No. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  in  the  first  year,  18G1  ? — A.  Under  Cape 
George  and  along  that  shore. 

Q.  At  Margaree,  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  How  long  were  you  fishing  there  i — A.  Five  weeks. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  of  mackerel  did  you  catch  ? — A.  Five  hundred 
and  fifteen. 

Q.  In  the  next  year,  1802,  how  long  were  you  fishing  ? — A.  Seven 
weeks. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  the  tonnage  of  the  first  vessel  you  were  fishing 
in  was  ? — A.  1  could  not  rightly  say. 

Q.  Was  that  a  full  fare  that  you  got? — A.  Yes;  she  was  under  one 
hundred  tons,  I  should  judge,  considerably. 

Q.  You  got  a  full  fare  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  She  went  home  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  were  only  one  trip  that  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  next  year  how  long  were  you  out  ? — A.  Seven  weeks. 

Q  What  fare  did  you  get? — A.  Four  hundred  and  seventy  l)arrels. 

Q.  Was  that  a  full  fare  ? — A.  It  was  not,  but  we  went  home  with 
that. 

Q.  Yon  just  made  one  trip? — A.  Yes ;  it  was  a  fall  trip.  Next  year 
we  were  out  in  the  summer. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  out  ? — A.  I  was  pretty  near  four  weeks  in  the 
ve.«8el.    I  left  her  in  (Janso.     We  had  220  barrels  when  I  left  her. 

Q.  Now,  I  want  to  ask  you  where  you  caught  those  fish? — A.  We 
caught  in  three  days  227  barrels  on  Cape  George,  close  in  among  the 
Ashing  boats. 

Q.  In  the  last  vessel,  the  Northwester,  where  did  you  catch? — A.  We 
caught  ofl^'  shore  altogether. 

Q.  How  far  from  shore  did  you  catch  ? — A.  About  7  or  8  miles. 

Q.  What  vessel  are  you  speaking  of? — A.  The  Northwester. 

Q.  Now  the  other  vessel  ? — A.  The  other  vessel,  we  fished  inshore 
altogether ;  at  Cape  George,  Port  Hood,  aud  Margaree. 

Q.  Do  you  say  altogether  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  of  these  fish  were  caught  inshore  ? — A.  The  whole  of 
tbem.    The  whole  of  that  season's  fish. 

Q.  At  the  time  you  were  fishing,  did  you  see  other  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  ? — A.  Every  day  we  saw  more  or  less,  10,  15,  or  20 
sail  iill  the  time. 

Q.  Where  did  they  catch  their  fish  ? — A.  Close  to  us. 


698 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEBT   COMMISSION 


Q.  AlItogethorT— A.  Yes. 

Q,.  Dill  they  catch  altogether  within  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  shore! — A.  About  three-quarters  of  a  mile;  from 
that  to  a  mile. 

Q.  I  presume  you  were  acquaiuted  with  the  opinious  of  the  men  ?-. 
A.  Somewhat. 

Q.  You  conversed  with  them  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  would  those  vessels  come  into  the  bay  to  flsh  if  excluded 
from  fishing  within  three  miles? — A.  1  think  not. 

Q.  Why  not  1 — A.  Because  they  don't  get  any  flsh  worth  while  off 
shore.    They  have  to  come  inshore  to  get  them. 

Q.  You  have  stated  the  whole  of  your  experience  ! — A.  Yes. 


No.  29. 


The  Conference  met. 


August  22, 187; 


James  McLean,  merchant,  Letite,  parish  of  St.  George,  Charlotte 
County,  New  Brunswick,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  ber 
Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  You  reside  in  the  county  of  Charlotte,  in  the  Province  of 
New  Brunswick  ? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  near  the  head  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  On  the  north  shore  of  the  bay  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  parish  do  you  livef — A.  In  the  parish  of  St.  George. 

Q.  Are  you  engaged  in  the  fishing  business  ? — A.  I  trade  in  fisb. 

Q.  You  live  close  to  the  shore  of  the  bay  ? — A.  Close  to  the  shore. 

Q.  There  are  a  number  of  harbors  at  that  part  of  the  coast;  in  wiiich 
harbor  do  you  carry  on  business  ? — A.  We  have  a  store  at  Letite  and 
another  at  Black  Bay. 

Q.  Both  of  which  are  on  the  shores  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  the  business  ? — A.  About  17 
years. 

Q.  What  is  the  chief  fishery  carried  on  there  ? — A.  Our  chief  fisbery 
is  herring. 

Q.  You  are  acquinted  with  the  fishery  from  Lepreau  to  Letite  ?— A. 
Yes;  very  well. 

Q.  That  is  along  the  main-land  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Among  the  islands  lying  along  the  coast  are  Campobello,  Deer 
Island,  and  some  minor  islands  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Besides  Grand  Manan  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Deer  Island  and  the  smaller  islands  immediately  around  it  are 
known  as  the  parish  of  West  Isles  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Campobello  is  a  separate  parish  by  itself  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  so  is  Grand  Manan  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  are  all  within  the  limits  of  Charlotte  County  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  all  British  islands  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Will  you  explain  to  the  commission  how  the  herring  fishery  has 
been  conducted  ?  Take  the  last  ten  years  if  you  like. — A.  Our  chief  fish- 
ing commences  some  time  in  November,  and  extends  during  the  wiuter, 
in  fact  along  the  spring,  till  the  last  of  April  or  first  of  May. 

Q.  Y"ou  are  now  speaking  of  the  last  ten  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  are  the  herring  disposed  of  ? — A.  They  are  disposed  of  in  a 
frozen  state ;  they  are  caught  and  frozen  and  sold  to  the  people  who 
come  to  buy  them  in  vessels ;  some  are  taken  to  Eastport,  barreled  up, 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


699 


e  Province  of 


[■ound  it  are 


and  Rbipped  to  Boston  in  a  frozen  state ;  they  are  also  disposed  of  in 
our  Diiirkets,  at  !dt.  Andrew's  and  St.  Jobn,  and  are  sent  throughout  the 
Dominion. 

Q.  Do  you  put  up  in  salt  any  herring! — A.  Yes;  we  salt  some ;  if 
tiie  wtnitlier  is  not  very  cold,  freezing,  we  salt  them. 

Q.  What  other  fish  do  you  take  besides  herring  f — A.  Cod,  haddock, 
haice,  and  pollock. 

Q.  Take  the  herring;  are  they  all  caught  inshore  ? — A.  The  herring 
are  ull  caught  inshore. 

Q.  What  about  the  other  flsh  ? — A.  The  other  flsh  are  chiefly  taken 
inshore,  except  codfish,  some  of  which  are  caught  outside  of  three 
miles. 

Q.  This  applies  to  haddock,  hake,  and  pollock  T — A.  About  all  are 
caught  inshore. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  inshore  ? — A.  I  mean  within  three  miles  of 
the  shore. 

Q.  Are  they  caught  very  near  shore  as  a  rule? — A.  Sometimes  very 
near. 

Q.  On  the  main-land,  take  from  Lepreau  to  Letite,  how  many  vessels 
and  boats  are  employed  by  British  subjects  ? — A.  From  Lepreau  to  Letite 
I  should  think  there  are  between  50  and  GO  vessels. 

Q.  There  is  a  good  deal  of  boat  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Bow  many  boats  are  employed  ? — A.  I  should  think  there  would 
be  from  150  to  200  boats. 

Q.  Tliat  is  from  Lepreau  to  Letite? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  distance? — A.  About  21  miles.  I  think  there  are  150 
boats  at  least. 

Q.  Take  the  two  harbors  in  which  you  carry  on  business — Letite  and 
Black  Bay — what  will  be  the  number  of  boats  in  those  harbors  alone? — 
A.  About  70  boats. 

Q.  There  is  a  good  deal  of  business  done  as  you  go  in  the  direction 
of  Saint  John ;  take  Beaver  Harbor ;  how  many  boats  are  there  at  that 
harbor? — A.  A  large  number. 

Q.  It  is  an  excellent  fishing  ground? — A.  It  is  a  splendid  fishing 
ground. 

Q.  Are  there  as  many  at  Beaver  Harbor  as  at  Letite  and  Black  Bay  ? 
—A.  I  think  there  are. 

Q.  Then  how  many  boats  are  there  at  Lepreau  ? — A.  Not  a  large  num- 
ber there. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  at  Maoes  Bay  ? — A.  A  few  boats  there. 

Q.  There  is  a  place  called  Ueadman's  Cove  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  good  fishing  place? — A.  Yes;  a  few  boats  are  owned 
there.    There  is  also  Black's  Harbor. 

Q.  Will  not  the  number  of  boats  at  each  of  these  places  added  together 
give  more  than  160? — A.  I  give  you  the  number  at  150 ;  I  dare  say  there 
are  more.  I  don't  want  to  overdraw  it;  I  want  it  to  be  under  the  num- 
ber. 

Q.  You  are  sure  there  are  70  between  Letite  and  Black  Bay  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  You  are  equally  sure  there  are  as  many  in  Beaver  Harbor? — A. 
Yes;  I  think  nearly  as  many. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  are  only  10  additional  boats  as  far  up  as  Le- 
preau?—A.  It  may  be  200;  it  will  be  fully  up  to  150,  quite  likely  200. 

Q.  You  can  speak  positively  as  to  150,  and  there  are  quite  likely  to 
be  200  boats? — A.  I  have  no  hesitation  in  swearing  to  150. 

Q.  Take  the  vessels;  how  many  men  will  be  employed  on  each  vessel 
on  an  average  ? — A.  The  vessels  are  of  diflferent  tonnage.    Some  may 


i 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


I.I 


li£  |28 

^  lis  IIIIIM 


IIIM 

m 


1.8 


1.25  III  1.4 

IIJ4 

^ 

6"     — 

^ 

V 


vl 


»,  '> 


a*  -" 


•^ 


'V 


Hiotographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


m 


\ 


iV 


<^ 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  MSSO 

(716)  S72-4503 


6^ 


« 


700 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


have  as  mnny  as  from  6  and  8  to  10  men.  Our  vessels  for  herring.'  Ash- 
ing are  of  small  si/ '. 

Q.  How  many  men  do  the  boats  employ  T — A.  There  are  generally  two 
men  in  each  boat. 

Q.  I  presume  these  vessels  are  used  for  herring  fishin;;  only  in  the 
winter  season* — A.  For  the  herring  fishing  in  the  winter  season.  When 
the  herring  is  right  inshore,  the  natives  alo>,.g  the  shore  use  bouts. 
When  the  herring  move  off,  if  they  have  not  vessels,  they  csinnot  fol- 
low the  fish.  They  have  to  go  in  vessels  to  follow  the  herring,  perhaps 
ten  miles  along  the  shore  to  another  harbor. 

Q.  Before  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  in  1871,  how  did  you  deal  with 
the  fish  i  Did  the  Americans  come  in  as  much  after  the  abroi^iition  of 
the  Reciprocity  Treaty  and  before  they  commenced  under  the  Washing- 
ton Treaty? — A.  Not  catching  herrings. 

Q.  Did  they  do  so  after  1871  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tell  the  Commission  how  you  dealt  with  the  herring  before  187If 
— A.  Wo  dealt  with  them  as  we  do  now.  The  Americans  came  down 
and  bought  them ;  if  not,  we  loaded  a  vessel  ourselves  and  shipped 
them  frozen  to  New  York. 

Q.  There  was  no  duty  imposed? — A.  We  never  had  a  duty  charged 
on  frozen  herring  and  fresh  Ush. 

Qc  Wliat  was  the  duty  on  salted  herringbefore  the  date  of  the  Wash- 
ington Treaty? — A.  Half  a  cent  a  pound  right  through  or  $1  per  bar- 
rel, and  50  cents  a  quintal  on  dried  tish. 

Q.  Notwithstanding  that  duty,  you  shipped  largely  to  the  United 
States  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  did  not  make  any  difference  to  us,  duty  or  no  duty. 

Q.  Before  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  did  you  get  as  high  or  higlier  prices 
as  now  for  your  dried  fish  ? — A.  We  got  higher  prices  than  now,  a  good 
dc'd  higher  than  we  are  getting  this  season. 

Q.  You  made  more  money  after  paying  the  duty  than  you  do  now  ?— 
/.  Yea. 

Q.  8ince  the  Washington  Treaty  the  Americans  have  come  down  and 
fished  a  great  deal? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  the  fishing  grounds  in  your  locality  entirely  in  British  waters? 
— A.  Our  herring  fishery  is  altogether  in  British  waters — all  that  1  linow 
of;  I  don't  know  of  any  in  American  waters. 

Q.  It  is  altogether  within  the  tbreemde  limit  ? — A.  Altogether.  I 
don't  know  of  any  beyond  three  marine  miles  of  the  shore  not  withiu 
our  locality. 

Q  Do  you  think  the  Americans  fish  anywhere  for  herring  except  on 
the  coast  ? — A.  I  don't  think  so ;  not  in  our  neighborhood. 

Q.  And  so  with  regard  to  the  other  fish,  except  cod,  which  is  caught 
outside? — A.  A  great  many  of  the  cod  are  caught  inside  and  a  great 
many  outside  of  the  limits. 

Q.  You  put  the  cod  as  being  chiefly  caught  outside  the  limits?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  But  haddock,  hake,  and  pollack  are  all  inshore  fish? — A.  I  should 
say  chiefly  inshore  with  us. 

Q.  You  own  fishing- vessels  yourself? — A.  Yes;  and  supply  fisher- 
men. 

Q.  Do  you  fish  for  cod,  pollack,  and  haddock  as  well  as  herring?— A. 
Y'es. 

Q.  I'on  know  where  the  catch  is  made — that  it  is  all  inshore  ?— A. 
Principally.  I  don't  go  in  my  own  vessels,  but  I  know  from  the  state 
meuts  of  my  captains.  I  ktjep  the  run  of  thorn  aud  kuow  where  they 
are. 


AWARD   OP   THE   yiSHERY   C0MMI8SI0X. 


701 


Itoj'etber.    I 


Q.  Leaving  out  cod,  are  the  other  fish  you  have  mentioned  canjjht  in- 
Rliore  or  off  shore  ? — A.  Our  haddock,  hake,  and  poUack  are  all  inshore 

fish. 

y.  You  speak  from  you  own  experience  as  a  vessel  o w n er  ? — A.  Yes; 
from  my  own  experience. 

Q.  Can  yon  see  them  tishin;;  from  land  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  all  fish  within  the  three  miles? — A.  I  should  think  so. 

•}  lave  you  any  doubt  about  itf — A.  I  have  not  much  doubt  about 
it.    Tliey  may  go  a  little  outside ;  but  we  call  those  all  inshore  flsh. 

Q.  You  have  stated  the  number  of  British  vessels  aiul  boats  in  your 
locality;  what  is  about  the  number  of  Americans  who  have  come  there 
aunuaily  sin<!e  the  treaty? — A.  Do  you  take  the  county  of  Charlotte? 

Q.  Take  the  mainland. — A.  In  the  winter-time  we  are  outnumbered. 

Q.  TIow many  fish  in  the  winter-time? — A.  In  the  herring  tishingonour 
roast  in  winter  there  are  from  100  to  VJ5  American  vessels  tishing,  small 
aud  large. 

Q.  Tliat  is,  from  Lepreau  to  I.etite? — A.  Yes;  off  Beaver  Harbor, 
Black's  Harb»)r,  Black  Bay,  and  Lepreau. 

Q.  What  size  are  the  vessels  ? — A.  They  range  from  10  up  to  probably 
40  or  .")(>  tons. 

Q.  For  what  are  they  fishing  ? — A.  For  herring  chiefly ;  a  few  flsh  for 
haddock. 

Q.  Do  those  who  flsh  for  haddock  flsh  for  herring  as  well  ? — A.  No; 
tbey  are  generally  separate. 

Q.  How  many  come  down  for  haddock  flshing? — A.  Not  many  come 
dose  to  our  shore  for  haddock.  I  know  of  one  or  two  personally  ;  there 
may  bt^  more. 

Q.  All  the  rest  of  the  fleet  of  150  vessels  flsh  for  herring  ? — A.  Yes, 
of  the  100  or  125  vessels. 

Q.  Will  you  state  to  the  Commission  the  process  of  flshing,  what  the 
Americans  do  when  they  come  down  there  ? — A.  They  come  down  iu 
their  vessels.  They  frequent  our  harbors  in  blustering  weather,  and  in 
fine  weather  they  go  out  in  the  mortiing  and  set  their  nets.  They  have 
anchors  to  their  nets  and  large  warps,  and  set  a  gang  of  nets,  two  or 
four  nets,  to  a  boat.  The  nets  are  all  allowed  to  remain  out  all  tiight 
and  taken  up  in  the  morning,  if  it  is  not  windy.  If  it  is  too  windy  the 
vessels  remain  in  harbor,  and  the  nets  have  to  remain  in  the  water  un- 
til there  is  a  chance  to  get  them  taken  in.  Tiie  vessels  do  not  take  up 
the  nets,  the  boats  are  sent  after  them,  aiul  in  blustery  weather  it  is 
not  a  very  nice  job.  The  herring  is  taken  on  board  of  the  vessels. 
Sometimes,  if  there  is  a  large  catch,  the  men  take  the  herring  to  the 
beach  and  freeze  them  ;  if  there  is  only  a  small  catch,  they  freeze  them 
ou  deck,  but  they  cannot  freeze  the  flsh  so  well  on  deck  as  on  shore. 

Q.  As  a  rule,  I  believe  they  laiul  the  flsh  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  scrape  away  the  snow  and  lay  the  herring  on  the  ground  ? — 
A.  Yes,  and  let  them  freeze.  In  the  morning  they  take  the  herring  and 
sell  them  ;  there  are  buyers  always  in  the  harbor. 

Q.  These  vessels  which  receive  the  herring  as  soon  as  frozen  are  dif- 
ferent vessels? — A.  Yes ;  they  are  outside  of  the  1J5  I  mentioned. 

Q.  These  are  American  vessels  which  are  in  the  harbors  with  buyers 
on  board  ? — A.  Chiefly  American  vessels. 

Q.  The  herring  are  taken  ashore  frozen  and  then  taken  in  small  boats 
to  vessels  outside,  and  sold  to  buyers  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  I  suppose  when  those  vessels  are  loaded  and  leave,  their 
places  are  supplied  by  others  ? — A.  Yes. 


i 


702 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  The  business  is  carried  on  in  that  way  until,  in  tlic  S|>ring,  the 
flsbiu^-vessels  go  away  empty  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tbcy  have  sold  the  fish  as  they  caught  them!— A.  Yea ;  tlicy  dis. 
pose  of  tlie  herring  Just  in  tlie  same  way  as  our  own  vessels.  Some  ves- 
sels sell  what  they  catch  during  the  winter,  and  then  catch  a  load,  or 
part  of  a  load,  go  home,  and  sell  them.    As  a  rule  they  go  home  empty. 

Q.  Is  a  catch  of  fish  a  cash  article! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  cash  is  handed  over  to  the  seller  immediately  the  (IkIi  is  de- 
livered. They  pay  so  much  cash  per  100 ;  what  do  they  pay  for  herring'! 
— A.  It  is  according  to  the  season  and  the  scarcity.  They  generally 
start  at  the  tlrst  of  the  season  at  from  45  cents  to  50  cents,  and  at  the 
latter  part  of  the  season  they  go  down  to  45  cents,  40  cents,  33  cents, 
and  30  cents  per  100. 

Q.  Would  you  average  them  at  40  cents  all  round  ! — A.  They  woiiM 
go  at  very  nearly  that,  I  should  think. 

Q.  Without  the  privilege  of  lauding  and  putting  the  herring  nut  to 
freeze,  the  American  lishermen  couhl  not  very  well  carry  on  the  busi 
ness  ? — A.  It  would  be  a  little  awkward. 

Q.  You  say  they  could  freeze  only  small  quantities  on  deck  ?— A.  The 
herriug  must  be  kept  separate  and  turned  over ;  they  cannot  freeze  very 
well  when  lying  G  or  8  inches  deep.  They  must  get  the  herring  thor- 
oughly frozen — -just  like  ice. 

Q.  It  is  practically  impossible  to  freeze  them  in  that  way  on  deck 
unless  the  catch  is  very  small ! — A.  Unless  the  catch  is  very  small. 

Q.  It  is  much  more  convenient  to  land  ? — A.  Yes ;  with  large  quan- 
tities it  is  more  convenient  to  land. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  very  great  convenience  and  privilege  to  the  Americans 
to  be  allowed  to  do  so ! — A.  I  should  think  so ;  I  look  upon  it  as  such, 

Q.  The  Americans  themselves  consider  it  a  privilege  to  land  ?— A.  I 
suppose  so. 

Q.  Obviously  it  is  a  very  great  privilege  ? — A.  It  looks  that  way.  I 
know  that  all  our  tisherman  have  to  land  to  freeze  the  tisli,  and  the 
Americans  follow  the  same  methods.  There  is  no  difterence  l)et\veeu 
them  sit  all;  at  least  I  do  not  see  any  difference.  They  fish  iu  tlie  har- 
bor just  in  common  with  our  own  men. 

Q.  Betbre  the  Aniericans  came  there  it  was  the  rule,  I  think,  that  uo 
nets  should  be  left  set  in  the  day-time! — A.  That  is  our  law. 

Q.  And  there  is  a  very  good  reason  for  it  ? — A.  Yes.  The  reasons  for 
it  are  diverse.  When  a  great  many  fishermen  art-  there,  if  they  leave 
their  nets  set  in  the  day-time  it  scares  the  herring  away.  There  will  be 
at  such  a  time  probably  20  or  30  tiers  of  nets,  and  if  they  are  left  iu  the 
water  during  the  day,  this  frightens  the  fish  awaj'. 

Q.  Before  the  Americans  came  in  there  at  all,  I  understand  that  the 
nets  were  not  left  down  in  tl"> day-time? — A.  Yes;  the  reason  why  was, 
that  if  the  nets  are  so  left  set  it  scares  the  herring  out  of  the  harbor. 

Q.  Because  the  fish  can  see  the  nets  in  the  day-time! — A.  Yes.  Tlicy 
will  not  mesh  in  the  day  time,  but  they  will  during  the  night. 

Q.  They  do  not  catch  themselves  in  the  nets  during  the  day?— A. 
No ;  nor  on  moonlight  nights. 

Q.  The  night  is  the  proper  time  to  put  out  nets  to  catch  herring?— A. 
Yes ;  and  the  darker  the  night  the  better. 

Q.  In  fact,  the  regulations  were  such  that  the  fishermen  had  no  right 
to  keep  their  nets  down  iii  the  day-time,  and  none  were  to  be  set  from 
sundown  on  Sunday  night  until  sunrise  ou  Monday  morning  ? — A.I 
believe  that  such  was  the  case. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


703 


Q.  And  tlie  Americans  have  come  iu  and  changed  the  practice  T — A. 
Tlu'y  fish  every  day. 

Q.  They  keep  their  nets  down  all  day? — A.  Yes;  and  all  day  Sun- 
day. 

Q.  Do  they  take  their  nets  up  on  Sunday  ? — A.  Sometimes  they  do 

niid  sometimes  they  do  not;  this  is  done  just  as  it  suits  themselves. 

Q.  They  fish  Sunday  and  Saturday  alike  f — A.  I  do  not  see  that  they 
make  any  difference. 

Q,  What  is  the  effect  of  that  kind  of  fishin;;  on  the  fish  ? — A.  It 
drives  the  Iierring  from  right  close  inshore  to  one  and  a  half  miles  and 
two  miles  off  shore — out  of  our  harbors  into  deeper  water. 

Q.  Has  the  Ameiican  system  of  fishing  been  destructive  to  these 
fisiieries? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Explain. — A.  For  one  thing,  they  set  rather  too  many  nets.  If 
there  is  a  large  school  of  fish,  they  set  so  many  nets  that  they  cannot 
take  proper  care  of  them  all;  and  if  nets  are  allowed  to  remain  long  in 
the  water  when  full,  they  sink  after  a  certain  time  to  the  bottom  ;  and 
if  they  are  so  allowed  to  remain  for  34  to  48  hours  the  fish  become 
spoiled,  and  they  corrupt  the  bottom  of  the  fishing-grounds. 

Q.  When  they  sink  to  thebottom,  the  herring  and  uets  are  all  lost? — 
A.  Generally  this  is  the  case.  Sometimes  the  nets  are  recovered  after 
two  or  three  days  full  of  halt-decomposed  herring.  The  nets  are  not 
spoiled,  but  the  herring  are,  and  the  bottom  is  corrupted.  The  herring 
die  a  short  time — a  few  minutes— after  being  caught  in  the  net. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  all  this  on  the  fishing-grounds  ? — A.  They 
are  corrupted,  and  the  herring  shun  the  spot;  they  will  not  frequeut 
these  grounds  at  all,  but  keep  farther  out. 

Q.  Is  the  herring  spawing  ground  near  your  coast  ? — A.  Herring  ap- 
pear to  spawn  all  the  year;  we  fiud  that  this  is  the  case  iu  all  our  har- 
bors. 

Q.  I  believe  that  their  chief  spawning-time  extends  from  about  the 
middle  of  July  to  the  middle  of  September? — A.  It  extends  from  the 
l.jth  of  July  to  the  15th  of  October. 

Q.  That  is  what  is  called  the  close  season  ? — A.  Y'^es. 

Q.  But  you  think  some  spawn  all  the  year  round  ? — A.  I  have  uo 
doubt  of  it. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  herring  spawn  in  the  winter  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where? — A.  In  the  herring  in  the  boats  on  the  coast. 

Q.  .Showing  that  they  were  ready  to  spawn  ? — A.  Yes.  I  have  made 
inquiries  of  the  fishermen  about  it,  and  one  man  in  St.  Andrew's  Bay 
told  me  that  after  a  net  was  sunk  for  ten  or  twelve  days  it  would  be  all 
covered  with  spawn.  I  could  rely  upon  this  person.  Tlie  spawn  become 
attaclu'd  to  the  net  from  the  bottom.  At  the  time  we  were  trying  to 
have  St.  Andrew's  Bay  set  off  as  a  spawning  ground.  St.  Andrew's 
Bay  empties  into  the  IBay  of  Passanuuiuoddy. 

Q.  It  is  sometimes  called  the  inner  bay  of  Passamaquoddy  ? — A.  I 
suppose  that  it  is. 

Q.  Was  not  that  at  one  time  a  great  herring  ground  ? — A.  It  was 
once  a  splendid  fishing  ground. 

Q.  Since  the  negotiation  of  the  Washington  Treatj',  and  since  the 
Americans  have  fished  there,  what  has  become  of  it  ? — A.  It  has  been 
destroyed  within  the  last  two  years;  it  is  now  no  good  whatever. 

Q.  How  did  the  Americans  destroy  it  ? — A.  By  bringing  too  many 
vessels  there  and  by  setting  too  many  nets.  The  water  is  quite  rough 
there  at  times,  the  wind  blowing  heavily  in  from  the  northwest.  North- 
west winds  prevail  in  winter,  and  three  years  ago  we  had  a  very  hard 


704 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISnERY  COMMISSION. 


winter.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  wind,  and  a  very  great  mimberof 
nets  were  set.  Within  a  few  hours  of  tlieir  being  set,  at  niglit,  tlicv 
would  be  full  of  herring,  and  perhaps  they  were  not  drawn  for  a  week 
or  ten  days,  and  perliaps  never;  and  when  this  was  done,  they  were 
found  full  of  rotten  and  corrupt  herring.  Many  nets  were  allow  cii  to  lay 
there,  and  tliis  altogether  destroyed  these  fishing  grounds.  Witliin  tlie 
last  two  years  we  have  got  no  herring  at  all  there  worth  speakiii<ror 
taking  notice  of. 

Q.  This  has  been  done  by  American  fishermen  T — A.  Not  altogether; 
the  American  fishermen  helpe<l  to  do  it ;  a  great  many  Americans  were 
concerned  in  it,  but  our  fishermen  were  in  it  too. 

Q.  Were  your  fishermen  driven  to  it  in  order  to  compete  with  the 
Americans? — A.  They  have  to  do  it;  they  must  do  it. 

Q.  Another  mode  of  fishing — trawling — is  practiced  with  larger  Bsh, 
such  as  i)ollack,  haddock,  &c. ;  explain  the  efi'ect  of  it. — A.  Triiwlin;; 
has  been  pursued,  as  I  understand  it,  during  the  last  six  or  seven  years. 

Q.  That  is,  since  the  ratification  of  the  Washington  Treaty? — A.  Yes; 
it  began  about  six  years  ago.  Our  flshermen  commenced  to  trawl  with 
600  hooks,  but  the  number  has  gradually  crept  up,  and  this  year  they 
trawl  with  from  1,500  to  2,000  hooks.  We  found  after  the  first  one  or 
two  years'  experience  at  it  that  on  the  ground  where  we  had  trawled 
one  year  no  fish  were  to  be  got  the  next  year ;  then  we  would  have  to 
go  half  a  mile  or  so  further  out.  One  of  the  reasons  for  the  disaitpear- 
ance  of  the  fish  is  the  throwing  over  of  the  gurry  there. 

Q.  Gurry  is  the  oflFal  of  the  fish  ? — A.  Yes.  The  skate,  a  fish  that 
lies  on  the  bottom,  eats  this  offal ;  but  tliese  lines  destroy  about  all  these 
fish  and  leave  nothing  to  eat  up  the  ottal. 

Q.  How  is  this  done  ? — A.  The  hooks  lay  right  on  the  bottom,  ami 
the  skate,  whicli  act  as  scavengers,  also  lay  right  on  the  bottom,  and  as 
these  hooks  lie  close  to  them,  they  swallow  the  bait  lazily  and  are 
drowned. 

Q.  The  same  statement  holds  good  with  regard  to  the  mother  fish  ?— 
A.  The  mother  fish  are  stupid  about  the  time  of  spawning,  and  then 
lie  on  the  bottom  ;  and  they  take  hold  of  these  trawling  hooks.  These 
books  are  small;  a  great  dual  smaller  thai  the  hand-line  hook,  which  is 
double  their  size.  The  hand-line  fisherman  lets  his  line  down,  and  as 
soon  as  he  strikes  the  bottom  with  his  lead,  he  hauls  the  line  up  about 
six  feet. 

Q.  How  far  is  the  lead  placed  above  the  hook  ? — A.  About  a  futhom. 
He  hauls  the  line  up  so  as  to  have  the  bait  clear  of  the  bottom  an«l  clean; 
and  so  the  mother  fish  hardly  ever  pay  attention  to  it.  They  do  not 
want  to  catch  these  fish,  but  the  trawling  hooks  catch  everytliiii;,',  in- 
cluding little  fish  and  mother  fish. 

Q.  WMien  they  are  hauled  up,  what  is  the  result  ? — A.  A  great  many 
large  fish  have  swallowed  the  smaller  hooks,  and  their  mouths  beiii;{  kept 
open  are  drowned.  They  drop  ott  the  hooks  dead  to  the  bottom,  and 
the  fishermen  tell  me  they  believe  that  one-half  of  the  fish  that  they 
kill  on  the  trawls  they  do  not  get. 

Q.  This  is  in  addition  to  the  taking  of  small  fish,  which  are  useless  to 
them?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  no  skate  and  pollock,  &c.,  taken  ?— A.  Yes ;  but  skate  are  no 
good  save  to  act  as  cleaners  of  the  grounds  and  eat  up  the  ottal. 

Q.  The  Americans  introduced  this  system  of  trawl-fishing? — A.  Yes; 
I  believe  they  got  it  up. 

Q.  What  is  the  eflect  of  this  trawling  on  the  bottom,  on  marine  weeds 
and  other  substances  on  which  the  fish  feed  ? — A.  It  clears  the  grouiuls 


AWARD   OF   THE   FZSHEEY   COMMISSION. 


705 


npete  with  the 


are  useless  to 


of  all  weeds  and  vefjetation,  aud  in  faut  of  about  everything  on  them. 
It  scrapes  the  ground  clean  aud  brings  up  all  kinds  of  substances,  owing 
to  tlie  iivmt  number  of  the  liooks. 

Q.  The  practical  result  of  trawling  is,  that  one-half  of  the  fish  they 
do  uot  catch  but  kill,  and  the  fishermen  have  to  move  off  to  other 
grounds?- A.  That  is  the  consequence  of  it. 

Q.  And  it  destroys  the  food  of  the  fish  besides — such  as  marine 
plants  ?— A.  O,  yes ;  we  sometimes  catch  fish  with  their  entrails  full  of 
luariue  stuff  which  comes  from  the  bottom. 

Q.  What  would  you  say  would  be  the  average  yearly  value  of  the  fish 
caught  by  British  subjects  in  Charlotte  Cormty,  from  Lepreau  to  Letite  T 
What  number  of  herring  is  taken  by  each  man  on  the  average  T — A.  It 
would  l)e  pretty  hard  to  give  that.  They  vary  a  good  deal.  I  should 
think  that  in  a  fair  season  a  man  should  average  at  least  40,000.  If  he 
does  not  do  that  he  will  do  a  very  poor  winter's  work. 

Q.  Is  it  your  opinion  that  each  man  must  do  that  and  more  i — A.  Yes, 
iiDd  more.    If  he  does  uot  do  so  he  cannot  live  and  pay  his  bills. 

Q.  That  is  exclusive  of  other  fish  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Judging  from  your  practical  knowledge  of  the  fishery,  being  aa 
owner  of  fishing-vessels,  and  dealing  with  the  men  who  fish  as  you  do, 
what  do  you  say,  at  a  low  figure,  would  be  the  value  of  the  fisheries  and 
the  actual  worth  of  the  fish  caught  by  British  subjects  between  the 
imints  you  mention,  from  Lepreau  to  Letite  ?  What  would  be  a  fair 
uverajre  value  from  1871  ? — A.  I  should  estimate  the  quantity  for  Char- 
lotte Couaty  and  the  adjoining  islands.  We  all  fish,  and  it  would  be 
difficult  to  separate  the  two. 

Q.  You  are  acquainted  with  the  catch  of  the  islands  as  well  ? — A.  Yes  j 
1  visit  Grand  Manau  Island  occasionally,  aud  the  adjoining  islands 
often. 

Q.  What  is  the  ca1<ch  of  the  whole  ? — A.  A  low  estimate  for  our  fishery 
would  be  $1,000,000  Tor  each  year. 

Q.  For  British  subjwcts  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  a  low  estimate  1 — A.  Yes ;  I  think  I  am  under  the  mark ; 
iu  tact,  I  have  uo  doubt  of  it  at  all. 

Q.  And  it  may  be  a  good  deal  more  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  not  a  shadow  of  a  doubt  that  it  is  at  least  a  million  1 — 
A.  No. 

Q.  Aud  our  American  friends  take  a  considerable  amount  more  ? — A. 
They  take  as  many. 

Q  They  have  more  men  and  more  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  take  at  least  as  much  ? — A.  Yes ;  fully  as  much  as  we 
do,  if  not  more. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  that  they  do  take  more  ? — A.  I  believe  that 
tbey  take  more. 

Q.  You  have  no  doubt  of  it  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  That  would  make  a  million  dollars'  worth  taken  by  them  ? — A. 
They  must  take  a  million  dollars'  worth. 

Q.  That  is  at  the  very  least  calculation? — A.  Yes;  I  put  it  down  as 
low  as  possible  to  be  safe  and  sure. 

Q.  They  take  at  least  as  much  as  we  dof — A.  I  believe  that  they 
take  more,  aud  they  take  as  much  anyway. 

Q.  The  American  catch,  as  well  as  our  own,  on  which  you  place  an 
estimate  of  a  million  dollars  iu  value,  is  taken  within  three  miles  of  the 
shore  ?— A.  Yes.    I  am  confining  myself  to  within  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Do  many  American  vessels  come  down  there  for  bait  ? — A.  A  good 
many  do. 
45  F 


706 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  You  have  stated  that  the  proper  season  for  herring  was  from  No- 
vember to  March  and  April ;  do  the  Americans  confine  theuiselves  to 
that  season,  or  do  they  fish  during  the  summer  months? — A.  They  tish 
during  the  summer  in  common  with  our  fishermen.  The  berriii),'  are 
about  that  time  on  our  shore,  and  about  May  they  leave  it.  Then  flsli- 
ing  tor  herring  as  a  business  is  discontinued,  and  we  go  for  pollock,  and 
cod,  and  haddock.  In  the  spring,  right  on  our  main  shore,  for  about 
three  or  four  weeks,  there  is  not  much  fishing  to  speak  of;  this  is  a  kind 
of  rest,  though  tlie  fish  apparently  play  in  at  the  time.  The  men  then  go 
after  hake  and  haddock. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  come  down  for  them  ! — A.  Yes;  just  the  same 
as  our  own  men.    I  do  not  see  any  difference  between  them. 

Q.  And  they  are  fishing  there  now? — A.  Yes,  every  day. 

Q.  In  large  numbers? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  is  the  flalierj'  this  year  ? — A.  It  is  very  good  indeed. 

Q.  For  pollock  f — A.  The  pollock  fishing  is  a  little  extra  this  year. 

Q.  Point  out  Quoddy  Itiver;  is  not  the  catch  of  pollock  there  larjje!— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  No  fish  are  caught  in  American  waters  in  that  quarter  at  all?- 
A.  The  fishermen  do  not  fish  in  American  waters;  that  is,  they  do  not 
make  a  business  of  it.    I  have  never  seen  them  do  so. 

Q.  What  is  between  the  islands  is  what  is  commonly  called  the  Quoddy 
Biver,  which  is  a  strong  sea  current? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  are  numerous  eddies  in  it,  and  in  them  you  get  the  pol- 
lock ? — A.  Yes ;  when  the  tide  is  running,  we  fish  on  what  is  culled  the 
slack. 

Q.  There  is  an  extra  catch  of  pollock  this  year? — A.  I  was  talking  to 
several  persons  there  and  they  informed  me  that  from  800  to  l,UiJ<J 
quintals  of  pollock  were  caught  daily. 

Q.  That  is  between  these  islands  ? — A.  All  this  was  caught  iu  British 
waters. 

Q.  And  is  not  more  than  half  of  these  fish  taken  by  Americans  ?— A, 
We  estimate  that  fully  one-half  is  so  taken. 

Q.  What  are  pollock  worth  a  quintal  ? — A.  The  price  is  very  low  at 
present ;  it  ranges  from  $1.25  to  $1.50  a  quintal. 

Q.  This  is  an  exceptiouably  low  year  as  regards  price!— A.  Yes. 
Last  year  we  paid  $2.75  and  $3  a  quintal. 

Q.  Along  the  coast  of  Maine,  say  from  Eastport  westward,  there 
lives  a  large  population  who  flsh  entirely  in  our  waters?— A.  Yes. 
They  came  from  Lubec,  Perry,  Pembroke,  and  Eastport,  and  along  by 
Cutler,  and  westward  of  Lubec,  and  still  further  away  than  that. 

Q.  And  from  Machias  ? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  They  all  come  and  flsh  in  our  waters  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  not  iu  their  own  waters  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  fishing 
within  the  three-mile  limit  in  their  waters. 

Q.  Within  three  miles  of  their  coast,  there  is  no  fishing  of  which  you 
are  aware  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  this  is  a  population  that  lives  by  fishing  alone  ? — A.  From 
Eastport  and  along  there,  they  f'>lIow  fishing  for  a  livelihood  beyond 
question. 

Q.  So  that  a  large  body  of  American  fishermen  gain  their  whole  live- 
lihood in  our  waters  ? — A.  Yes.    Those  that  flsh  there  do. 

Q.  What  would  you  say  is  the  quantity  of  herring  alone  that  conies 
to  Eastport  in  the  course  of  the  season ;  how  many  millions  go  to  that 
small  town  during  this  period  ? — A.  I  should  think,  at  the  least  calcula- 
tion, from  7  to  10  miUioDS. 


AWAHD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


707 


Q.  All  caught  in  our  owu  waters  f — A.  Yes.  A  few  might  be  caught 
ootaide  of  theni. 

Q.  And  your  estimate  is  rather  under  than  over  the  mark? — A.  Yes. 
This  is  the  way  in  which  I  want  to  put  my  estimates. 

Q.  Jud(;ing  from  your  practical  acquaintance  with  the  fishery,  about 
vhat  profit  on  the  $l,(H)(),OOU  you  mentioned  a>t  having  l)een  taken  in 
value  each  year  out  of  our  waters,  would  be  actually  made  by  the  Ameri- 
can tisiiermeii,  putting  it  down  at  a  U)W  estimate  f — A.  That  is  a  pretty 
bard  (jiiestion  to  answer.  When  we  supply  the  tishing  vessels,  we  tind 
the  provisions,  lines,  hooks,  nets,  &c.,  and  give  ttie  men  one-half  of  the 
eatoli.  Tliey  have  nothing  to  find,  while  on  board,  save  their  clothing; 
or  we  <!harter  the  vessel  for  one  seventh  of  the  catch  in  fish  or  in  value, 
and  the  men  And  their  provisions,  salt,  &c. 

Q.  Putting  it  at  a  low  estimate,  what  would  yon  say  would  be  the 
profit  they  would  make  on  the  average  from  year  to  year  T — A.  1  think 
tiiey  ought  to  make  one-quarter  or  somewhere  in  that  neighborhood. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  low  estimate  ? — A.  1  do  not  know  but  what  it  is,  but 
1  ()o  not  know  as  it  is,  taking  one  year  with  another.  I  think  it  is 
alH)iit  right.  I  would  not  like  to  state  it  any  higher ;  it  is  an  expensive 
Imsitiess. 

Q.  If  this  treaty  was  at  an  end  and  the  Americans  kept  out,  would  it 
be  better  for  lirit'sh  fishermen  ? — A.  I  think  so.  That  was  my  experi- 
ence prior  to  the  treaty ;  there  was  such  a  tremendous  number  of  Ameri- 
eaiis  fishing  in  our  waters  that  it  was  better  when  they  did  not  have 
tiie  right  to  fish  in  our  waters.  We  then  had  better  times  and  got  more 
tisii,  anil  couhl  aflbrd  to  pay  the  duty. 

Q.  This  was  the  case  in  your  neighborhood  when  a  duty  was  im- 
posed?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  then  you  had  the  same  privileges  as  now  with  regard  to  the 
sending  of  fresh  fish  free  into  the  American  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  the  Americans  were  kept  out  of  our  waters  altogether,  and  you 
\m\  the  privilege  of  sending  fresh  fish  into  their  market  free,  would  it 
not  be  vastly  better  for  you  than  now  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  is  no  doubt  about  that  f — A.  None  whatever. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  place  where  the  Americans  can  get  their  her- 
rinu  in  the  spring  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where? — A.  I  know  that  they  procure  herring  down  here  in 
Nova  Scotia  in  the  winter  time  at  Prospect  and  Halifax,  and  that  they 
goto  Newfoundland  for  them. 

Q.  Hut  there  is  no  other  [)lace  where  they  may  go  for  them,  to  your 
knowledge? — A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  other  place  during  the  winter. 

Q.  You  think  that  we  have  tolerably  safe  fishing  from  November  in 
tlie  winter  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  have  goo<l  harbors. 

Q.  Land-locked  harbors  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  Americans  come  down  and  buy  herring  for  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  ? — A.  Principally  in  the  spring. 

Q.  Does  not  the  whole  Gloucester  fleet  come  down  for  bait  when 
going  to  fish  on  the  Banks,  or  George's  Banks,  and  the  Banks  of  New- 
foundland ? — A.  A  number  do.  I  should  think  that  from  75  to  100  sail, 
large  vessels,  come  down  there  generally  every  spring. 

Q.  For  bait  alone  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  catch  or  buy  it  f — A.  They  generally  buy  it. 

Q.  Do  they  buy  or  catch  about  Grand  Manan  Island  ? — A.  The  re- 
port from  several  there  is  that  they  generally  catch  it  there. 

Q.  And  with  you  they  generally  buy  it ! — A.  Yes. 


708 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q  And  somutimes  they  catch  it  f — A.  Tes ;  thej  have  that  privilege. 
If  they  cau  buy  it  cheaper  they  do  so. 

Q.  Soas  not  to  waste  time  T — A.  Yes.  We  generally  prefer  to  liny  bait 
for  our  own  vessels  iu  the  spring. 

Q.  If  you  are  sending  vessels  to  the  Banks,  you  prefer  to  buy  the 
bait  and  send  them  right  off? — A.  Yes ;  that  is  it  exactly. 

Q.  In  oonsequence  of  the  fishery  regulations  for  the  last  H  or  1(1  yi-arR, 
have  you  found  that  herring  or  other  tlsh  have  with  you  iiicrcuMed  iu 
number  ? — A.  The  herring,  since  their  spawn  has  been  protectin),  have 
increased  wonderfully. 

Q.  Where  are  their  chief  spawning-grounds  ? — A.  Off  the  southern 
head  of  Grand  Mauiin  Island. 

Q.  That  is  their  great  spawning-ground  for  the  Bay  of  Fuiulv  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  If  that  is  destroyed,  what  will  become  of  the  herring  flsbery  ?— A. 
It  will  be  ruined. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  it  has  beon  meddled  with  by  the  American 
fishermen,  in  spite  of  the  regulations  and  attempts  made  to  prevent  it  ? 
— A.  Yes ;  this  has  been  often  the  case. 

Q.  They  lie  off  and  come  in  at  night  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  spite  of  efforts  made  to  protect  the  grounds  they  come  in  f— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  It  requires  a  cruiser  to  keep  them  off? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  thu  Dominion,  within  the  last  eight  or  ten 
years,  has  gone  to  large  expense  to  protect  the  fishery  all  along  the 
coast  ? — A.  I  have  so  understood. 

Q.  Who  is  tie  warden  at  Grand  Maimn  Island? — A.  Walter  Mc 
Laughliu. 

Q.  And  at  Deer  Island  ? — A.  James  M.  Lord. 

Q.  These  men  look  after  the  fishery  grounds  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  iu  spite  of  all  they  can  do  the  American  fisherman  will  come 
in  ?— A.  Yes ;  that  is  what  I  understand  to  be  the  case. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  How  many  years  did  you  state  that  you  had  been  in  the  business 
of  trading  ?— A.  About  17. 

Q.  And  how  far  are  your  two  stores  from  each  other? — A.  About  two 
miles  by  land. 

Q.  And  by  water  ? — A.  Between  three  and  four  miles. 

Q.  How  large  is  the  village  where  you  reside  ? — A.  It  contains  from 
70  to  80  rate- payers. 

Q.  And  how  many  inhabitants  ? — A.  From  300  to  350. 

Q.  That  is  St.  George  ? — A.  No.  It  is  Letite,  iu  the  parish  of  St. 
George. 

Q.  How  many  inhabitants  are  there  in  the  village  in  which  yonr 
other  store  is  situated  ? — A.  Nearly  400 ;  and  I  suppose  there  are  alwut 
80  ratepayers. 

Q.  In  these  two  villages  live  about  700  people  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  live  in  the  whole  parish  of  St.  George  ? — A.  I  cannot 
give  the  exact  figure.  The  population  of  the  county  of  Charlotte  is 
25,000, 1  think. 

Q.  What  is  its  area  ? — A.  The  county  is  about  50  miles  long ;  it  is  ex- 
tensive. 

Q.  It  runs  back  a  considerable  distance  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  near  Fredericton  does  it  run? — A.  It  is  some  distance  from 
Fredericton. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   C0MMI8HI0N. 


709 


V  comp  in  ?— A. 


A..  Walter  Mc- 


rmau  will  come 


t  cou tains  from 


loug ;  it  is  ex- 


Q.  l8  the  amount  of  businens  yon  do  about  the  name  from  year  to 
vearf  H'-w  it  been  diminishing;  or  increatiing  in  these  two  8tore8f — A. 
It  baH  (liininiMbud  Home  within  the  lant  year  or  so. 

Q.  When  was  it  the  hirgest  f — A.  AI)ont  four  years  ago. 

Q.  About  how  nincb  business  did  you  then  do  f — A.  My  brother  and 
I  do  not  take  stock,  but  we  would  estimate  the  busine*is  for  the  year  at 
between  $.SO,0(»U  and  $  1U4),U()U. 

Q.  For  the  two  stores  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  your  business  consists  in  buying  and  selling  tlsh  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  pay  for  a  good  many  (Ish  in  goods  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tlien  your  business  is  almost  wholly  done  in  connection  with  the 
boat-tishing  ?— A.  Y'es. 

Q.  How  many  men  would  there  be  in  a  boat  f — A.  In  the  small  boats, 
two. 

(}.  Tiiese  would  deal  with  you  t — A.  Yes. 

(].  Did  you  say  you  had  fishing  vessels  I — A.  Wo  own  shares  in  some 
oftbi'Hi. 

Q.  What  is  their  size  t — A.  They  are  quite  small ;  they  range  from 
six  to  about  sixteen  and  twenty  tons. 

Q.  In  how  many  vessels  do  you  own  shares  f — A.  In  four. 

Q.  Do  you  handle  the  catch  of  the  vessels — perimps  that  is  your  chief 
reason  tor  investing  in  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  sell  goods  for  cash  I — A.  Yes. 

g.  To  what  extent  ?— A.  We  handle  from  $50,000  to  $60,000  worth  of 
tisli  a  year. 

Q.  And  the  remaining  $20,000  or  $30,000  of  your  business  is  done  for 
cash  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  of  this  $({0,000  is  represented  by  herring  J — A.  We  have 
not  handled  a  great  many  herring  of  late  years.  The  Americans  come 
in  and  buy  them  up ;  and  we  do  not  bother  with  them. 

Q.  W^hat  is  the  fish  which  you  principally  handle  ? — A.  Haddock, 
hake,  cod,  and  pollock.     We  handle  a  good  many  pollock. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  the  pollock  ? — A.  We  8hi|)  some  to  Portland 
and  we  sell  some  in  the  Dominion. 

Q.  How  do  you  cure  them  ? — A.  We  salt  and  dry  them. 

Q.  Like  cod  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Pollock  is  inferior  to  cod  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Vou  have  no  market  for  pollock  in  the  United  States  f — A.  We 
have  some  market  for  it  there. 

Q.  Where! — A.  Principally  at  Portland. 

Q.  But  you  have  no  market  for  consumption  there  T — A.  I  do  not 
kiiuw  whether  they  consume  them  or  not. 

Q.  Is  not  a  good  deal  of  pollock  shi|»ped  direct  from  the  province  to 
the  West  Indies  I — A.  No. 

Q.  Where  do  the  bake  go  f — A.  The  hake  and  haddock  go  to  the 
West  Indies. 

Q.  Do  you  sell  them  to  the  Americans  or  ship  them  ? — A.  We  sell 
them  chietiy  at  Yarmouth,  N.  S. 

Q.  And  they  are  shipped  thence  f — A.  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  price  of  herring  is  now  very 
iowf—A.  The  price  of  pollock  is  very  low. 

Q.  And  herring  too  f — A.  I  do  not  think  I  said  so  with  reference  to 
herring. 

Q.  Take  smoked  herring  ! — A.  They  are  very  low  in  price. 

Q.  Do  you  do  much  of  a  trade  in  smoked  herring  ! — A.  No. 

Q>  Uow  do  you  get  them  ? — A.  In  boxes. 


710 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Of  whom  f — A.  The  flshermen  who  Rrooke  tliem. 

Q.  What  are  they  worth  a  l)ox  ? — A.  About  17  oent8. 

Q.  How  many  does  a  box  holdf — A.  About  70.  These  nro  a  Hmull 
herring. 

Q.  Ih  not  a  larger  herrinj;  oau);ht  in  your  nei);hborhoo(l  ? — A.  Yex. 

Q.  How  is  it  BoUl  f — A.  By  the  hundred  or  by  the  barrel. 

Q.  Wb.it  do  these  sell  for  by  the  hundred  f — A.  From  3U  to  '>()  cents- 
and  sometimes  for  more. 

Q.  How  large  are  they  f — A.  They  are  from  12  to  13  inche.s  Ioiik,  I 
should  think. 

Q.  How  many  of  them  are  there  in  a  barrel  f — A.  1  think  about  'm. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  herrin;^  taken  in  your  vicinity  goes  to  the 
United  States  f — A.  I  think  three  ({uarters. 

Q.  Where  does  the  remainder  go? — A.  It  is  sent  to  Bt.  John's,  through 
the  Dominion,  and  all  around. 

Q.  To  what  do  you  attribute  the  low  price  of  herring  ? — A.  I  think 
that  too  many  are  caught. 

Q.  Is  there  any  diminution  in  the  supply  7 — A.  I  do  not  think  su. 

Q.  They  are  superabundant  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Has  not  the  disposition  to  eat  smoked  herring  fallen  off  f— A.  I 
cannot  say. 

Q.  Do  you  not  happen  to  know  that  they  are  less  eaten  than  they 
used  to  be  I — A.  No. 

Q.  Are  the  herring  taken  in  the  winter  and  frozen  used  for  food  and 
bait? — A.  They  are  used  chiefly  for  food. 

Q.  How  are  they  sent  from  this  place  to  the  United  States?— A. 
Chiefly  in  American  vessels.    They  come  down  and  buy  them  in  bulk. 

Q.  In  pretty  large  quantities?— A.  They  take  from  loO,(KM>  to  400,(i0() 
in  a  vessel. 

Q.  During  what  months  ? — A.  They  commence  to  come  as  soon  as 
the  weather  is  severe  enough  to  freeze  the  herring  well,  and  thev  con- 
tinue to  come  until  the  freezing  weather  is  over.  I  think  that  these  res 
sels  are  occupied  in  Ashing  during  the  summer. 

Q.  These  are  not  taken  wholly  for  bait  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  so.  They 
are  taken  in  full  cargoes. 

Q.  And  they  go  back  to  the  States  and  sell  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  would  be  the  nearest  market  town  for  herring  in  <iuantities 
in  case  you  did  not  sell  them  to  these  vessels  ? — A.  There  is  Eastport, 
Saint  Andrew's,  and  Saint  John's.  Kastport  is  about  10  miles  from 
Saint  Andrew's,  which  is  in  British  territory.  Eastport  is  a  small  town 
containing  about  8,000  or  9,000  people. 

Q.  You  do  not  really  mean  8,000  or  9,000? — A.  I  cannot  give  you  the 
exact  population.  It  is  quite  a  small  town.  Its  population  is  probably 
a  couple  of  thousand. 

Q.  Do  you  send  the  most  to  Saint  Andrew's  or  Eastport  ? — A.  We 
send  the  most  to  Eastport. 

Q.  And  a  good  deal  the  most? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Very  many  more  than  either  to  Saint  John's,  N.  B.,  or  Saint 
Andrew's  ? — A.  Eastport  merchants'  vessels  come  down  and  buy  the  tisb, 
take  them  back  and  ship  them. 

Q.  If  these  vessels  do  not  come  down  you  say  that  you  send  tbem  to 
Eastport,  Saint  Andrew's,  and  Saint  John's;  where  do  you  send  the 
greater  part  of  them  ? — A.  To  Eastport. 

Q.  You  send  more  there  than  both  Saint  Andrew's  and  Saint  John's  !- 
A.  O,  yes ;  a  good  deal  more. 

Q.  Is  there  any  distinction  made  in  sorting  the  herring  between  those 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


711 


8e  nrp  a  small 


tUiuk  80.    They 


to  be  lined  as  food  niul  those  to  be  used  as  bait  T— A.  No.  They  are 
waiit<*«l  ju8t  as  good  for  bait  as  for  eating.  In  tlie  winter  all  the  herring 
are  lart;!^  and  the  fat  herring  are  frozen. 

Q.  Are  frozen  herring  eaten  T — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  The  very  low  price  is  due  to  their  abundaneef — A.  Yes. 

Q.  (five  us  some  idea  as  to  how  the  price  has  ranged  during  the  past 
few  years?  Has  not  the  price  shown  u  falling  tendency? — A.  Two 
years  ago  they  were  pretty  high.  The  winter  was  blowy  and  blustering, 
and  the  traders  paid  the  fishermen  a  high  price  for  thent,  but  lost  money 
ou  the  speculation. 

Q.  riow  high  were  they  ? — A.  ^\s  high  as  S.*!  cents  a  hundred. 

Q.  And  they  are  now  17 cents  a  box! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  usual  price  a  hundred  paid  to  flshermen  for  frozen 
herring  ? — A.  They  start  usually  about  fifty  cents  and  they  end  at  from 
L'3  to  30  cents.  They  are  sometimes  as  low  as  twenty  cents,  and  even 
fifteen  cents. 

Q.  These  herring  are  not  taken  save  by  seines  ? — A.  They  are  taken 
in  nets. 

Q.  And  do  they  not  take  them  at  Grand  Manan  Island  f — A.  Not  in 
the  winter. 

Q.  When  do  they  take  them  there? — A.  In  the  summer,  sometimes. 

Q.  Hut  not  in  the  winter  at  all  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  they  not  take  any  of  tliem  except  inshore? — A.  I  do  not  know 
of  any  place  where  they  are  taken  in  winter  off  shore.  They  cannot; 
then  iish  away  out  to  sea  with  nets. 

Q.  You  think  that  they  do  not  take  any  except  on  British  coasts  ? — 
A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  caught  elsewhere  in  winter. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  it— whether  this  is  the  case  or  not  ? — 
A.  I  know  that  a  tremendous  lleet  of  American  vessels  comes  into  our 
waters  for  them. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  whether  they  take  herring  as  far  as  Eastport  in 
winter,  or  not? — A.  They  do  take  them  somewhere  about  Eastport,  but 
in  what  water  is  it  ? 

Q.  Tell  me  that  ? — A.  It  is  in  British  waters.  Y'^ou  can  lay  within 
two  gunshots  of  Eastport  in  British  water.? 

Q.  Do  yon  say  that  they  take  no  herring  in  winter  below  Eastport  on 
the  American  coast  ? — A.  I  have  never  known  any  herring  to  speak  of 
taken  below  there  in  winter. 

Q.  They  are  caught  right  up  to  the  line  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  that 
there  is  a  chance  for  net-fishing  there.  None  ;ire  caught  up  to  the  line 
in  British  waters.  Tliey  are  taken  four  or  Ave  miles  away  from  East- 
port  down  the  coast  from  there. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  there  is  not  much  of  a  summer  fishery  ? — 
A.  We  do  not  think  much  of  it. 

Q.  Neither  there  nor  in  your  own  neighborhood  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  There  is  none  within  your  observation  ? — A.  There  is  some  at 
Grand  Munan  shore,  where  they  go  for  bait ;  but  there  is  none  of  any 
great  consequence  on  the  mainland.  The  whole  fishery  stops  when  it 
is  no  longer  possible  to  freeze  the  fish.  The  herring  appear  playing  in 
on  our  shore  in  winter  for  shelter,  and  afterward,  in  the  spring,  they  ap- 
pear playing  oflFin  other  places. 

Q.  Would  it  be  very  ditlicult  for  the  Americans  to  freeze  their  herrings 
as  far  away  as  Eastport  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  The  flshermen  would  probably  have  to  go  fifteen,  six- 
teen, or  twenty  miles  sometimes  to  do  so. 

Q.  By  land  or  water  f — A.  By  water. 


f.-'- 


712 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  yen  think  they  could  not  do  that  ? — A.  I  think  tl)at  tUev 
could;  biii:  if  they  did  so,  they  could  only  flsh  one-half  of  their  time.  ' 

Q.  How  soon  after  the  herring  are  caught  is  it  necessary  to  freeze 
them  ? — A.  It  takes  some  time  to  pick  up  a  net  and  take  out  tbe  catch 
in  the  morning,  and  when  this  is  done  pretty  much  of  the  day  is  spent 
and  the  men  have  then  only  an  hour  or  so  to  work  with  the  herring  before 
the  night  lalls.  It  takes  the  greater  part  of  the  day  to  i)iuk  up  tiie  net  and 
set  it;  and  then,  if  they  had  fifteen  or  twenty  miles  to  go  afterward, the 
weather  might  be  calm  or  the  wind  be  ahead. 

Q.  How  far  do  your  fishermen  take  them  to  find  a  place  for  froeziiif^ 
them  ? — A.  Perhaps  20  or  30  yards  from  where  they  lay  at  anchor  in  the 
harbor. 

Q.  They  are  right  inshore? — A.  Yes;  they  lay  right  inshore  in  the 
harbor. 

Q.  And  you  say  tliat  about  Eastport  and  Lubic,  on  the  American 
side,  no  herring  are  caught  in  weirs  f — A.  I  did  not  say  that.  I  said 
that  no  large  herring  are  there  caught,  to  my  knowledge,  in  nets. 

Q.  Then  they  do  catch  tliem  there  in  weirs  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  large  quantities ? — A.  Yes;  small  herring. 

Q.  These  herring  are  frozen  ? — ^A.  No ;  thej'  are  not  caught  in  the 
winter. 

Q.  Not  on  the  American  side? — A.  Ifot  in  weirs. 

Q.  They  only  so  catch  small  herring  f — A.  They  catch  a  small-sized 
herring,  which  is  not  fit  for  being  frozen. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  herriugcaught  in  your  vicinity  is  smoked?— 
A.  A  very,  very  small  proportion. 

Q.  And  of  that  which  is  not  smoked,  at  least  three  quarters  goes  to 
the  Americans  either  for  food  or  bait? — A.  In  the  frozen  state;  yes. 

Q.  I  thought  you  did  not  do  much  at  the  summer  fishery  ? — A.  We  do 
not  for  herring,  but  we  do  for  cod.  We  do  nothiiig  in  herring  in  the 
summer. 

Q.  And  of  all  the  herring  caught  by  you,  more  than  three  quarters 
goes  to  Americans,  either  for  food  or  bait? — A.  Of  frozen  herring, yes. 

Q.  And  of  the  $50,000  or  $60,000  worth  that  you  take,  what  propor- 
tion goes  to  the  Americans  ? — A.  About  one-third. 

Q.  Where  do  you  sell  the  rest  ? — A.  In  the  Dominion  and  New  Bruns- 
wick.   Some  are  shipped  to  the  West  Indies. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  will  explain  a  little  more  fully  than  you  did  the  effect 
of  the  American  mode  of  fishing  in  destroying  your  fish.  What  fish  are 
80  destroyed  ? — A.  The  trawling  is  done  for  cod,  haddock,  and  halie, 
with  books. 

Q.  And  you  attribute  the  injury  done  to  your  fishing-grounds  to  this 
style  of  fishing  ? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  How  long  do  you  think  that  the  iuduence  of  the  dead  fish  falling 
from  one  of  these  lines  would  continue  on  a  particular  spot  of  ground  i 
— A.  Fishermen  tell  me  that  after  fishing  this  way  in  any  place  one 
year,  the  next  year,  with  the  trawls,  they  can  haul  up  some  of  the  wa-ste 
material  there,  and  that  it  smells  so  oft'ensively  that  they  cannot  keep 
it  in  the  boat. 

Q.  You  think  that  it  lasts  beyond  one  season  ? — A.  That  is  what  I  am 
told  by  the  fishermen. 

Q.  Are  many  skate  caught  on  these  hooks  ? — A.  Yes ;  a  good  many. 

Q.  What  flsh  eat  seaweed  ?— A.  Haddock,  principally.  They  do  not 
eat  seaweed,  however,  but  a  kind  of  vegetable  substance  found  on  the 
bottom. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


713 


iushoro  in  tlie 


caught  in  the 


ud  NewBnius- 


rounds  to  this 


;  is  what  I  am 


Q.  What  is  it  ? — A.  A  kind  of  vegetable  substauce  of  a  dark  gayish 
color. 

Q.  Is  the  business  of  the  fishermen  more  profltible  than  that  of  the 
trader-s  with  you  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  but  that  it  is  sometimes. 

Q.  But  generally  speaking  ? — A.  Well,  no. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  their  proportion  of  profit  is  the  greater  ? — A.  I 
do  not. 

Q.  l)i<l  you  estimate  the  25  per  cent,  of  the  million  dollars  you  men- 
tioned as  their  portion  of  the  profit  ? — A.  I  said  it  was  about  one-quar- 
ter. 

Q.  You  think  that  they  make  one-quarter  or  $250,000  a  year  ? — A. 
Sometimes,  taking  the  whole  year  round. 

Q.  Yon  think  that  it  is  their  usual  profit  ? — A.  Y^es. 

Q.  In  your  business,  do  you  make  a  larger  i)roportion  ? — A.  Perhaps 
we  do  and  perhaps  we  do  not.     VVe  have  to  take  things  as  tl»ey  come. 

Q.  Traders  average  more  profit  than  fishermen  ? — A.  VVe  try  to  do  so. 

Q.  And  the  fishermen  make  one-quarter  of  the  average  of  the 
catch  ? — A.  Not  all ;  probably  some  make  a  great  deal  more,  but  that 
would  be  the  average.    I  know  some  who  make  more  than  that. 

Q.  You  make  allowance  for  each  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  do  you  allow  for  wages? — A.  We  have  to  allow  ordi- 
nary wages. 

Q.  What  are  they  T — A.  If  a  man  is  worth  $1  or  $1.25  a  day,  accord- 
ing to  season,  we  must  allow  it.  If  I  sui)ply  50  or  GO  men,  I  have  a 
profit  on  them,  and  they  have  only  a  profit  on  their  little  lot  of  fish  for 
the  season.    Our  laborers  gpl,  about  $1.50  a  day. 

Q.  Do  you  intend  it  to  be  understood  that  with  respect  to  the  catch 
of  a  million  dollars'  worth  of  fish,  you  allow  the  fishermen  wages  from 
$1  to  $1.50  a  day,  while  their  profit  is  $250,000  ?— A.  We  do  not  look 
upon  it  in  that  way. 

Q.  How  do  you  look  upon  it? — A.  In  this  way:  that  a  fisherman 
puts  his  time  into  his  business  like  a  merchant,  and  if  I  make  a  profit, 
I  do  not  say  that  I  get  so  much  a  day,  but  that  I  make  so  much  during 
the  season  in  trading.  If  a  fisherman  fishes  all  the  year,  and  if,  after 
he  pays  his  bills,  he  has  33j^  per  cent,  or  25  per  cent.,  we  look  upon 
that  as  clear  profit. 

Q.  Is  this  clear  one-third  or  one-quarter  after  he  pays  his  bills  with 
reference  to  his  vessel  or  his  family  ? — A.  I  refer  to  all  fishing  expenses. 

Q.  But  you  do  not  mean  apart  from  these  expenses  ? — A.  Of  course 
not. 

Q.  Then  you  simply  mean  that  you  think  these  fishermen  get  from 
25  to  33;^  per  cent,  profit  on  their  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Which  goes  to  pay  them  for  their  time  ? — A.  Yes  ;  and  their  fam- 
ily expenses. 

Q.  That  is  what  they  live  upon  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  that  the  fishermen  would  get  apiece  ? — A.  If 
they  do  not  earn  $600  or  $700  a  year,  they  will  have  to  live  pretty 
poorly. 

Q.  Besides  the  expenses  of  the  vessel  ? — A.  Yes.  For  instance,  if  a 
fiaberraan  goes  on  shares  with  me,  and  takes  fish  to  the  value  of  $700, 
I  give  him  $350,  out  of  which  he  has  to  maintain  his  family ;  he  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  expenses  of  the  vessel  at  all,  regarding  salt, 
lines,  |»rovisions,  &c. 

Q.  You  mean  that  $600  or  $700  worth  of  fish  is  a  fair  catch  for  one 
inan?_A.  Y"es. 

Q.  xVud  that  he  gets  one-half? — A.  Yes,  if  he  works  on  shares. 


m 


714 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  So  that  in  this  case  he  would  make  from  $300  to  $350  T— A.  Yes 
for  the  season.  ' 

Q.  What  part  of  the  year  is  that? — A.  It  extends  over  about  eight  or 
ten  months. 

Q.  He  cannot  do  much  else  that  year  f — A.  Yes ;  he  can  lay  up  and 
cut  wood  and  do  anything  that  is  to  be  done  about  the  house. 

Q.  But  nothing  in  the  way  of  business! — A.  This  saves  him  from 
paying  out  money.    Some  men  will  make  as  high  as  $1,000  a  year. 

Q.  And  you  have  your  pick  of  the  fishermen  ? — A.  No ;  but  we  try  to 
get  as  good  men  as  we  can. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  good  men  T — A.  Of  an  average  good  man.  A 
pretty  good  lot  of  men  will  average  that. 

Q.  How  do  you  make  your  estimate  regarding  the  $250,000?— A, 
Suppose  you  catch  $1,000,000  worth  of  fish,  then  if  one  quarter  of  it  is 
rot  left  for  the  families  to  live  on,  the  men  cannot  follow  up  the  busi- 
ness. 

Q.  How  many  fishermen  would  it  take  to  catch  this  $1,000,000 
worth  ! — A.  I  could  not  tell  you  exactly. 

Q.  But  about  f — A.  A  number  of  boys  is  employed  with  the  men. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  of  men  and  boys? — A.  I  could  not  say  ex- 
actly. The  population  of  Charlotte  County  is  about  25,000,  aud  tliis  is 
the  biggest  fishing  district  in  New  Brunswick.  I  think  I  should  sup- 
pose that  we  have  from  12,000  to  15,000  fishermen. 

Q.  Men  who  make  this  their  exclusive  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  these  people  would  catch  the  million  dollars'  worth  of  fish  !— 
A.  Yes.    Boys  help  the  men,  and  there  are  some  hired  men. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  of  the  boys? — A.  We  do  not  count  them  in 
sometimes. 

Q.  Besides  some  hired  men  you  think  that  there  are  from  12,000  to 
15,000  substantial  fishermen  engaged  in  the  fishing  business  ?— A.  I 
think  so,  but  I  am  not  sure. 

Q.  And  their  catch  realizes  $1,000,000  ? — A.  Well,  you  see  that  we 
hire  a  good  many  men.    Strangers  fish  for  us. 

Q.  Thi»  does  not  then  represent  simply  what  the  12,000  or  15,000  fish- 
ermen do? — A.  The  men  we  hire  we  have  to  pay  out  of  it. 

Q.  Can  you  not  estimate  the  number  of  hired  men  ? — A.  I  cannot. 

Q.  Nor  the  number  of  boys? — A.  No. 

Q.  Are  there  as  many  more  hired  men  as  there  are  regular  fisher- 
men?— A.  No. 

Q.  Are  there  half  as  many? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Are  there  one  quarter  as  many  ? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  And  you  estimate  that  the  12,000  or  15,000  fishermen,  and  as  many 
hired  men  and  boys  as  they  may  happen  to  have  with  them,  cateh  this 
million  dollars'  worth  of  fish  ? — A.  I  would  not  confine  myself  right  to 
the  population.    If  it  is  necessary,  I  could  furnish  their  number. 

Q.  In  reply  to  a  question  put  yon  by  Mr.  Thomson  you  said  that  a 
profit  of  $250,000  a  year  was  made  by  New  Brunswick  fishermen  I— A. 
I  thought  that  this  was  the  case. 

Q.  And  you  mean  as  we  now  understand  you  that  this  $250,000  which 
they  would  earn  besides  doing  their  chores  in  the  winter  and  cutting 
their  own  wood,  is  to  support  these  12,000  or  15,000  people,  and  pay  the 
wages  of  as  many  hired  men  as  they  may  have,  and  take  care  of  their 
families  ? — A.  Yes,  that  is  the  idea  exactly. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  estimate  how  much  the  Americans  made  !— 
A.  I  estimated  from  what  we  see,  and  learn  that  they  take  fully  as  much 
fish  as  we  do  out  of  our  waters. 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


716 


good  man.   A 


Q.  Yoa  think  they  take  as  much  Y — A.  I  do.    I  fully  believe  it. 

Q.  I  am  afraid  that  your  figures  are  not  right.  You  have  $1,000,000 
estimated  as  the  value  of  the  catch  of  12,000  or  15,000  fishermen.  How 
oiuch  would  tb^t  leave  each  man? — A.  I  never  figured  it  up. 

Q.  When  you  learn  perhaps  you  will  not  be  desirous  of  adhering  to 
your  statement  regarding  the  profit  of  $250,000.  It  would  leave  about 
|80  a  man,  on  the  whole,  for  these  12,000  or  15,000  New  Brunswick  fish- 
ermen, or  $20  a  man,  clear  profit. — A.  I  do  not  know  exactly  how  many 
iu  our  county  are  engaged  in  the  fishing  business. 

Q.  You  did  not  stop  to  think  before  you  made  that  statement  ? — A. 
Probably  not. 

Q.  Mr.  ThoujRon  put  you  a  leading  question,  and  you  answered  '^yes.*^ 
Yoo  at  once  opened  your  mouth  and  said  "yes"  to  that  question  ? — A.  I 
tell  you  what  I  still  think,  that  all  our  men  make  about  that  profit.  Take 
an  average  man,  and  he  will  make  about  that  profit.  By  taking  men  on 
shares  you  can  see  what  they  catch. 

Q.  I  am  asking  yon  about  the  answer  which  you  gave  as  to  the  quar- 
ter of  a  million  dollars  of  profit  made  by  your  own  people  f — A.  I  thought 
that  was  the  case,  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge. 

Q.  But  you  do  not  think  so  now  f — A.  Probably  not  over  about  6,000 
meu  are  there  engaged  in  the  fisheries. 

Q.  Take  5,000;  how  much  do  you  think  that  they  would  make?— A. 
I  have  never  figured  it  up. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  how  much  a  year  they  make  ? — A.  I  think  that 
they  have  got  to  have  at  least  one-quarter  clear  of  what  they  catch,  or 
else  they  cannot  live,  nor  follow  up  the  fisheries  from  year  to  year. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  it  costs  an  average  family  a  year  to  live  ? — A. 
Some  live  very  cheaply,  I  tell  you. 

Q.  Take  an  average  family. — A.  Some  live  on  $200  a  year. 

Q.  Do  they  work  Sundays  ? — A.  No ;  our  New  Brunswick  people  do 
Dot,  save  as  to  cooking  and  such  matters. 

Q.  But  the  Americans  are  wicked  enough  to  catch  fish  on  Sundays? — 
A.  I  know  that  very  few  of  our  New  Brunswick  people  catch  fish  on 
Sundays. 

Q.  And  they  cannot  catch  fish  for  more  than  ten  months  in  the  year? 
—A.  They  can,  but  there  is  usually  a  slack  time  of  about  two  months. 

Q.  Do  they  get  more  than  $1.50  a  day  for  themselves  and  families  to 
live  on  ? — A.  I  do  not  know ;  I  never  figured  it  up. 

Q.  What  do  they  so  get,  in  your  judgment? — A.  Some  get  that  and 
some  do  not,  and  some  obtain  more. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  would  average  that  ? — A.  That  would  be 
$400  a  year ;  it  would  be  somewhere  near  that.  Some  get  $1.50,  some 
$1.25,  and  some  $2. 

Q.  They  get  as  much  as  $400  a  year  ?— A.  And  some  get  $800  and 
some  $1,000. 

Q.  Those  who  are  bright  and  smart  are  prosperous  ? — A.  That  is  it 
exactly. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  your  own  certain  knowledge  the  population  of 
Charlotte  County  ? — A.  No ;  I  do  not. 

Q.  It  is  somewhere  more  than  25,000  ? — A.  Probably  it  is ;  I  have 
not  a  good  memory. 

Q.  Without  reference  to  the  population  of  the  county,  you  have  a 
pretty  good  idea  as  to  how  many  persons  are  engaged  actually  fishing 


716 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


in  tbat  county,  both  bojs  and  men  t — A.  I  have  a  middling  good  idea* 
it  is  quite  a  large  county. 

Q.  Most  of  the  fishing  is  done  in  the  localities  of  which  you  have 
spoken! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  all  done  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  and  the  inner  bay  of  Passatna- 
quoddyf — A.  For  instance,  take  a  fisherman  who  has  got  a  family  of 
girls ;  they  all  assist  him,  every  one  of  them ;  and  with  respect  to  these 
herring  taken  in  nets  in  a  fishing  community,  in  fact  the  wife  aud  all 
help  a  good  deal  of  the  work.  The  children  from  eight  years  old  up  ail 
assist,  and  this  makes  a  good  deal  of  difference.  I  looked  at  it  in  this 
light  when  I  spoke  of  the  population. 

Q.  As  a  practical  man,  taking  into  consideration  the  main  3oast  of 
New  Brunswick  in  your  neighborhood,  aud  not  the  islands  at  all,  will 
you  tell  me  whether  there  would  be  more  fish  cau(;ht  along  tbe  main 
coast  than  about  the  islands  ? — A.  Yea ;  our  herriug  fishery  is  coiitiued 
right  to  our  mainland. 

Q.  Taking  the  whole  year  through,  would  more  fish  be  caugbt  aloug 
the  mainland  than  about  the  islands,  Campobellu,  &c.? — A.  Well,  there 
would  not  be  much  difference  in  the  catches.  A  large  quantity  of  tish 
is  caught  in  Quoddy  River,  for  tbis  reason :  w^hen  the  fish  strike  in 
there  an^'  kind  of  a  man,  and  men  who  do  not  make  a  business  of  fish* 
ing,  can  catch  them,  but  in  order  to  fish  around  Grand  Manan  Island  a 
man  must  have  a  good  substantial  boat,  because  he  has  to  go  ten  or 
fifteen  miles  to  reach  there. 

Q.  About  the  S0.me  quantity  is  caught  on  the  mainland  and  about  the 
islands  ? — A.  Yes ;  very  nearly. 

Q.  Which  way  would  the  balance  incline  ? — A.  I  think  to  the  island 
catch,  if  anything. 

Q.  Is  the  privilege  of  fishing  in  American  waters,  obtained  undt^r  this 
treaty,  taken  advantage  of  by  our  fishermen }  do  they  fish  there  to  any 
extent  f — A.  I  have  never  known  in  my  life  of  any  vessel  of  our  own, 
gave  one,  that  went  tnere  to  fish. 

Q.  And  did^he  fish  at  a  distance  of  more  than  three  miles  from  the 
American  coast  t — A.  He  fished  ten  miles  off  the  shore,  but  he  made 
the  harbors  un  the  American  coast. 

Q.  What  did  he  catch? — A.  Hake.  He  went  there  one  year,  aud 
that  is  the  only  one  I  know  of  who  did  so.  He  belonged  to  Beaver 
Harbor,  and  his  sister  married  the  captain  of  an  American  vessel ;  the 
latter  came  to  our  neighborhood  to  buy  herriug,  and  he  went  down 
there  to  fish,  thinking  he  might  do  better  there  than  here,  but  he  oaly 
trieri  it  one  year.    This  is  the  way  in  which  he  came  to  go  there. 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  rather  sarcastically  spoke  of  the  American  fishermen 
as  being  wicked,  evidently  meaning  that  they  are  saints,  but  I  suppose 
yon  do  not  agree  with  that  view ;  you  have  heard  them  make  use  of  ex- 
pressions with  regard  to  the  Bible  which  are  not  exactly  saintly  i^— A. 
Yes ;  I  have  heard  them  use  pretty  queer  expressions.  Fishermen  gen- 
erally are  not  a  very  religious  people. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Is  there  any  period  of  the  year  where  there  is  fishing  for  sea  her- 
ring, except  inshore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  ?— A.  Off  Grand  Manan,  on  what  are  called  the  Ripples  of 
Grand  Manau. 

Q.  Is  it  extensive  1 — A.  No ;  not  during  the  last  four  or  five  years. 

Q.  Was  it  80  formerly  f— A.  It  used  to  be  quite  a  fishing  ground. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


717 


Q.  When  f — A.  Jnly  and  Augast  was  the  best  time ;  it  is  aboat  over 
now. 

Q.  Yon  think  that  the  fish  here  have  grown  less  in  number  f — A.  I 
coald  not  say  that ;  but  this  fishing  ground  is  not  as  much  frequented 
as  it  used  to  be. 

Q.  Do  Campobello  and  these  other  islands  form  part  of  Charlotte 
County  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  they  included  in  the  estimate  you  made? — A.  Yes. 

Q  Their  population  is  not  very  large  f — A.  No. 

Q.  And  about  one-half  of  the  fishing  of  which  you  have  spoken  is 
done  there? — A.  Yes;  about  Grand  Manan  and  the  adjoining  islands. 

Q.  What  is  the  population  of  Grand  Manan  Island  ? — A.  It  is  some- 
where about  2,000  or  3,000. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Qaestion.  What  is  the  relative  value  of  the  different  kinds  of  fish  f 
I  do  not  mean  with  regard  to  the  quantity  caught,  but  the  relative 
valne  of  the  fish  itself  ? — Answer.  The  codfish  is  the  most  valuable ;  the 
bake,  1  think,  is  the  next. 

Q.  Tlieu  the  haddock  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  the  pollock  f — A.  The  pollock  is  low  this  year.  Last  year 
the  pollock  came  ahead  of  the  hake. 

Q.  How  is  it  that  they  prosecute  the  herring  fishery  in  winter  there 
and  not  in  other  places  f — A.  It  is  just  as  a  shoal  of  herring  comes  in 
there.    They  follow  them  wberever  they  can  find  them. 

Q.  Does  it  depend  in  any  way  upon  the  high  tides  ? — A.  I  do  not 
know. 

No.  30. 

James  Lord,  of  Deer  Island,  in  the  county  of  Charlotte,  N.  B.,  called 
on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  ex- 
amined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  You  live  at  Deer  Island  ? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  in  the  parish  of  West  Isles,  in  the  county  of  Charlotte  ? — A. 
Yes ;  that  and  the  adjacent  small  island. 

Q.  What  is  your  office  ? — A.  I  am  a  fishery  officer. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  a  fishery  officer?— A.  About  three 
years. 

Q.  Now,  is  it  part  of  your  official  duty  to  ascertain  the  number  of 
boats  and  vessels  engaged  in  the  fishery  there  ? — A.  It  is. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  me  what  is  the  number  of  schooners  or  of  vessels  ? — 
A.  There  are  28  vessels  engaged  in  the  fishery  in  my  district. 

Q.  Of  what  tonnage? — A.  The  aggregate  tonnage  is  about  700  tons. 

Q.  How  many  men  are  employed  there  ? — A.  I  have  a  memorandum. 
(Reads.)    There  are  171  men  engaged  in  the  vessels  fishing. 

Q.  How  many  boats  are  there  ? — A.  Two  hundred  and  thirty-four. 

Q.  They  belong  to  the  islands  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  These  boats  and  vessels  are  British  boats  and  British  vessels? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  island  is  close  to  Eastport  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  is  it  to  Eastport  from  Deer  Island? — A.  About  three 
quarters  of  a  mile  from  the  nearest  point. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  fish  much  on  the  coast? — A.  Yes;  they  fish  in 
common  with  our  fishermen,  on  the  same  fishing-grounds. 


718 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHEHT   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  many  vessels  have  they  f— A.  I  shoald  think  they  had  fall 
as  many  is  onr  folks. 

Q.  And  fully  as  many  boats  f — A.  Yes ;  about  the  same  number,  I 
should  think. 

Q.  Do  they  employ  about  the  same  number  of  hands  T — A.  I  shoald 
say  so. 

Q.  Now,  will  yon  t«ll  me  what  is  the  whole  catch  made  by  the  British 
fishermen  in  your  district  of  West.  Isles  T — A.  The  whole  value  is  about 
$180,000  in  our  district. 

Q.  Your  <1i8trict,  for  which  you  give  that  valuation,  does  not  include 
the  island  of  Campobello  ? — A.  No ;  it  is  a  separate  district. 

Q.  Campobello  employs  about  how  many  vessels  and  how  many 
boats  f — A.  I  could  not  give  you  exactly  the  number.  I  should  say  it 
was  about  equal  to  West  Isles.  I  should  not  think  there  would  he 
much  difference. 

Q.  It  employs  about  the  same  number  of  vessels  and  the  same  num- 
ber of  hands  ? — A.  I  should  say  so. 

Q.  And  the  whole  catch  is  the  same  " — A.  Yes;  I  should  suppose  so. 
They  fish  on  the  same  ground  with  our  folks. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  fish  also  there  about  equally  with  the  British 
fishermen? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  put  the  catch  of  Campobello  as  being  about  the  same 
catch  of  West  Indies? — A.  According  to  the  best  of  my  judgment.  I 
have  no  statistics  to  show. 

Q.  Well,  you  have  statistics  in  reference  to  the  West  Isles f — A.  Yes; 
in  my  district. 

Q.  And  Campobello  is  only  a  little  distance? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  plenty  of  opportunity  of  forming  an  opinion  ?— A.  I 
should  say  so. 

Q.  Have  yoa  any  doubt  as  to  vfhether  yon  have  overestimated  or 
nnderestimated  ? — A.  If  anything  I  should  say  I  was  underestimatiug. 

Q.  Then  off  Campobello  there  is  about  $180,000  worth  taken  by  our 
people  ? — A.  I  should  say  so. 

Q.  And  $180,000  worth  at  West  Isles  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  take  an  equal  catch  in  both  places  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  As  to  West  Isles  you  are  sure,  and  you  have  no  reasonable  doubt 
about  Campobello  ? — A.  Just  so. 

Q.  I  suppose  Grand  Manan,  being  somewhat  distant,  you  don't  know 
as  well  about  ? — A.  I  don't  know  so  much  about  Grand  Manan.  I  can't 
speak  mucb  about  that.    It  is  rather  out  of  my  jurisdiction. 

Q.  You  have  been  a  practical  fisherman  ? — A.  Yes;  all  my  life  I  have 
been  a  practical  fisherman. 

Q.  Tell  me,  now,  is  the  catcu  you  speak  of  at  West  Isles  and  Campo- 
bello taken  all  close  inshore? — A.  All  close  inshore. 

Q.  All  within  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes;  with  the  exception  of  one  or  two 
vessels  from  Deer  Island  that  go  outside.  The  chief  catches  are  in- 
shore. 

Q.  Well,  when  I  asked  you  for  an  estimate  of  the  catch  and  you  gave 
me  $180,000,  you  did  not  include  in  that  amount  the  fish  that  was 
caught  outsiao  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  is  that  catch  chiefly  composed  of? — A.  Different  kinds  of 
fish — codfish,  pollock,  haddock,  hake,  and  herring. 

Q.  What  is  the  principal  fish  in  point  of  numbers  and  value  ? — A.  In 
point  of  numbers  the  herring  has  the  advantage,  and  in  value  I  think 
also. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


719 


nion  ? — A.  I 


Q.  What  comes  next,  in  your  jadgment,  to  the  herring  ? — A.  The 
pollock,  I  think,  is  about  next  in  numbers. 

Q.  And  in  value  T — A.  Well,  yed,  I  think,  in  value  too. 

Q.  What  is  next  ?— A.  The  hake. 

Q.  And  after  that  the  haddock  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Which  is  the  more  valuable  fish  per  quintal,  the  pollock  or  the 
haddock  ? — A.  The  haddock  is  the  most  valuable  of  late  years.  The 
pollock  always  have  been  the  most  valuable  until  lately. 

Q.  Tbe  taste  has  veered  around  in  favor  of  haddock  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  ISovf  tell  me,  as  to  the  Americans,  what  is  their  style  uf  fishing  f 
By  the  way,  since  the  Washington  Treaty,  have  they  come  in  in  greater 
numbers  to  fish? — A.  Yes.  More  of  them  since  the  treaty  tlnvn  before 
bave  visited  our  shores. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  the  herring  f — A.  In  the  winter  they  freeze 
them  and  in  the  summer  they  salt  them. 

Q.  Du  they  land  on  the  West  Isles  for  the  purpose  of  freezing  them, 
or  do  they  take  them  to  their  own  shores  ? — A.  Well,  some  take  them 
ou  shore  and  others  freeze  them  on  the  deck  of  their  vessels.  Others 
take  them  across  to  the  State  of  Maine  to  Eastport.    It  is  close  by. 

Q.  What  are  the  herring  caught  there  worth  a  hundred  ?— A.  I 
should  think  they  would  average  about  30  to  33  cents  a  hundred  in  the 
winter  season. 

Q.  Is  that  the  proper  season  to  fish  ? — A.  It  is  the  best  season  for 
herring. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  in  the  summer  there  at  all,  the  Americans  or  the 
island  people? — A.  They  fish  in  summer;  not  so  much  for  herring, 
though,  as  for  other  kinds  of  fish. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  in  summer  for  herring  at  all  ? — A.  Very  little  ;  that 
is,  for  bait  and  the  like  of  that. 

Q.  Is  it  partly  your  business  to  prevent  them  fishing  for  herring  ? — 
A.  I  bave  no  restrictions  to  prevent  them. 

Q.  What  is  your  duty  as  a  fishery  officer  ? — A.  It  is  to  see  that  they 
obey  tbe  regulations  as  we  do. 

Q.  Perhaps  around  those  islands  there  are  no  breeding  grounds.  Do 
they  breed  there  or  at  Grand  Manan? — A.  There  is  no  spawning 
ground  there  that  I  know  of.  Grand  Manan  is  where  the  chief  breed- 
ing grounds  are. 

Q.  They  are  protecting  them  there,  I  believe,  or  endeavoring  to  1 — A. 
They  are  supposed  to  be. 

Q.  Do  they  breed  around  Campobello  f — A.  It  has  never  been  set 
apart  as  a  breeding  ground,  although  they  might  spawn  there.  I  could 
not  say  for  that.  It  is  supposed  by  some  that  they  do  spawn  about 
Campobello,  but  there  is  no  spawning  ground  marked  out  there. 

Q.  Now,  since  1871  the  Americans  have  come  in  in  great  numbers 
fishing.  What  way  do  they  fish?  —A.  They  fish  with  nets,  trawls,  hand- 
lines,  &c. 

Q.  What  do  you  say  about  this  system  of  trawl-fishing  T — A.  I  think 
it  is  the  best  way  to  catch  them.  You  can  catch  a  greater  quantity 
with  trawls  than  with  hand-lines. 

Q  No  doubt  of  that;  but  what  is  the  effect  on  the  fishery? — A.  I 
think  it  injures  the  fishery. 

Q.  It  is  injurious;  why  f — A.  It  takes  a  good  many  of  the  small  fish 
that  are  of  no  use,  and  kills  them,  and  it  catches  a  good  many  of  the 
old  mother  fish  and  destroys  them. 

Q>  Well,  what  has  been  the  effect  of  killing  those  fish  upon  the  fish- 
iug  grounds  1— A.  Well,  after  they  have  killed  them,  the  next  thing  is 


720 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


to  gtit  rid  of  tbem,  and  the  best  way  they  can  do  is  to  throw  them  over- 
board. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  that  T— A.  It  pollates  the  water. 

Q.  Does  it  drive  off  the  fish  f — A.  I  thiuk  so. 

Q.  You  are  a  practical  fisherman ;  do  you  know  f — A.  Well,  it  is  my 
opinion,  as  a  fisherman. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  the  fishing  busiueas  l—A.  I 
have  been  engaged  in  the  fishery  ever  since  I  was  12  years  old.  That 
is  3U  years  ago. 

Q.  Thi'ii  you  ought  to  be  able  from  experience  to  form  a  pretty  good 
judgment.  That  is  your  deliberate  judgment  that  this  throwing  over- 
board of  the  dead  fish  destroys  the  fishing- grounds  f — A.  Yes ;  that  is 
my  opinion. 

Q.  What  do  you  say  of  throwing  over  the  gurry  1 — A.  It  has  the  same 
effect. 

Q.  Do  the  American  fishermen  always  do  that — that  is,  throw  over 
the  gurry? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  about  the  island  men  and  the  boats  belonging  to  the 
island  f  Are  they  obliged  to  land  or  do  they  throw  over  too  f— A.  Those 
that  fish  in  large  boats  and  vessels  do  the  same  thing.  Those  iu  small 
boats  dress  their  fish  on  shore. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  dress  theirs  on  shore  f — A.  Not  so  much,  be 
cause  they  come  a  very  longdistance  generally,  and  they  come  in  larger 
vessels.  They  dress  their  fish  on  board  their  vessels  and  throw  their 
gurry  overboard. 

Q.  Now,  this  trawl  fishing  as  a  business  has  sprung  up  has  it  uot 
within  the  last  5  or  6  yenrsT— A.  It  has  not  been  practiced  much  until 
lately,  within  6  or  7  years  on  the  coast. 

Q.  Who  introduced  it?  Was  it  introduced  by  the  Americans ?— A. 
Well,  I  guess  our  folks  got  the  idea  from  the  Americans. 

Q.  There  was  none  before  the  Americans  came  there  ? — A.  I  do  not 
think  there  was  any. 

Q.  Have  they  been  obliged  to  use  the  trawl  in  order  to  compote  with 
the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  of  your  own  knowledge  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  these  Americans  themselves  admit  it  is  destructive,  or  what 
do  thi'y  say  about  it? — A.  I  have  never  talked  with  them  on  the  sub- 
ject.   I  have  talked  with  our  own  fishermen  in  regard  to  it. 

Q.  Is  that  their  opinion  in  regard  to  it? — A.  That  is  their  opinion. 
They  all  arrive  at  the  same  conclusion. 

Q.  That  is  in  reference  to  the  destruction  of  the  fisheries  by  throwing 
over  the  dead  fish  and  the  gurry  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  aware,  or  has  it  come  under  your  observation  that  a  great 
number  of  nets  are  sometimes  set  out  by  the  American  fishermen  and 
allowed  to  go  to  bottom  with  dead  fish  in  tbem  ? — A.  That  is  the  case. 

Q.  Just  state  how  that  happened. — A.  Well,  when  they  go  fishing 
they  have  a  good  many  nets  and  they  set  tbem,  and  perhaps  it  will 
come  such  a  breeze  that  for  two  or  three  days  they  can't  get  those  nets. 
When  it  comes  a  fine  day  they  have  so  many  herring  that  they  caunot 
take  care  of  them,  and  the  nets  are  left  there  and  the  herring  rot,  and 
lie  on  the  bottom.    They  very  often  lose  nets  in  that  way. 

Q.  I  don't  know  whether  I  asked  you  the  number  of  men  employed 
in  the  vessels  ? — A.  Yes,  you  did. 

Q.  Did  I  ask  you  as  to  the  number  of  men  employed  in  the  boats; 
how  many  boats  did  you  say  there  were  ? — A.  Two  hundred  and  thirty- 
four  boats. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


721 


Q.  How  many  men  would  be  employed  f — A.  They  would  average  two 
men  to  a  boat.    That  would  be  4G8. 

Q.  The  vessels,  you  said,  employed  171 ;  now,  you  are  practically  ac- 
quainted with  the  flshiug,  not  only  at  the  island,  but  aloug  the  north 
shore?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tell  me,  in  your  judgment,  where  the  greater  number  of  fish  are 
tnkeu  within  the  three-mile  limit;  is  it  along  the  shoresof  the  islands  or 
of  the  mainland  on  the  north  shore  of  the  bay  ? — A.  The  herring  is  the 
chief  fish  in  winter,  and  is  taken  on  the  north  shore. 

Q.  They  are  all  taken  within  the  three-mile  limit  f — A.  Yes;  on  the 
Djaiuland,  from  Point  Lepreaux  to  the  West  Isles. 

Q.  You  think  the  larger  quantity  is  taken  aloug  that  shore  ? — A.  la 
tht'  winter  season. 

Q.  Take  the  whole  year  round  f — A.  I  think  my  district,  the  West 
Isles  district,  would  have  the  advantage,  taking  the  whole  year  round. 

Q.  Taking  the  whole  year  through,  winter  and  summer,  would  it  be 
about  the  same  on  the  mainland  and  West  Isles  ? — A.  1  thiuk  West 
Isles  would  have  rather  the  advantage. 

Q.  I  am  now  speaking  of  all  the  islands,  including  Campohello  and 
Grand  Manan  ;  do  you  think  Campobello,  Grand  Manan,  and  the  West 
Isles  would  be  rather  more  than  the  mainland  for  the  whole  year  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  But  the  catch  for  the  winter  is  considerably  larger  on  the  main- 
laud  than  on  the  islands  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  say  there  are  more  caught  on  the  islands  than  on  the 
mainland,  does  it  preponderate  very  much  or  is  it  pretty  near  the  same  ? — 
A.  It  is  pretty  nearly  the  same,  I  should  say ;  if  anything,  the  islands 
have  the  advantage. 

Q.  Now,  you  stated  that  the  principal  breeding  place  is  in  Grand 
Mauan  ;  at  what  part  is  it  ? — A.  At  the  south  end. 

Q.  That  place  is  protected  by  regulations,  is  it  not  ? — A.  Yes ;  there 
is  a  man  appointed  to  protect  that  ground. 

Q.  What  is  his  name  ? — A.  McLachlan. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  notwithstanding  the  regulations  and  endeav- 
ors of  the  Dominion  Government  to  keep  this  breediug-grouad  untouched 
the  American  fishermen  break  in  ? — A.  I  have  heard  that  they  have 
broken  in  on  several  occasions.  I  have  never  been  there  when  they  did 
so,  but  I  have  heard  of  it,  and  I  am  satisfied  that  they  did  that  thing. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  the  catch  upon  Grand  Manan,  around  the 
shores  of  Grand  Mauan — I  mean  of  all  kinds  of  fish,  and  within  3  miles — 
is  very  much  larger  than  on  West  Isles  and  Campobello  ? — A.  I  think 
it  is  more  than  both  put  together.    I  should  say  so. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  as  a  practical  fisherman  ! — A.  Well,  according 
to  the  best  of  my  judgment.    I  have  no  statistics. 

Q.  You  have  fished  all  over  the  ground  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  no  doubt  that  the  catch  on  Grand  Manan  exceeds  the 
catch  on  West  Island  and  Campobello  together  ? — A.  I  think  it  does. 

Q.  Well,  now  as  a  practical  fisherman,  what  would  you  say  would  be 
the  value  of  the  catch  made  by  the  British  subjects,  within  3  miles  of 
the  shores,  in  the  islands  and  on  the  mainland  from  Point  Lepreaux, 
taking  in  West  Island,  Campobello,  and  Grand  Manan ;  taking  the  whole 
thing,  what  would  you  put  it  down  at,  naming  a  figure  that  you  think 
is  certainly  within  the  amount? — A.  I  should  say  nine  or  ten  hundred 
thousand. 

Q.  That  is  about  a  million  ? — ^A.  Yes. 
46  F 


722 


AWABD   OF  THE    FISHERY   COMMIS8I0N. 


Q.  Have  yon  any  donbt  that  yon  are  nDderestimatiii?  rather  than 
overestimating  itf — A.  No  doubt  that  is  nnder  if  anything. 
Q.  That  is  taken  by  British  subjects  t — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Then  the  American  fishermen,  do  ttiey  talce  on  these  coasts  as 
much  every  year  as  the  British  subjects  or  more? — A.  I  think  they  do 
fully  as  much.    I  have  no  doubt.    If  I  were  going  to  say  either  mure  or 
less,  I  would  say  more. 
Q.  You  think  they  take  fully  as  much  and  more  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  That  would  be  a  million  they  take  also  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Are  you  aware  yourself,  from  praitical  experience,  what  the  prob- 
able  profit  would  be  on  that  million  taken  by  the  Americans  ?— A.  Well, 
that  would  be  a  pretty  hard  thing  for  yon  to  get  at. 

Q.  Is  there  any  fish  on  the  American  shore  at  all  ?  Are  you  aware  of 
any  fish  within  the  three-mile  limit  f — A.  There  are  none  wortii  talk 
ing  about.  None  of  our  fishermen  ever  visit  that  coast  for  the  sake  ot 
fish. 

Q.  Then,  practically,  the  privilege  accorded  to  British  fishermen  of 
fishing  in  American  waters  amounts  to  nothing  ? — A.  It  is  no  benefit 
to  us  whatever.  I  never  knew  a  fisherman  go  there  to  make  a  fare  of 
fish. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  along  the  American  shore  yourself  T— A.  Xo. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  get  porgies  or  menhaden  there  ? — A.  I  have  caught 
some  there. 

Q.  Was  that  caught  within  shore  or  out  beyond  the  three  miles  ?- 
A.  All  the  porgie  fishing  has  been  beyond  the  three  miles.  They  are  no 
far  offshore  they  have  to  have  steamers. 

Q.  It  has  ceased  for  a  number  of  years  to  be  an  inshore  fishery  ?— A. 
As  far  as  my  information  extends. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  recollect  of  porgies  coming  up  to  the  British  waters 
in  the  neighborhood  of  Campobello  and  those  places  f — A.  I  have  cauglic 
them  myself. 

Q.  What  drove  them  off? — A.  I  can't  say;  they  have  left  onr  coast. 

Q.  How  long  ago  ? — A.  There  has  not  been  anything  there  to  amouut 
to  anything  for  ten  years  or  over. 

Q.  And  even  on  the  American  shore  they  have  gone  out  so  that  they 
have  to  have  steamers  to  go  for  them  ? — A.  They  don't  pretend  to  fish 
for  them  without  they  have  steamers. 

Q.  Now,  along  the  American  coasts  there  are  numerous  settleraeuts 
from  Eastport,  westerly;  are  they  engaged  in  fishing? — A.  All  the 
places  close  to  the  shore  are  so  engaged. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  their  fish  ? — A.  In  British  waters. 

Q.  Inside  the  limits  f — A.  Yes ;  they  come  right  over  to  New  Bruns- 
wick, to  the  mainland.    They  have  always  done  so. 

Q.  That  is  their  only  means  of  living,  so  far  as  you  are  aware  ?— A. 
That  is  the  only  means  so  long  as  they  undertake  to  catch  fish. 

Q.  How  long  has  that  been  the  case  ? — A.  I  guess  it  has  always 
been  the  case  ever  since  the  country  was  settled,  so  long  as  1  can  remem- 
ber. 

Q.  You  have  been  engaged  that  way  30  years  ? — A.  For  30  years  they 
have  done  that.    I  can  swear  they  have  done  it  for  30  years. 

Q.  They  have  never  caught  fish  in  their  own  waters  at  all  ?— A.  I 
could  not  swear  to  that. 

Q.  1  say  never  to  speak  of? — A.  Never  to  make  a  business. 

Q.  Could  they  have  gone  on  with  the  fishing  business  at  all  unless 
they  had  access  to  our  waters  ? — A.  No ;  I  do  not  think  they  could.  I 
guess  they  will  admit  that  themselves. 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


723 


Q.  They  will  elsewhere ;  they  will  not  here. 
yourself !— A.  No  doubt  at  all. 


Bat  you  have  no  doubt 


Q.  Since  you  can  recollect,  that  is  for  30  years,  have  the  fishing  sta- 
tions increased  as  the  people  became  more  numeruu.s  f — A.  Well,  I  sup- 
|H)8e  they  have  increased  in  proportion  to  our  Qshermen.  Ours  have 
increased  and  they  have  kept  right  alongside  of  them.  They  have  in- 
creased  the  same. 

il  What  has  been  the  effect  of  this  treaty  I  Before  the  treaty  you 
hiiil  a  right  to  send  your  fresh  fish  in  free.  Were  you  in  the  habit  of 
st'iidiiiR  them  in  to  any  extent  ? — A.  We  have  always  hud  tlio  right  to 
send  in  tlie  Iresh  fish. 

(}.  Did  you,  before  the  treaty,  send  many  in? — A.  Yes;  we  always 
sent  more  or  less  to  the  United  States. 

(j.  In  that  respect  your  market  is  not  altered  at  all  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  fish  catch  that  you  speak  of  in  the  islands 
is  salted  and  sent  away  ;  any  large  numbers  of  herring,  for  instance  ? — 
A.  Yes ;  quite  a  large  number  of  herring. 

Q.  Where  do  you  send  them  ?— A.  Part  to  the  United  States  and  part 
of  them  are  sold  in  the  Dominion.  A  good  many  are  sold  in  St.  John, 
Varnioutli,  and  Halifax. 

Q.  Well,  before  the  treaty  did  you  put  up  any  of  those  salt  fish  ! — A. 
We  have  always  been  in  the  habit  of  putting  up  more  or  less. 

Q.  Did  you  send  to  the  United  States  before  this  treaty  the  same  as 
\ou  do  uowf — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  were  the  prices  then,  when  you  had  to  pay  $1  a  barrel  duty  I 
—A.  We  generally  got  enough  more  to  pay  the  duty. 

Q.  Well,  in  point  of  fact  then,  even  in  regard  to  salt  fish,  this  treaty 
bas  not  been  a  benefit  to  you  at  all  ? — A.  I  can't  see  that  it  is  a  benefit 
to  us.    I  think  it  is  an  injury  to  us. 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  the  Americans  come  down  into  the  Dominion 
and  supply  the  markets  that  you  would  otherwise  supply  ? — A.  There 
have  been  a  good  many  American  fish  sold  in  our  markets  to  my  knowl- 
e(l(;e.  They  are  selling  right  along,  more  or  less,  in  St.  John,  Halifax, 
and  Yarmouth. 

Q.  Y'^ou  say  that  during  the  time  before  the  treaty  was  in  force,  and 
\rbeu  you  had  to  pay  $1  a  barrel,  yon  got  as  good  a  price  as  now,  and 
that  they  paid  the  duty  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  the  Americans  were  excluded  from  our  waters  altogether,  you 
baving  the  privilege  to  send  in  fresh  fish  as  you  always  did,  what  duty 
would  you  be  willing  to  pay  on  the  salt  fish  to  keep  them  out  alto- 
gether?— A.  I  would  be  willing  to  go  back  to  the  old  arrangement. 

Q.  Would  you  make  more  money  if  you  went  back  to  that  syste  m 
and  kept  them  out  ? — A.  Well,  chiefly  all  the  money  I  made  fishing  was 
made  before  the  treaty  came  into  force,  when  I  had  to  pay  a  duty. 

Q.  You  would  rather  pay  a  reasonable  duty  and  keep  them  out  ? — 
A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Your  idea  is  that  the  consumer  pays  the  duty  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  result  is  simply  this,  then :  that  you  get  a  lower  price  for  yonr 
fish  now,  and  the  Americans  pay  less  for  it.  The  consumer  guts  it  for 
less  money  ! — A.  Yes,  that  is  the  result. 

Q.  The  benefit,  then,  has  been  to  the  consumer  as  far  as  you  can  see 
now  ?— A.  Yes,  sir ;  the  consumer  gets  the  benefit.  He  gets  a  cheaper 
fish  than  he  did  before. 

Q.  And  you  have  no  more  money  1 — A.  No  more. 

Q.  But  something  less  ? 

Mr.  FosTBB.  Does  the  witness  assent  to  that  ? 


724 


▲WARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


By  Mr.  Thomson  : 

Q.  Do  you  get  less  money  for  your  fish  than  you  did  before !— A. 
Yea;  for  some  kinds  of  flsh  we  don't  get  half  as  oiuuh  m  we  did  !>«! 
fore. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  come  down  there  and  catch  for  bait?— A.  Yes- 
they  visit  oar  shores  a  good  deal  for  bait. 

Q.  Do  they  catch  it  tuemselves !— A.  Some  Jo  and  some  do  not. 

Q.  Do  they  catch  to  any  considerable  extent  themselves  f— A.  Well, 
yes,  they  do  a  considerable. 

Q.  Do  they  bring  down  their  own  men  to  catch  it  ? — A.  Some  of  tlicm 
do,  yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  use  this  bait  for  f— A.  Codfish  chiefly. 

Q.  What  time  do  they  come  for  bait  ? — A.  They  come  in  the  spring 
of  the  year  chiefly.  The  best  bait  is  there  in  the  spring  of  tlie  year. 
That  is  for  tlie  Bank  fishery. 

Q.  How  mauy  vessels  visit  the  bay  for  bait  ?— A.  80  to  100  sail  of 
vessels. 

Q.  Every  spring  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  average  do  they  take  ? — A.  10,000  to  a  vessel. 

Q.  Are  they  all  caught  in  British  waters  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  a  considerable  privilege ;  do  they  admit  it  ? — A.  Yes,  tlics 
do,  because  it  is  the  easiest  way  for  them  to  get  bait.  If  it  was  not  a 
privilege,  they  would  not  avail  themselves  of  it. 

Q.  They  admit  it  is  a  privilege  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  are  you  aware  that  tluy  buy  also  besides  what  they  fish  ?— 
A.  Yes ;  they  do  buy  bait. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  they  make  a  preference  of  buying  from  their 
own  men  f — A.  Well,  I  never  saw  much  ditterence  that  waj'. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  your  own  island.  Do  you  know  whether  it  is 
GO  elsewhere  or  not  ? — A.  Well,  I  suppose  some  make  a  prefereDce, 
Some  have  particular  friends.  A  good  mauy  have  gone  from  Eastport 
to  Gloucester,  and  when  they  come  down  they  will  patronize  the  J-^ast 
port  men  before  a  stranger.  That  is  the  way  it  goes,  1  tliiuk,  a  good 
deal. 

Q.  In  reference  to  net- fishing  for  herring,  ought  those  nets,  according 
to  your  experience,  to  be  allowed  to  remain  in  the  water  during  the  day- 
time ? — A.  They  ought  not,  according  to  my  experience. 

Q.  Why  not  ? — A.  Because  they  injure  the  fishery,  they  frighten  the 
fish  away. 

Q.  The  herring  see  the  nets  and  are  frightened  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  proper  time  is  at  night  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  ought  to  put  them 
down  in  the  evening  and  take  them  up  in  the  morning. 

Q.  One  witness  said  that  in  the  day-time,  as  a  rule,  the  herring  did  not 
mesh  themselves  in  the  net  at  all  ? — A.  That  is  my  experience ;  they  say 
they  don't  mesh  themselves. 

Q.  In  addition  to  that,  they  get  frightened  1—A.  Yes ;  and  it  is  an 
obstruction  to  their  passage. 

Q.  Since  the  Americans  came  in,  have  they  introduced  the  system  of 
keeping  the  nets  out  day  and  night  ? — A.  They  do  it  more  or  less. 

Q.  And  that,  you  say,  injures  the  fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  our  fishermen  do 
it  too. 

Q.  Yes,  but  that  is  because  the  Americans  do  it  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Whenever  any  bad  practice  is  introduced  to  kill  the  fish,  our  men 
have  to  follow  it  in  self-defense  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  any  one  try  to  get  along  without  trawling, 
and  finally  take  to  it  on  account  of  the  Americans  doing  so  ?— A.  It  is 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   C0MMIH810N. 


725 


and  it  is  an 


only  of  late  years  that  we  have  nsed  the  trawl.  We  always  ased  to  get 
along  without  the  trawl  before  the  Americans  oarae  down. 

Q.  Have  yon  ever  known  any  one  trying  to  compete  with  them  with* 
ont  aning  it  and  afterward  having  to  come  into  it  f — A.  They  have  to 
fi.sh  with  the  same  appliances  as  the  Americans  to  get  along. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  them  try  to  get  along  without  using  it  and 
find  that  they  could  not  do  so,  espeoially  about  Grand  Manan  f — A. 
They  have  not  nsed  them  there  until  very  lately — until  last  year.  But 
they  have  found  that  they  are  coiiiiiellod  to  use  them  to  get  along. 

Q.  Tliere  is  no  trouble  between  the  American  fishermen  and  your 
oflrnf— A.  I  never  saw  any  great  trouble.  Sometimes  there  is  a  little 
(liil'eronce  arises,  but  I  do  not  know  that  there  is  any  more  trouble  be- 
tween the  Americans  and  our  flshermeu  than  there  is  among  our  own, 
as  far  as  my  observations  have  gone. 

Q.  I  tliink  you  have  stated  that  all  the  fisheries  are  within  three  miles 
of  the  land  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is,  the  hake,  haddock,  herring,  and  pollack  ? — A.  Yes,  they 
are  all  within  three  miles. 

Q.  What  about  the  cod  ? — A.  We  do  not  get  much  cod  in  our  inshore 
fisheries. 

Q.  The  cod  is  a  very  small  proportion  ? — A.  Yes,  it  is  a  very  small 
proportion. 

Q.  You  stated  that  the  value  you  gave  consisted  altogether  of  fish 
caught  within  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  For  30  years  I  think  you  said  you  had  l>een  fishing  in  your  neigh- 
borhood ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Ill  vessels  and  boats? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  How  large  are  the  vessels  that  have  been  owned  by  British  sub- 
jects 30  years  past  ? — A.  Tlie  vessels  have  beeu  all  the  way  from  10  tons 
to  'tO  tons. 

Q.  They  do  not  go  out,  I  believe,  for  long  trips,  do  they — the  British 
vessels  f— A.  The  chief  of  tbem  do  not,  as  I  said,  but  there  are  one  or 
two  would  go  fishing  on  the  opposite  banks. 

Q.  All  the  boats  and  ueiirly  all  the  vessels  are  day  fishermen,  are  they 
not?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  during  all  that  time  the  Americans  have  been  there  too  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  in  about  equal  numbers  to  your  people  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  have  fished  in  the  same  places  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Without  reference  much  to  what  sort  of  a  treaty  there  was  betveea 
Washington  and  London  ? — A.  It  never  made  any  difference. 

Q.  Nothing  can  be  traced  specially  to  the  effect  of  the  treaty  of  1818 
or  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1856,  or  the  Washington  Treaty  of  1871, 
caa  there,  as  to  that.  It  went  on  the  same  way  ?— A.  Pretty  much  in 
the  same  way. 

Q.  Well,  the  Americans  used  to  fish  with  hook  and  line,  didn't  they! — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  they  begin  to  alter  a  little  and  have  small  trawls  ? — A. 
Lately,  within  8  or  io  years. 

Q.  They  first  fished  with  small  trawls,  didn't  they  ?— A.  Yes,  with 
hand  lines. 

Q.  But  when  they  began  using  something  else,  they  first  began  to  ase 
trawls  with  a  few  hooks  upon  them  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  are  getting  in  the 
way  of  using  more  hooks  every  year. 


726 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  But  it  did  not  begin  all  at  once  a»  it  is  at  present  1 — A.  No,  it  is 
increasing  now  every  year. 

Q.  Your  people  saw  the  growth  of  it  and  they  fell  in  with  it  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  are  pushing  it  now  with  diligence,  according  to  their  means! 
their  enterprise,  and  capital  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  the  trawl  a  costly  ihing  ;  do  the  lines  and  hooks  and  the  daiigor 
of  losing  theoi  make  it  costly  ? — A.  Yes.  It  costs  in  proportion  to  the 
length  of  the  lines  and  the  number  of  hookr,. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  generally  the  Americans  had  more  capital  at 
their  disposal  than  the  British  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes.  They  came  tioiu 
a  distance,  and  it  seems  they  had  better  vessels. 

Q.  But  those  that  reside  in  the  easterly  part  of  Maine  ? — A,  I  think 
they  had  pretty  much  the  same  capital  as  our  fishermen. 

Q.  Your  people  began  using  trawls  at  first  with  a  few  hooks  in  a  small 
way  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  it  gradually  grew  up  to  its  present  dimensions  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  as  they  are  doing  it  now  they  are  att'ecting  the  ftsher^v  to  about 
the  same  extent  as  the  Americans? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  do  you  think  it  is  an  injury  ?  You  know  there  are  per- 
sons who  think  it  is  not  an  injury  ? — A.  There  are  but  very  few  wlio  will 
not  say  it  is  an  injury. 

Q.  But  it  has  been  the  same  with  the  pursuit  of  all  fishing ;  where 
science  has  advanced  and  skill  and  capital  have  been  employed  they 
have  used  different  methods  of  prosecuting  the  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Y'^ou  know  that  it  seems  to  be  the  inevitable  progress,  does  it  not.' 
— A.  Y'^es. 

Q.  I  observe  that  the  gentleman  who  examined  you  used  a  word  that 
you  did  not  use,  that  this  "  destroyed "  the  fishery.  J  want  to  know. 
when  you  assented  to  his  phrase  "destroyed,"  io  what  sense  you  meant 
to  use  the  word  ? — A.  I  meant  that  it  was  an  injury  to  the  fishery. 

Q.  That  was  the  phrase  you  used ;  but  I  think  you  did  not  yourself 
say  it  destroyed  them.  You  do  not  mean  to  say  they  are  destroyed  ?— 
A.  Not  all  of  them. 

Q.  And  you  do  not  know  they  are  going  to  be  destroyed  absolutely  .'— 
A.  It  is  my  opinion  that  if  they  kept  on  at  the  rate  they  are  goinj^  on 
now  they  would  eventually  destroy  the  fish. 

Q.  That  is  altogether  a  speculative  opinion ;  you  cannot  know  how 
that  is  ? — A.  No;  that  is  only  my  opinion. 

Q.  May  it  not  go  on  in  this  way,  after  they  have  used  this  apparatus, 
that  as  soon  as  the  fish  are  diminished  they  will  begin  to  use  it  less  and 
less,  becau.se  it  does  not  pr.y;  then  will  not  the  fish  naturally  inerease 
in  numbers  again  ?  For  all  you  know,  that  may  be  the  case,  as  it  has 
been  with  fisheries  in  other  parts  of  the  world.  I  will  ask  you  it'  you 
do  not  know  it  is  the  case  where  modes  of  fishing  have  been  employed 
which  renderetl  the  fish  scarce,  those  modes  have  after  a  time  been  no 
longer  used,  and  then  the  fish  nave  again  come  in  as,  for  instance,  on 
the  coast  of  Norway? — A.  No;  I  do  not  know,  and  I  do  not  think  it 
would  ever  be  the  case. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  read  upon  that  subject? — A.  No;  I  have  never 
read. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  they  have  found  it  in  other  places  ? — A.  No ;  I 
never  heard.  It  is  my  opinion  that  the  scarcer  the  fish  get  the  more 
they  will  have  to  use  these  appliances. 

Q.  Well,  will  it  not  be  so  expensive  that  the  Americans  will  go  to 
another  place  ? — A.  It  may  be. 

Q.  Well,  won't  that  be  the  case ;  if  the  American  knows  that  it  will 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


72? 


mot  know  how 


be  very  expensive  to  get  fish  in  cue  place  and  not  so  expensive  iu  an 
other,  he  will  go  to  the  other  ? — A.  That  may  be  so. 

Q.  You  do  not  suppose  the  same  number  of  people  will  keep  on  fish- 
ing with  trawls  when  there  is  not  so  great  a  number  of  fish  to  be  caught  t 
—A.  Well,  they  will  have  to  move  to  some  other  district. 

Q.  What  then? — A.  The  country  will  become  depopulated. 

Q.  What  country? — A.  Our  fishing  country,  where  I  reside.  When 
the  fish  get  so  scarce  that  the  fishermen  cannot  get  a  living,  they  will 
have  to  go  somewhere  else. 

Q.  It  may  make  them  more  adventurous  and  they  may  get  larger 
vessels  ? — A.  But  when  they  get  so  poor  that  they  can't  purchase  those 
vessels 

Q.  Don't  you  suppose  there  can  be  capital  and  enterprise  enough 
found  there  to  follow  the  fish  wherever  they  go  ?  Do  you  suppose  your 
fishenneu  are  so  limited  that  they  cannot  go  beyond  tlie  marine  leaguel 
—A.  There  are  very  few  of  them  capable  of  purchasing  a  large  vessel. 

Q.  If  they  can't  catch  fish  close  in,  don't  yon  think  means  will  be  found 
to  go  out  ? — A.  They  won't  be  able  to  furnish  boats  and  vessels  them- 
selves. 

Q.  If  it  destroys  the  population,  as  you  seem  to  think,  not  having 
capital  to  go  beyond  three  miles,  how  will  it  be  when  the  fish  come  back  ? 
If  they  do  come  back  it  will  not  be  ultimately  des  oyed  ? — A.  No;  it 
would  be  in  the  mean  time. 

Q.  It  would  be  resumed,  would  it  not  ?  You  don't  know  that  it  would 
not  be  ?— xV.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  So  that,  after  all,  your  opinion  is  speculative  ?    Now,  with  reference 
to  throwing  the  tisli  overboard,  what  you  call  the  gurry,  1  suppose  that 
depends  entirely  upon  whether  the  vessel  makes  port  often  or  is  out? — . 
A.  It  depends  upon  that  a  good  deal. 

Q.  If  they  are  boats  or  sn)all  vessels  that  make  port  frequently,  they 
will  put  the  gurry  on  the  land.  It  is  good  manure? — A.  It  is,  but  the 
fishermen  can't  generally  use  it  much  for  manure.  Very  few  of  the 
fishermen  have  any  land. 

Q.  Is  that  so  ?  Don't  your  boat  fishermen  also  own  land,  like  the 
fishermen  in  Prince  Edward  Island  ?— A.  Some  own  a  little  and  more 
don't  own  a  mite. 

Q.  When  they  do  own  it,  they  cultivate  it? — A.  They  raise  a  few  po- 
tatoes and  the  like  of  that. 

Q.  Those  that  don't  make  port  throw  it  overboard  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Has  not  that  always  been  the  case  ? — A.  Yes,  I  think  so. 

Q.  Then  that  was  not  atrick  learned  from  the  Americans  ? — A.  I  think 
it  was  always  done  more  or  less.  I  guess  the  Americans  did  not  teach 
theiu  all  their  bad  habits.    I  suppose  they  had  some  before. 

Q.  The  Americans  come  down  there,  we  have  been  told,  to  buy  her- 
ring for  bait.    That  is  for  cod-fish  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  buy  if  they  can  ?  —A.  Some  do  and  some  catch  their  own 
bait. 

Q.  Now  I  want  to  know.  The  witness  before  you  spoke  of  them  as 
almost  universally  buying  the  fish  ? — A.  Tart  of  them  do  and  part  of 
them  do  not. 

Q.  Well,  "  part"  may  be  anything  ? — A.  Well,  I  would  say  one-half 
buy  it  and  the  other  half  catch. 

Q.  Do  they  catch  it  alone  or  do  they  make  bargains  with  your  people, 
that  own  boats  and  nets? — A.  Sometimes  they  catch  it  themselves. 
They  bring  their  nets  with  them.   Most  of  their  fishermen  that  fish  iu  the 


728 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


bay  have  nets  ao  that  they  can  set  nets  and  catch  their  own  buit ;  bat 
the  vessels  that  come  from  Gloucester 

Q.  Well,  if  any  witness  has  said  that  the  large  majority  of  the  herrin" 
that  is  taken  away  for  bait  is  bought,  you  would  not  concur  in  that  ?-l 
A.  I  should  say  there  was  a  majority. 

Q.  You  would  say  more  than  half? — A.  Yes,  a  half  or  two-thirds. 

Q.  It  might  be  three-fourths? — A.  I  should  not  say  so. 

Q.  You  say  there  might  be  two  thirds  ? — A.  There  might  possibly  be. 
I  would  not  lilce  to  say  much  over  half. 

Q.  Have  you  any  means  of  ascertaining  what  it  is  ? — A.  Notliiiig  more 
than  what  I  see  myself.  I  am  a  practical  flshermau  and  1  have  beeu 
around  with  them. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  bait  ? — A.  Yes.  I  am  like  any  other  flslierrnan.  I 
catch  what  bait  I  can  in  the  spring  and  sell  what  I  can  to  the  iisber- 
men. 

Q.  Well,  I  do  not  know  what  your  views  of  trade  are,  but  I  suppose 
you  try  to  make  something.  You  do  not  sell  solely  to  encourage  the 
Americans  ? — A.  We  do  not  study  their  advantage  at  all.  It  is  our  own. 
We  do  not  put  ourselves  out  at  all  about  them.  When  we  catch  the  bait 
the  next  thing  is  to  see  where  we  will  get  the  most  money  out  of  it. 

Q.  You  sell  to  your  own  people.  They  buy  herring  for  fishing  ?— A. 
Well,  they  do  some,  but  not  much.  X  have  sold  herring  for  bait  to  our 
people  who  went  mackerel  fishing,  but  not  much  for  cod  fishing. 

Q.  Have  you  been  in  the  habit  of  sending  fish  to  the  United  States— 
I  mean  your  island  people  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Dried,  frozen,  and  salted  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  a  long  time  ? — A.  For  some  time. 

Q.  How  long  ? — A.  I  can't  just  remember  when  I  commenced  shipping 
frozen  herring.    I  guess  it  has  been  about  fifteen  years,  probablj-. 

Q.  And  they  have  gone  iu  irrespective  of  treaties  ?  They  would  go  in 
as  fresh  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  sent  in  your  frozen  fresh  fish,  and  also  you  took  dried 
and  slightly  salted  flsh  ?  They  have  gone  in,  have  not  they,  for  a  great 
many  years  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  They  have  gone  in  free  since  the 
treaty ;  at  least  I  don't  call  it  exactly  free. 

Q.  Why,  what  is  the  matter  ? — A.  Well,  when  we  go  to  Fiastport  to 
sell  a  quantity  of  fish,  we  are  supposed  to  report  to  the  custoin-liouse 
every  time  we  come,  and  if  we  only  have  two  quintals  of  fish  we  have 
to  pay  60  cents  for  a  permit  to  land  them. 

Q.  Does  that  apply  to  fresh  flsh  ? — A.  To  fresh  and  salt  both. 

Q.  What  do  you  call  that  60  cents  ? — A.  I  don't  know  what  the  name 
is,  but  every  vessel  that  goes  there  with  flsh  is  supposed  to  pay  that  00 
cents  for  the  permit.    It  is  paid  to  the  custom-house. 

Q.  Is  it  not  duties  ? — A.  They  don't  put  it  in  the  shape  of  a  duty.  It 
is  iu  the  shape  of  a  fee. 

Q.  Do  you  pay  the  man  that  owns  the  wharf  besides  ? — A.  55 o. 

Q.  Is  not  that  what  it  means  ? — A.  !No. 

Q.  Is  it  not  dockage  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Don't  they  call  it  dockage  or  wharfoge  ? — A.  No ;  it  goes  to  the 
custom-house. 

Q.  In  the  first  instance.  But  you  must  pay  somebody  if  you  had 
your  fish  at  the  wharf? — A.  The  merchants  that  buy  the  fish  furnish  the 
wharf  to  put  it  on. 

Q.  You  go  there  to  sell  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  own  a  wharf  there,  do  you  ?    Do  you  suppose  the  treaty 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


729 


lose  the  treaty 


means  that  you  shall  have  a  free  wharf  to  land  your  flsh  on  ? — A.  No ; 
I  do  not. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  pay  any  dockage  or  wharfage,  but  you  pay  60 
ceuts.  Haven't  you  ever  looked  into  that  to  see  if  it  was  not  dockage 
or  wharfage  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  have  looked  into  it. 

Q.  How  do  you  make  it  out,  if  you  do  not  pay  anybody  except  the 
customhonse I — A.  Every  person  who  has  a  fish-stand  has  a  wharf  of 
his  own,  and  he  is  glad  to  give  you  the  privilege  of  landing  for  the  sake 
of  the  trade.  We  are  not  supposed  to  pay  any  dockage.  They  furnish 
the  (lockage. 

Q.  Who  ?— A.  Tlie  men  that  buy. 

Q.  Then  you  say  it  is  in  the  form  of  a  landing  permit  ? — A.  Yes ;  we 
have  to  report. 

Q.  Somebody  comes  down  from  the  custom-house  to  see  that  you  are 
all  right,  that  you  haven't  anything  but  fish  ?  Do  you  ever  go  anywhere 
where  you  do  not  have  to  pay  something  for  a  landing  perm'<^  ?  Was 
it  not  so  before  this  treaty  ? — A.  1  think  it  has  always  been  so. 

Q.  And  in  addition  to  that  you  had  to  pay  a  duty  before  the  treaty? 
>'o\v  the  duty  is  taken  ott"  and  the  permit  remains  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  read  the  treaty  ? — A.  Y'^es;  but  I  don't  think  I  could 
repeat  much  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  anything  about  leaving  out  the  landing  permit? — 
A.  Xo ;  I  do  not  remember. 

Q.  You  say  you  get  less  for  your  flsh  than  before  the  treaty  was  made; 
how  long  has  that  treaty  been  in  actual  operation  ?  I  do  not  mean  to 
refer  to  the  time  it  was  dated,  but  to  its  actually  going  into  operation 
on  both  sides? — A.  It  has  been  in  operation,  I  think,  ever  since  it  was 
dated  or  issued  at  Washington.  I  do  not  just  remember.  We  do  not 
trouble  ourselves  very  much  about  treaties  there. 

Q.  Does  dry  flsh  go  in  as  fresh  f — A.  They  do  now. 

Q.  But  I  mean  before  the  treaty  ? — A.  So;  we  had  to  pay  a  duty  on 
them  as  well  as  salted  flsh. 

Q.  Did  not  they  generally  go  in  as  American  flsh  ? — A.  Xo;  not  from 
our  side.    They  went  in  as  British  fish. 

Q.  Was  not  there  any  arrangement  made  between  your  people  and 
tlie  Americans  by  which  those  went  in  under  the  names  of  American 
traders? — A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  a  great  deal  was  taken  in  in  that  way? — A. 
There  might  be  some  smuggled  in  in  that  way. 

Q.  You  say  you  got  less  for  your  fish.  How  do  you  account  for  that 
tact  ? — A.  There  are  so  many  more  flsh  taken  into  the  market  than  there 
were  before,  that  it  has  reduced  the  price. 

Q.  W^ell,  that  is  a  simple  mode  of  accounting  for  it.  And  if  there 
should  be  fewer  fish  go  in  the  price  would  go  up? — A.  Yes;  and  I  think 
if  it  had  been  left  the  way  it  was,  and  no  Americans  were  allowed  to  fish 
iu  our  waters,  probably  the  flsh  would  be  higher  than  they  were  then 
in  the  United  States,  as  there  is  a  greater  population,  and  more  would 
be  required. 

Q.  Well,  the  treaty  has  not  stopped  the  increase  of  the  population? — 
A.  iNot  that  I  know  of.    The  same  thing  seems  to  go  on  yet. 

Q.  Well,  is  it  not  the  case  that  the  price  depends  upon  the  demand 
and  supply  ?— A.  I  suppose  so. 

(J.  And  the  demand  is  gradually  increasing,  is  it  not,  pretty  rap- 
idly ?— A.  1  suppose  it  is. 

Q.  And  the  supply  is  also  increasing  by  the  use  of  these  nets  and  the 
number  of  people  that  are  employed  iu  the  business  ? — A.  Yes. 


TTJXr 


AVVABD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


Q.  They  keep  pretty  well  atre  ist  of  one  auother  1 — A.  Well,  ^es;  but 
I  think  the  supply  is  a  little  ahead. 

Q.  Do  you  think  more  of  your  people  have  sent  fish  to  the  United 
States  than  did  before? — A.  I  don't  know  that  there  are  any  more  of 
them. 

Q.  Well,  there  are  certainly  no  more  Americans  than  before?  There 
are  fewer,  are  there  not  ? — A.  There  have  been  more  since  the  treaty. 

Q.  Have  you  found  it  so  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  more  last  year  than  the  year  before  ? — A.  Yes ;  there 
seems  to  be  more  every  year. 

Q.  Is  there  any  greater  increase  than  there  has  always  been  ?— A 
Yes. 

Q.  You  have  been  on  the  American  coast  somewhat  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Not  very  far  down  the  coast  of  Maine  ? — A.  Yes,  1  have  been  to 
Boston. 

Q.  But  have  you  followed  the  fishing-grounds  1 — A.  No. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  by  personal  observation  what  the  American  in- 
shore fishery  is,  do  you  ? — A.  No,  I  do  not ;  only  what  I  have  heard  by 
talking  to  American  fishermen,  and  our  fishermen  that  are  engaged  oii 
the  coast. 

Q.  Since  this  question  has  been  up,  of  compensation,  you  have  heard 
i,t  a  good  deal  talked  about,  haven't  you  ? — A.  Well,  no,  not  a  great  deal. 

Q.  Certain  opinions  are  pretty  strongly  held  in  your  neighborhood  ?— 
A.  There  is  not  much  said  about  it  there  any  way. 

Q.  Don't  they  say  there  generally — ^haven't  you  been  frequently  told 
that  the  Americans  were  ruining  your  fisheries  and  that  they  ought  to 
pay  a  large  sum  ? — A.  Yes,  they  think  there  ought  to  be  a  reasoaable 
compensation  for  the  privilege. 

Q.  That  is  not  what  I  mean,  but  the  opinion  is  pretty  generally  pro- 
mulgated, is  it  not,  that  the  Americans  have  done  a  great  deal  of  harm  '.— 
A.  Yes,  they  think  so. 

Q.  That  they  have  destroyed  them  by  seine  fishing  and  by  throwing 
over  gurry,  and  in  various  other  ways  ? — A.  I  think  that  has  been  the 
case.    That  is  reasonable  to  any  man. 

Q.  Well,  you  have  given  your  opinion.  You  say  there  are  regulations 
as  to  catching  fish  at  Grand  Manan  with  reference  to  the  season  f— A. 
Yes,  there  is  a  close  season  for  herring.  They  are  prohibited,  I  think. 
from  the  15th  of  August  to  the  15th  of  October.  I  won't  swear  certainly 
what  time  it  is. 

Q.  It  is  the  spawning  period  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  there  during  the  spawning  period  ? — A.  >"o ; 
I  have  never  be3n  there. 

fr-  Q.  And  you  cannot  then  say,  from  your  own  observation,  that  the 
Americans  have  broken  these  regulations,  or,  if  so,  to  what  extent  .'— 
A.  I  could  not  say  that  they  do ;  but  I  have  heard  it  said  by  our  fish- 
ermeu.    But  our  own  fishermen  will  do  it,  too. 

Q.  I  was  going  to  ask  you  that.  I  know  you  have  been  very  f^ank. 
I  suppose  the  officer  finds  it  as  hard  to  keep  out  the  British  as  the 


American 
certain. 


fishermen?— A.  Well,  I  think  so;  yes.    I  don't  know  for 


By  Mr.  Foster : 
'■  Q.  Mr.  Thomson  consents  that  I  shall  put  a  few  questions  to  you. 
Will  you  tell  us  where  the  Wolves  are  ?— A.  (Points  to  Wolves  on  the 
map.)    They  are  out  there. 
^  Q.  Now,  did  I  understand  you  to  say  that,  no  winter  fishing  for  her- 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


731 


rJDg  is  (lone,  except  in   there   (pointing  ou  map  to  inshore  fishing 
grounds)  ? — A.  None  of  any  account. 

Q.  I  want  to  see  what  that  means  exactly.  Do  you  know  Overseer 
Cunningham,  of  the  inner  bay  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.     .  he  an  intelligent  man  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  I  want  to  know  what  this  means.  I  read  from  his  report  for 
1870,  and  would  like  to  liave  you  explain  it,  if  you  can  :  "  The  winter 
herring  fishery,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  shows  a  decrease  from  the  yield  of 
last  year.  This,  I  believe,  is  owing  to  the  large  quantity  of  nets — in 
fact,  miles  of  them — being  set  by  United  States  fishermen,  all  the  way 
from  Grand  Manan  to  Lepreaux,  and  far  out  in  the  bay  by  the  Wolves, 
sunk  from  20  to  25  fathoms,  which  keep  the  fish  from  coming  into  the 
bay."  Is  that  so  ? — A.  it  is  a  doubt,  to  my  mind,  whether  it  would  be 
so  or  not. 

Q.  Do  they  do  it  ?    Do  they  keep  nets  in  the  bay  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Our  fishermen  don't? — A.  Nobody  does;  they  can't  do  that. 

Q.  "  In  this  view  1  am  borne  out  by  all  the  fishermen  with  whom  I 
couversed  on  the  subject.  Our  own  fishermen,  w  ho  own  vessels,  have 
now  to  go  a  distance  of  six  to  eight  miles  offshore  before  they  can  catch 
any."    Is  that  so  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  "  The  poorer  classes  of  fishermen  who  have  nothing  but  small 
boats  made  but  a  poor  catch." — A.  I  think  Mr.  Cunningham  is  a  little 
wild  in  his  calculations.  X  do  nut  think  he  has  a  way  of  knowing  as 
much  as  a  practical  fisherman. 

Q.  Is  his  report  all  wrong? — A.  I  think  some  parts  of  it  are. 

Q.  "  However,  during  the  winter  months  there  were  caught  and  sold 
in  a  frozen  state  to  United  States  vessels  1,900  barrels,  at  from  §1  to 
.*5  a  barrel.  The  price  being  somewliat  better  than  last  year,  helped 
to  make  up  the  deficiency  in  their  catch.  About  500  barrels  were  used 
for  home  consumption.  There  was  a  better  catch  of  smoked  herrings, 
amounting  to  84,000  boxes,  and  there  might  have  been  a  larger  business 
in  this  line,  but  prices  were  so  low  that  those  in  the  business  preferred 
making  oil  and  pumice,  which  paid  better."  Is  that  so  ? — xV.  I  could 
not  say.  The  inner  bay  is  Passamaquoddy.  It  is  a  different  district. 
1  have  no  control  of  that.  I  could  not  say  how  many  herring  were 
caught  in  there.    Of  course  he  could  say  better  about  that  than  I  could. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  making  oil  and  pumice  "  paid  better"? — A.  That 
might  be  so. 

Q.  (Reads.)  "There  were  only  175  barrels  of  mackerel  caught  this 
year,  although  a  large  school  of  those  fish  came  into  the  bay,  but  they 
would  not  bite  at  a  bait,  nor  did  they  come  inshore  close  enough  for  the 
weirs  to  do  much.  Those  caught  were  taken  mostly  in  nets,  with  a  few 
good  hauls  in  the  brush  weirs,  but  I  feel  confident  that  if  seines  had 
been  employed,  there  would  have  been  a  large  catch.  In  hiiddock  and 
bake  there  is  a  decrease  from  the  catch  of  last  year,  occasioned  no  doubt 
by  the  use  of  trawls  or  set  lines  outside." — A.  I  think  that  was  so. 

Q.  Well,  haddock  and  hake  are  caught  by  trawls  outside  ? — A.  He 
means  outside  the  islands. 

Q.  (Reads.)  "  My  own  experience  is,  having  formerly  u.sed  a  trawl 
or  bultow,  that  it  is  a  destructive  mode  of  fishing,  and  kills  a  great 
many  small  and  useless  fish,  as  well  as  keeps  the  fish  from  coming  near 
sliore,  and  I  am  convinced  that  their  use  should  be  prohibited  altogether 
in  this  country.  A  very  serious  injury  to  the  fisheries  is  the  habit  of 
throwing  over  the  gurry  or  ott'als  on  the  fishing  grounds  by  our  own  fish- 
ermen as  well  as  by  Americans.  As  they  are  fishing  far  off  shore,  a 
week  at  a  time,  this  destructive  practice  can  be  followed  with  impunity 


732 


▲WARD  OP  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


and  witboat  fear  of  detection.  The  overseers  are  many  miles  away  on 
shore  and  can  do  little,  for  the  fishermen  will  not  inform  on  each  other. 
I  can  see  no  way  to  prevent  this  most  destructive  abuse  but  to  have  a 
small  vessel  employed  to  go  around  among  the  fishing  craft  and  see  that 
the  gurry  is  taken  ashore  and  disposed  of." 

They  do  talce  fish  off  shore  from  what  I  have  read.  Mr.  GuDningham 
says  the  gurry  is  deposited  there.  Is  there  not  a  good  deal  of  flsbiDg 
more  than  three  miles  out  ? — A.  There  is  not  in  my  district  that  amounts 
to  anything. 

Q.  Well,  that  is  all  wrong? — A.  No;  he  does  not  say  it  is  more  than 
three  miles  out. 

Q.  He  says  they  are  fishing  far  off  shore. — A.  Well,  he  would  say  far 
off,  and  it  might  be  two  miles  or  it  might  be  three  miles.  Faroiuin 
the  bay  would  be  between  the  Wolves  and  Beaver  Harbor,  where  the 
chief  fishing  is  done  in  wiuter.  The  chief  fishing  is  done  from  Letete 
Passage  to  Lepreaux. 

Q.  You  explain  by  saying  that  it  is  all  within  three  miles  ?— A.  All 
the  herring  fishery  in  winter  is  done  within  three  miles. 

Q.  Well,  is  it  done  by  nets  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can't  they  catch  with  nets,  which  they  do  not  drag  on  shore,  but 
which  they  draw  into  the  vessel?  Do  they  do  all  this  by  coiuiiig  on 
shore  1 — A.  They  do  it  all  with  nets.  They  take  the  herring  on  shore 
and  freeze  them  in  these  harbors. 

Q.  What  does  he  mean  by  speaking  of  their  having  to  go  a  distance 
of  6  or  8  miles  off  shore  before  they  can  make  a  catch  ? — A.  He  has  not 
had  experience. 

Q.  How  would  they  catch  out  there? — A.  I  suppose  they  would  catch 
them  with  nets,  if  they  caught  thera  at  all. 

Q.  And  if  so,  they  would  bring  them  into  the  vessel  ? — A.  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  Well,  that  report  is  all  wrong  ? — A.  A  part  of  it. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  Passamaquoddy  is  over  by  St.  Andrew's  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  the  very  bay  in  which  one  of  the  witnesses  said  that  the 
fishing  would  be  destroyed  by  the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Cunningham  lives  away  off  ever  so  far? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  Mr.  Cunningham  is  no  practical  fisherman  at  all  ? — A.  Xo. 

Q.  He  lives  away  up  at  St.  Andrews  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  Americans  are  actually  now  making  a  charge  for 
landing  permit  of  GO  cents  ? — A.  Yes.  We  are  supposed,  every  time 
we  land  herring,  to  pay  60  cents.    If  we  don't  we  are  violating  the  law. 

Q.  Had  you  to  pay  that  before  the  treaty  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  always  had 
to  pay  that,  and,  in  addition  to  that,  we  had  to  pay  a  duty. 

Q.  Notwithstanding  the  treaty,  they  make  you  pay  60  cents?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Is  Mr.  Cunningham  overseer  for  the  whole  of  the  county  ? — A.  Noj 
only  for  Passamaquoddy. 

No.  31. 

Wednesday,  August  23, 1877. 

The  conference  met. 

Walter  B.  McLaughlin,  light-house  keeper  and  fishery  overseer 
at  Grand  Manan,  in  the  county  of  Charlotte,  called  on  behalf  of  the 
Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 
Question.  Where  do  you  live  ? — Answer.  At  Grand  Manan. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


733 


it  is  more  tban 


Miles  ?— A.  All 


said  that  the 


Q.  What  ofiBues  do  you  hold  there  ? — A.  I  am  lighthouse  keeper  and 
fishery  overseer. 

Q.  You  are  also  a  county  councilor  ? — A.  Yes.  1  am  also  a  captain 
of  the  militia. 

Q.  I  should  be  surprised  if  you  were  not  a  justice  of  the  p3ace  ? — A. 
I  am  ex  o_fficio  in  view  of  my  commission  as  fishery  overseer. 

Q.  You  were  born  there  I — A.  No ;  I  was  born  in  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  resided  on  the  island  ? — A.  1  have  resided 
there  all  my  life-time. 

Q.  How  long  is  that  ? — A.  Forty-eight  years, 

Q.  Has  your  father  evi^r  been  engaged  in  the  fisheries  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  way? — A.  My  father  was  engaged  both  as  a  fisherman 
himself  and  as  an  employer  of  fishermen — that  is,  he  had  an  interest  in 
vessels  and  hired  men. 

Q.  He  was  a  practical  fisherman  himself,  and  not  only  that  but  he 
employed  men  to  fish?— A.  Yes,  to  a  small  extent. 

Q.  Was  not  he  a  fishery  warden  in  his  lifetime  I — A.  He  was  nearly 
all  his  life,  while  he  lived  on  the  island. 

Q.  Has  your  attention  been  directed  to  the  fisheries  asd  fishing  ever 
siuce  you  were  old  enough  to  know  anything? — A,  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  yourself  now  engaged  in  the  fishery? — A.  No;  I  am  not; 
anything  more  than  as  a  fishery  overseer. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  a  fishery  overseer  ? — A.  Since  18G7. 

Q.  You  were  appointed  when  these  provinces  were  confederated  ? — A. 
Yes ;  my  father  died  in  1861.    I  was  appointed  in  his  place. 

Q.  What  are  your  duties  as  overseer;  to  enforce  the  laws  and  regula- 
tions with  reference  to  the  fisheries  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  the  island  of  Grand  Manan  is  a  large  island,  is  it  not  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  It  is  about  30  miles  long  ? — A.  On  the  chart  it  is  about  14^  marine 
miles;  about  20  English  miles  we  call  it.  It  contains  100  square  miles — 
that  is,  Grand  Manan  and  the  adjacent  islands. 

Q.  What  is  the  population  ?— A.  Over  2,000.  There  are  400  or  500 
families,  I  think. 

Q.  Are  they  all  more  or  less  engaged  in  the  prosecution  of  the  fish- 
eries?— A.  All,  directly  or  indirectly. 

Q.  The  fisheries  around  Grand  Manan  are  the  most  important  in  the 
bay  ?— A.  They  are  considered  so.  They  are  considered  the  key  of  the 
fisheries  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy.  It  is  the  most  important  fishery  in  the 
Bay  of  Fundy. 

Q.  Now  is  it  a  spawning  ground  for  any  kind  of  fish  ? — A.  It  is  for 
herrings  and  halibut.  I  would  not  say  as  to  codfish,  although  i)eople 
often  take  them  with  the  spawn  in  them. 

Q.  It  is  certainly  so  for  herring  and  halibut? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  is  the  great  spawning  ground  for  herring? — A.  We  con- 
sider it  is  from  a  point  called  Red  Point,  near  Seal  Cove,  to  Bradford's 
Cove.  They  spawn  some  all  around  the  island.  (Points  to  map  and 
describes  spawning  ground.) 

X  Q.  Y'ou  have  pointed  out  the  spawning  grounds ;  now  what  is  the  close 
season  ? — A.  The  law  says  from  the  15th  July  to  15th  October. 

Q.  Do  you  enforce  that  as  far  as  you  can  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Where  do  the  halibut  spawn  f — A.  They  spawn  in  different  parts 
of  the  island  (pointing  to  map).  This  was  considered  the  chief  spawn- 
ing ground,  between  the  Three  Islands  and  Wood  Island. 

Q.  Do  they  spawn  close  inshore?— A.  They  do  in  that  locality. 

Q.  What  about  the  herring? — A.  They  spawn  close  inshore. 


734 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Yoa  say  that  ia  the  spawning  grouod  for  the  bay  ! — A.  That  is  the 
greatest  spawning  ground. 

Q.  Weil,  now,  it  is  yonr  business  to  give  a  return  of  tlie  fish  that  are 
caught  year  by  year  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  have  to  maico  returns. 

Q.  Well,  now,  what  is  tlie  value  of  fish  taken  by  the  British  sub- 
jects ?  Or,  by  the  way,  can  you  tell  me  how  many  boats  and  vessels 
there  are  engaged  belonging  to  Grand  Manan  ? — A.  We  have  very  few 
vessels,  not  over  10.  We  had  18  reported  last  year,  but  some  of  them 
should  have  been  entered  as  boats.  There  are  something  over  30(»  boats. 
But  I  want  to  make  a  statement  with  regard  to  these  boats.  Our  peo- 
ple follow  two  kinds  of  fishing.  The  weir  fishing  requires  a  skilf  that 
they  don't  use  in  line  fishing.  So  I  have  to  take  an  account  of  all,  and 
I  make  300  boats.     We  have  about  200  superior  boats  for  line  fishing, 

Q.  Yon  say  there  is  a  skiff  required  for  weir  fishing  that  is  not  used 
in  line  fishing  t — A.  Yes.  It  is  not  used  for  net  or  line  fishing.  That 
gives  quite  a  number  of  boats  for  the  number  of  fishermen. 

Q.  How  many  of  those  skitt's  are  there  ? — A,  Well,  I  should  think  we 
had  probably  over  100.    One  hundred  and  fifty  probably. 

Q.  What  do  you  say  is  the  whole  number  including  these?— A.  I 
could  not  speak  certainly  from  memory.  (Consults  memoriindnin.) 
There  are  350  boats.  About  200  of  them  would  be  fishing- boats  for  line 
and  net  fishing. 

Q.  How  many  men  would  each  of  those  boats  have  ? — A.  There  would 
be  about  two  men  to  a  boat  as  a  general  thing.  I  do  not  refer  to  weir 
fishing,  but  in  lino  fishing  the  average  would  be  two  men  to  a  boat,  or 
perhaps  more. 

Q.  What  time  does  your  herring  fishery  commence  ? — A.  They  take 
herring  all  the  year  routid  at  Grand  Manan. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  ? — A.  For  all  purposes  they  can  be  used  for. 

Q.  Have  you  not  a  close  season  from  15th  of  July  to  loth  October?— 
A.  Yes,  but  that  is  only  on  a  small  part  of  the  island.  I  am  overseer 
for  the  whole  island. 

Q.  Well,  you  mean  you  do  not  prevent  them  from  catching  herring 
elsewhere? — A.  Certainly  not,  only  during  the  weekly  closed  time. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  do  they  catch  them  in  summer? — A.  For  bait, 
pickling,  smoking,  &c. 

Q.  The  A-^aluable  fishing  for  herring  is  in  winter  ? — A.  Yes.  The  great 
fresh  herring  business  is  carried  on  in  winter  almost  exclusively. 

Q.  That  is  the  frozen  herring  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  a  good  many  herring 
are  pickled  in  winter  too.    It  is  put  in  barrels  and  salted. 

Q.  That  is  the  ordinary  salt  herritig  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  those  herrings  that  are  caught  in  summer— all  summer 
through — are  they  good  herrings? — A.  Yes;  so  long  as  they  are  not 
ripe  herring  depositing  their  spawn.  There  is  a  time  when  tliey  get  a 
few  of  these  even  outside  of  the  spawning  grounds.  Of  course,  these 
are  really  not  very  good  for  food,  though  they  are  often  eaten. 

Q.  There  are  but  few  of  those  ? — A.  Yes,  few. 

Q.  What  other  fish  besides  herring  do  you  take? — A.  Cod,  pollock, 
hake,  haddock,  &c. 

Q.  Are  those  all  taken  inshore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  All  of  them  ? — A.  Yes,  by  our  boats.  Of  course,  boat-fishing  must 
be  inshore. 

Q.  What  do  you  understand  by  inshore  ? — A.  Within  three  miles— 
a  marine  league  from  land. 

Q.  You  say  all  those  fish  you  speak  of  are  taken  inshore? — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


735 


lOuUl  think  we 


es.    Tbe  great 


Well,  there  waa  1,400  quintals  taken  on  the  Banks  out  of  the  catch 
stated  in  my  estimate  last  year. 

Q.  What  <1o  you  caH  on  the  Banks? — A.  I  mean  on  the  Banks  clear 
of  three  miles  from  the  land.  Out  of  7,000  quintals,  in  my  estimate, 
1,400  were  Bank  fish ;  but  they  always  give  me  far  less  than  the  real 
estimate. 

Q.  That  is  the  boat-fishers,  you  mean  f — A.  They  all  give  me  less, 
whether  outside  or  inside. 

Q.  Tbe  fthief  tishing  is  iusidf,  as  regards  cod  ? — A.  Yes. 

(}.  How  is  it  with  respect  to  hake  and  pollock  ? — A.  They  are  entirely 
inside.  There  is  halibut  outside  the  three-mile  line,  but  the  best  tiali 
bas  always  been  inside. 

Q.  Did  you  seethe  halibut  spawning-ground? — A.  Yes;  very  close 
in.  There  is  a  large  spawning  ground  very  close  in,  but  it  has  been 
pretty  well  destroyed. 

Q.  How  so?— A.  By  trawl-flshing. 

Q.  Is  that  since  the  treaty  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Who  introduced  that  trawl-fishing — the  Americans  or  our  flsher- 
men  ?— A.  The  Americans  introduced  it  with  us. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  that  trawl-fishing  upon  the  fisheries  gen- 
erally?— A.  What  do  you  mean  by  the  effect  of  it? 

Q.  Will  it  destroy  the  fish  ? — A.  Well,  if  you  catch  all  the  spawned 
tisb  there  can't  be  any  left. 

Q.  State  why  the  trawl-fishing  destroys  the  fish. — A.  Well,  they 
catch  the  spawned  fish  and  the  small  fish ;  they  catch  all.  Where  our 
fishermen  fish  with  the  hand-line,  there  will  be  two  men  in  a  boat,  and 
those  men  cannot  attend  to  more  than  two  lines  each.  Each  line  has 
two  hooks  on  it,  so  they  have  four  hooks  to  a  man,  and  that  makes  eight 
hooks  to  a  boat.  Now,  they  let  that  line  go  to  bottom  and  haul  it 
up  a  fathom  or  a  fathom  and  a  half.  The  spawned  fish  lie  on  the  bottom 
and  they  cannot  take  the  bait.  But  the  trawl  goes  right  to  the  bottom 
and  the  spawned  fish  swallow  the  hook  and  it  kills  them.  Again,  when 
a  line-flsherman  takes  small  fish  they  hardly  ever  swallow  the  hook, 
and  tbe  small  fish  is  put  back  alive — but  the  trawl  kills  them.  The 
spawned  fish  hardly  ever  take  the  hook  unless  it  comes  right  into  their 
mout'a. 

Q.  Tbe  hooks  on  the  hand-lines  are  very  much  larger  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Therefore  the  small  fish  cannot  be  caught,  as  a  rule,  with  the  hand- 
line,  and  if  they  are  they  are  pat  back  into  the  sea  ;  they  go  off? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  They  are  injured  very  little  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  not  killed  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Bat  it  is  a  smaller  hook  that  is  used  with  the  trawls? — A.  Yes; 
they  swallow  that  and  it  gets  into  the  stomach  and  kills  them,  and  they 
are  thrown  back  into  the  sea  as  gurry. 

Q.  They  bring  up  all  sizes  with  the  trawls  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  kill  the 
skate  on  the  bottom  which  we  consider  a  scavenger  for  eating  up  the 
gurry.    They  are  killed  and  made  no  use  of. 

Q.  The  skate,  then,  is  your  scavenger  ? — A.  I  consider  it  so  there  ; 
tbe  skate,  sculpin,  &c. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  cod  and  other  fish  swallowing  gurry  are 
apt  to  be  killed  ? — A.  Our  fishermen  tell  me  that  they  swallow  the  back 
bone  and  head  and  it  destroys  them.  They  catch  them  very  poor  and 
lean. 

Q.  But  the  skate  has  a  s'omach  to  stand  that  ? — A.  It  seems  to  be 
the  case. 


736 


AWARD   OF  THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Well,  tben,  in  reference  to  the  tbrowiug  over  of  the  gurry,  what 
effect  has  that  f — A.  It  has  the  effect  of  injuring  the  tiuherieH;  it  de- 
stroys the  fish  and  injures  them.  This  is  universally  considered  by 
flshermen  to  be  the  effect. 

Q.  It  is  admitted  ahso  that  this  trawling  injures  the  fish  ?— A.  Yes, 
sir  J  it  is,  of  course,  disputed  by  a  few,  but  many  believe  it  is  destruc- 
tive. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  it  yourself? — A.  I  do  with  all  ray  heart. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  where  they  have  trawled  for  some  considerable 
time  at  particular  places,  you  cannot  trawl  again  for  a  groat  lengtli  of 
time  ? — A.  It  has  been  introduced  so  recently  in  our  waters  that  I  only 
know  it  to  be  the  case  with  the  halibut  spawning  ground.  I  liuow  that 
is  fished  out. 

Q.  Within  the  last  ten  years  ? — A.  Within  the  last  seven  years.  Our 
fishermen  have  been  to  me,  every  few  days  almost,  to  get  up  a  petition 
to  the  government  to  prevent  trawling.    I  have  not  done  so. 

Q.  Before  the  Treaty  of  Washington  they  did  not  trawl  at  all  ?— 
A.  No. 

Q.  Whatisthefeelingof  your  people  with  regard  to  it  ?— A.  They  are 
very  much  opposed  to  it  in  Grand  Mauan,  and  have  only  been  forced 
into  it  for  self-defense. 

Q.  Why? — A.  Just  as  I  say.  Two  men  in  a  boat  have  eight  books; 
they  will  come  along  with  a  trawl  that  has  fifteen  hundred  hooks.  You 
can  easily  see  where  the  disparity  is.  It  is  fifteen  hundred  hooks  agaiust 
eight.    You  see  what  the  result  is. 

Q.  The  result  is  that  our  men  aredriven  intoit  in  self-defense?— A.  Yes. 
Our  men  will  go  and  raise  a  good  school  of  fish  with  hand-lines.  Au 
American  will  take  a  glass  and  see  what  they  are  doing,  and  whichever 
boats  have  the  best  school  they  will  come  along  to  use  their  trawls 
alongside,  and  our  boats  have  to  pick  up  their  anchors  and  away.  The 
fish  will  leave  the  hand-lines  for  the  trawl  in  an  instant. 

Q.  Then  our  fishermen,  knowing  full  well  that  the  fisheries  are  being 
destroyed  by  these  trawls,  are  obliged  to  use  them  ? — A.  Well,  I  will 
give  you  an  illustration.  Captain  Dickson  has  a  vessel  of  forty  tons, 
which  he  fitted  out,  and  went  to  our  grounds  fishing.  He  was  abont  a 
month,  and  got,  I  think,  forty  quintals,  while  the  vessels  fishing  with 
trawls  were  getting  plenty.  Captain  Dickson  then  fitted  out  with 
trawls,  and  in  three  weeks'  time  he  got  four  hundred  quintals. 

Q.  How  many  did  he  destroy  to  get  those  four  hundred  quintals  ?— 
A.  He  did  not  tell  me,  and  I  didn't  ask  him. 

Q.  Where  was  she  fishing  ? — A.  In  our  waters  around  the  island. 

Q.  How  mauy  quintals  did  she  catch  in  three  weeks  ? — A.  She  caught 
forty  quintals,  I  think,  with  hand-lines. 

Q'.  How  long  was  she  getting  the  other  load  ?— A.  She  was  three 
weeks  or  a  month  getting  four  hundred  quintals. 

Q.  With  the  same  number  of  men  ? — A.  Yes.  That,  of  course,  shows 
the  practical  difference  between  trawl-fishing  and  fishing  with  the 
hand-lines. 

Q.  Our  own  people  are  quite  willing  to  give  up  the  trawl-fishing  at  any 
time  when  the  Americans  do? — A.  The.y  are  not  only  willing,  but 
anxious.    They  are  ready  at  any  time  to  give  it  up. 

Q.  I  suppose  our  people  feel  anxious  that  the  fisheries  should  be  i)re- 
served  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  feel  so  naturally. 

Q.  But  how  about  the  Americans  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  they  feel  so 
anxious.  The  capitalists  may  feel  anxious.  I  do  not  know  positively 
that  they  do,  but  the  fishermen  do  not  feel  anxious  about  the  matter. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


737 


..  She  caught 
lie  was  tliree 


Q.  Tbey  go  io  for  the  gain  of  the  hour  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yuu  have  stated  that  there  are  about  400  or  500  families  in  the 
island?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  there  are  about  2,000  inhabitants  T— A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Do  they  own  their  own  land  ? — A.  Lots  of  them. 

Q.  They  have  their  own  houses  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  mostly  permanent  settlers  like  yourself  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tboy  would  naturally  feel  an  interest  in  the  permanence  of  their 
owu  fisheries  I — A.  Certainly,  they  do. 

Q.  Well,  you  say  our  people  complain  very  much  of  this  trawl  fishing, 
and  come  to  yon  about  it  f — A.  Yes ;  a  number  will  not  go  into  it  at  all. 
Tbey  tell  me  they  will  starve  before  they  will  make  a  trawl,  or  they  will 
go  out  of  the  business  entirely. 

Q.  In  your  opinion  it  won't  take  very  long  to  destroy  the  fisheries  in 
tbat  way  ? — A.  I  am  afraid  they  will  be  destroyed  if  there  is  not  some- 
thing  done.  I  am  hopeful  that  after  this  is  settled  the  two  nations  will 
establish  an  international  law  making  it  a  crime  to  fish  with  a  trawl. 
Tbe  8ame  as  to  the  seine  fishing.    Tbat  is  bad  too. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  this  purse  seine  ? — A.  No ;  except 
from  what  my  neighbors  have  told  me. 

Q.  Do  they  use  the  purse-seine  around  the  island  ? — A.  No ;  they 
never  used  it  around  tbe  island. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  do  a  large  amount  of  boat-fishing  around  the 
island  ? — A.  They  do  now. 

Q.  Since  the  Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Before  the  treaty  did  they  send  any  boats  ? — A.  They  really  send 
in  more  boats  now  than  tbey  did  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  After  the  abolition  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  they  did  not  come  in 
boats  ?— A.  No,  because  the  boats  run  a  great  risk.  Tbey  could  not  run 
off  shore  to  avoid  capture. 

Q.  After  the  abolition  of  the  Reciprocity  in  1866,  and  up  to  tbe  Treaty 
of  Washington  in  1871,  the  small  boats  could  not  be  sent  in  f — A.  No ; 
not  iu  my  district,  for  they  could  be  seized.  But  the  vessels  continued 
to  fish  because  they  could  run  outside  of  the  limits. 

Q.  You  say  that  since  the  Washington  Treaty  the  boats  have  come  in 
great  numbers?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tbe  American  boats  come  over  from  the  main  land,  do  they  ?— A. 
Yes.  They  come  over  from  dififerent  parts  along  the  shore,  from  East- 
port  and  thereabout. 

^l  What  is  the  distance  from  Eastport  to  Grand  Manau  ? — A.  From 
land  to  land  it  is  only  about  seven  miles.  From  Mount  Desert  it  is  a 
good  distance. 

Q.  Do  they  come  from  as  far  westward  as  Mount  Desert? — A.  Yesj 
they  can  come  along  the  coast.  They  have  good  harbors  all  along  the 
coast. 

Q.  Do  they  go  further  westward  than  Mount  Desert  ? — A.  I  would 
not  say  for  boats.  I  would  not  even  say  that  boats  come  from  Mount 
iJesert.  A  man  came  to  me  on  one  occasion  wanting  to  know  why  he 
had  been  placed  on  the  road  list.  He  belonged  to  Jonesport.  He  said 
our  commissioners  had  put  him  cm  our  road  list.  The  fact  was  that 
he  had  been  fishing  so  long  alongside  of  our  wharves  that  they  had  got 
him  down  as  a  citizen. 

Q.  Where  is  Jonesport  ? — A.  It  is  between  Mount  Desert  and  Cutler. 

Q.  Then  he  had  fished  so  much  there  that  they  had  put  him  down  as 
a  resident  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  those  boats — those  American  boats — do  they  equal  or  out- 
47  F 


738 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


number  oursT — A.  I  tbiok  tliey  outuutnber  ours.  I  woukl  not  suy 
ponitively.    I  am  convince<l  in  my  otrn  mind  that  tbey  outuuinl)er  ourH. 

Q.  Thow  lK>at8  supply  the  coRHt  of  Maine  with  tisti  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Our  poople  do  not  compete  witli  them  in  those  markets?— A.  Our 
flab  go  to  Boston,  Portland,  or  New  York.  Those  boats  supply  their 
own  coast. 

Q.  How  often  do  tbey  go  home  with  their  fish  ? — A.  Tliey  tlsh  a  week 
or  so  and  then  go  home.  They  have  a  nice  little  cabin  in  the  boat  and 
the  men  sleep  in  that.    As  soon  as  they  get  a  load  they  go  home. 

Q.  How  do  tbey  keep  their  flsh  f— A.  They  salt  them. 

Q.  How  is  it  about  the  fresh  iish  i — A.  Well,  when  they  come  for 
fresh  tish  in  the  winter  time,  of  course  tbey  have  larger  boats  or  vessels. 

Q.  And  the  flsh  that  are  taken  by  the  Americans  in  the  summer  tbey 
saltf — A.  Certainly,  unless  they  sell  them  fresh  in  the  American  mar- 
ket. I  that  case  the  vessels  come  supplied  with  ice.  There  are  a  few 
that  run  to  Macbias  and  other  places  with  fresh  flsh,  the  same  as  tbey 
do  to  Eastport  or  Lubcc;  but  any  that  make  a  business  of  selling  tbo 
flsh  fresh  must  have  an  icehouse. 

Q.  Those  American  boats  that  you  spoke  of  all  flsh  within  three 
miles f — A.  Yes;  I  consider  that  they  all  fl»h  within  three  miles— a 
marine  league.    Boat  Ashing  means  that. 

Q.  Now,  about  how  many  American  vessels  flsh  on  the  coast  during 
the  season  ? — A.  It  would  be  bard  to  tell  that.  It  has  never  been  my 
duty  to  count  them. 

Q.  They  come  in  large  numbers,  and  they  greatly  outnumber  ours?— 
A.  Yes;  our  people  at  Grand  Manan  flsh  but  little  in  vessels. 

Q.  Do  these  vessels  come  in  flshing  within  three  miles? — A.  At  n 
certain  time  of  the  year.  In  winter  it  is  entirely  within.  The  fall  aud 
winter  flshing  is  entirely  within. 

Q.  What  besides  herring  are  caught  in  summer  ? — A.  Cod,  pollock, 
and  bake. 

Q.  Tbey  catch  in  boats  and  vessels  both  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  in  the  spring  are  you  not  visited  by  the  Grand  Manan  fleet 
from  Gloucester? — A.  Yes;  they  used  formerly  to  come  to  Grand 
Manan  direct.  Generally  now  they  go  to  Eastpoit  and  get  the  East- 
port  people  to  catch  bait  for  them. 

Q.  When  you  say  "  formerly,"  do  you  mean  after  the  Treaty  of  Wasb- 
ington  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  did  not  come  before  that  much.  It  is  since  1871 
that  they  have  come  principally.    They  will  come  down  every  spring. 

Q.  How  long  do  they  last?— A.  Sometimes  a  longer,  and  sometimes 
a  shorter  time. 

Q.  How  many  years  after  the  treaty  did  it  commence  ?— A.  It  bas 
lasted  down  to  the  present  time,  for  that  matter.  There  has  not  beeu 
so  many  this  last  spring  as  before. 

Q.  I  thought  you  said  there  had  been  a  change  in  the  practice?— A. 
There  has  not  been  a  change  in  the  practice  of  getting  bait  at  our 
places,  but  in  the  mode  of  getting  it.  They  generally  come  to  Eastport 
and  make  that  their  place  of  departure.  The  Eastport  people  are 
acquainted  with  our  waters  almost  as  well  as  our  own  people,  and  tbey 
come  across  and  catch  fish  and  sell  to  the  Gloucester  fishermen.  Tbat 
is  the  majority  of  the  cases  now. 

Q.  I  understand  tbat  at  first  tbey  came  down  themselves  and 
bought? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  now  they  come  chiefly  to  Eastport  to  employ  Eastport  fish- 
ermen, who  catch  the  fish  and  bring  them  to  them  ? — A.  The  big  ves- 
sels are  not  fitted  out  for  herring  fishing.    Tbey  take  an  Eastport 


▲WARD   OF   THli:   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


739 


vesael  in  company  with  them,  and  come  over  and  anchor  in  oar  waters. 
•They  bring  their  own  fishermen  with  them  and  anchor  in  our  waters, 
aoil g^t  their  bait  there,    ^hey  sometimes  c^me  in  the  fall  for  bait. 

Q.  Tbey  are  not  confined  to  tlie  spring  f — A.  No.  In  the  spring  they 
come  always.  They  have  come  less  this  year  to  Gradd  Manan  than  ever 
before. 

Q.  Where  have  they  gone  this  year  f— A.  I  think  to  Campobello,  Deer 
iHland,  and  those  places. 

Q.  Still  in  British  waters? — A.  Yes;  we  have  the  herring  fishery. 

Q.  Uow  many  catoe  down  in  the  spring? — A.  To  the  Grand  Manan 
groiiDds,  I  should  say  forty  sail.    I  would  not  say  positively. 

Q.  As  a  practical  fisherman,  you  say  about  forty  sail  of  them  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  see  them  come  in  the  fall  f — A.  Yes ;  at  all  times  of  the 
year. 

'  Q.  Where  are  the  fish  generally  got  that  they  catch  in  the  fall? — A. 
Geuerally  on  the  Banks,  or  on  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia.  In  the  sum- 
mer they  take  cod,  halibut,  &c. 

Q.  Do  they  take  them  in  the  winter  also? — A.  Ypp.  That  is  boat- 
fisbing  as  a  rule  altogether.  Our  fishermen  go  in  the  winter  time,  but 
the  Americans  come  in  large  vessels  in  the  winter. 

Q.  It  would  be  unsafe  to  go  in  boats  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  can  only  fish 
at  certain  times. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  me  what  is  the  value  of  the  fish  taken  by  our  own  peo- 
ple each  year  on  the  island  ? — A.  Well,  I  could  tell  from  my  fishing 
returns  of  last  year.     I  could  have  brought  them  all. 

Q.  Do  you  make  up  your  return  for  the  whole  year  ? — A.  Yes;  from 
the  Ist  January  to  the  31st  December. 

Q.  Yon  do  not  make  it  up  for  the  fiscal  year  ? — A.  No.  I  am  ordered 
to  wake  it  to  the  3l8t  December.  The  return  states  itself  that  it  is 
80  made  up.  The  amount  in  my  estimate,  as  I  made  it  up  from  inquiry 
last  year,  is  $383,891,  bnt  that  is  far  under  the  real  catch. 

Q.  You  say  that  is  far  under  the  actual  value  of  the  catch.  How  do 
yon  acconnt  for  its  being  under  the  amount  ? — A.  Well,  the  fishermeu 
are  reluctant  to  give  an  account  of  what  they  make  on  account  of  the 
taxation.  We  have  a  free-school  law  now,  and  are  taxed  very  heavily 
for  it. 

Q.  It  happens  that  you  are  an  assessor  of  taxes  ? — A.  I  am  at  times, 
aud  I  am  a  county  councilor,  and  have  been  a  census  enumerator. 

Q.  Aud  they  do  not  like  to  give  this  information  to  you  ;  you  are  the 
last  person  to  whom  they  want  to  give  it  ? — A.  Well,  I  tell  them  that 
the  marine  department  never  lets  such  information  go  out  of  its  posses- 
sion. Tliey  tell  me  there  is  no  need  of  its  doing  so,  that  I  have  it  all  in 
my  hands.    They  say  it  is  too  thin. 

Q.  Then  you  believe  the  amount  you  have  given  is  an  under-esti- 
mate? — A.  I  know  it  must  be  over  half  a  million  dollars;  that  is  our 
old  $500,000. 

Q.  That  is  within  the  mark  for  your  own  island  ? — A.  Yes. 

(J.  Of  the  British  catch  ? — A.  Yes,  our  own  Grand  Manan  people. 
Because  sometimes  they  come  over  from  Campobello  and  other  places ; 
but  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  that. 

Q.  Well,  now,  is  the  American  catch  larger  or  smaller? — A.  I  think 
it  is  larger. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  ? — A.  No ;  because  their  appliances  are  so 
much  better  than  ours,  and  I  think  their  men  outnumber  ours. 

Q>  I  suppose  they  are  just  as  assiduous  in  using  their  appliances?-— 


II 


740 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


I 


A.  Just  as  much  so.  Ooe  of  their  vessels  will  take  more  haddock  in  a 
short  time  than  ours  will  in  a  whole  year.  One  of  theirs  took  150,uoo 
pouuds  in  a  week,  while  all  of  ours  took  only  50,000  pounds  in  the  whole 
year.    That  was  sold  fresh. 

Q.  Then  the  American  catch,  I  should  judge  from  what  you  say,  must 
be  very  much  larger? — A.  Well,  that  was  only  an  isolated  case;  but  I 
consider  it  is  very  much  better.  The  appliances  are  better.  They  cau 
lie  on  the  fishing  grounds ;  They  have  fine  vessels,  and  good,  bold  tneu 
thai  are  our  own  subjects ;  they  generally  have  alien  crews,  the  Glou- 
cester vessels  especially. 

Q.  All  that  catch  that  you  estimate  at  over  half  a  million  for  the 
British  fishermen,  and  more  than  that  for  the  Americans,  is  within  the 
three-mile  limit? — A.  Yes.  The  British  is,  for  certain,  and  I  think  the 
Americans  catch  much  more  inshore  than  our  own  people.  Of  course, 
they  catch  a  great  many  outside. 

<^.  Now,  from  your  experience  of  the  fisheries,  would  it  pay  the 
Americans  to  come  into  the  waters  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy  at  all  if  they 
were  debarred  from  the  privilege  of  coming  within  three  miles  of  the 
coast? — A.  I  do  not  know  how  they  could  come.  They  could  not  get 
bait. 

Q.  Well,  if  they  could  get  bait  could  they  get  fares  ? — A.  Xo,  for 
certain ;  they  could  not  supply  their  own  market,  if  they  were  ('ebarred. 

Q.  Could  they  prosecute  the  fisheries  successfully  if  they  had  any 
market  to  supply  ? — A.  Well,  I  do  not  know  how  far  they  would  be 
actually  debarred. 

Q.  I  am  supposing,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that  they  could  be  kept 
out  altogether  ? — A.  Well,  I  do  not  think  so.  I  think  their  catch  would 
be  probably  less  than  one-third  of  what  it  is  now. 

Q.  From  your  experience  do  you  think  they  could  prosecute  it  at  all ! 
— A.  I  think  they  could  in  some  cases.  I  do  not  think  they  would  invest 
money,  only  the  wealthy  capitalists,  because,  of  course,  the  scarcer  the 
iish  became  in  the  American  markets  the  greater  the  price  would  be. 

Q.  And  you  think  there  would  be  very  few  fish  that  they  would  catch 
outside  ? — A.  Yes.  The  capitalists  could  perhaps  keep  a  certain  num- 
ber of  vessels  out. 

Q.  Suppose  they  were  kept  out  of  the  grounds  and  you  were  allowed 
to  send  in  your  fresh  fish  as  you  were  formerly  ;  there  was  no  duty  ou 
that,  was  there  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Well,  then,  they  could  not  compete  with  you  at  all. — A.  No;  tliey 
could  not  compete  with  us. 

Q.  What  is  the  feeling  with  reference  to  the  treaty  there  ? — A.  The 
AVashington  Treaty  !  Well,  our  people  are  dissatisfied  with  it.  They 
would  be  willing  to  go  back  to  the  old  state  of  affairs.  If  it  bad 
been  put  to  the  people  there,  they  would  have  voted  it  down  for  certain. 

Q.  What  is  your  own  opinion? — A.  It  is  that  it  is  an  injury  to  our 
fisheries. 

Q.  Suppose  they  were  kept  out  and  were  to  put  any  reasonable 
amount  of  duty  upon  herring,  say  about  $1  a  barrel,  as  it  was  before  f— 
A.  We  cau  pay  any  reasonable  duty  they  can  put  on.  We  have  a  better 
market  of  our  own  now  since  confederation. 

Q.  You  have  now  the  whole  Dominion  ? — A.  Yes.  It  is  not  only  that 
we  have  a  free  market  in  the  whole  Dominion,  but  the  facilities  for 
conveying  our  fish  are  so  much  better  now  since  the  railway  has  been 
built.  Most  of  our  fresh  fish— and  line  fishing — cod,  pollock,  and 
haddock,  in  winter  are  sent  to  St.  Andrews.  Hart,  for  one,  buys  them 
and  sends  them  up  the  line. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


741 


-A.  No;  tliey 


Q.  You  had  not  even  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  that  market  f — 
A.  No ;  not  then.  Our  fresh  fish-trade  was  not  anything  during  reci- 
procity.   It  is  a  new  feature. 

Q.  During  that  time  you  had  no  free-trade  with  the  other  provinces  ? 
—A.  No ;  there  was  very  little  communication  at  all.  We  did  not  know 
anything  but  the  American  market,  as  a  genenU  thing. 

Q.  And  now  you  have  the  whole  Dominion  f — A.  Yes ;  and  it  is  a 
good  market. 

Q.  Do  you  find  now,  since  the  Washington  Treaty,  that  you  are  fore- 
stalled in  the  Canadian  markets  by  the  Americans? — A.  Well,  that  is 
the  case  to  some  extent.  Captain  Gaskill  told  me  he  went  to  St.  John 
with  fish  and  found  that  two  Americans  had  sold  there  before  him,  and 
tiiey  got  a  little  better  price  than  he  did,  because  they  were  there  before 
him. 

Q.  Where  had  they  taken  their  fish  ? — A.  I  suppose  in  our  waters  or 
else  on  the  Banks;  one  of  the  two.  I  don't  know  where  they  caught 
tbem. 

Q.  He  is  a  resident  of  the  iiland  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  He  is  a  practical  fisheiinan  and  ship-owner  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  you  have  spoken  of  Grand  Manan.  I'ou  are  not  very  far 
from  Campobello,  are  you,  or  West  Isles  ? — A.  No ;  a  very  short  dis- 
tance; 7  or  8  miles. 

Q.  Your  people  go  a  good  deal  about  there  fishing  ? — A.  Yes ;  they 
are  very  much  like  ourselves. 

Q.  Take  Campobello;  is  the  fishing  around  Campobello  larger  or  more 
valuable  than  that  around  West  Isles  ? — A.  I  should  think  it  would 
equal  it,  if  not  surpass  it. 

Q.  In  your  judgment,  are  as  many  men,  boats,  and  vessels  employed 
in  the  fisheries  at  Campobello  as  in  the  fisheries  of  the  West  Isles? — A. 
I  think  so ;  I  am  quite  sure.  The  people  of  West  Isles  own  their  own 
land.  On  Campobello  they  rent  their  land,  and  have  to  live  more  on  the 
fisheries. 

Q.  West  Isles  is  the  district  over  which  Mr.  Lord  has  jurisdiction  as 
Fishery  Commissioner? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Campobello  is  a  British  island,  I  think  ? — A.  It  is,  sir. 

Q.  It  has  a  fishery-oflBcer,  I  think,  too? — A.  I'es.  It  is  within  gun- 
shot of  Lubec,  and  about  three  miles  from  Eastport. 

Q.  It  is  close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  the  l-oundary-line  of  the  province  runs  be- 
tween Campobello  and  the  JVIaine  shore? — A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  Where  is  the  chief  fishery  at  the  island  ?  Is  it  toward  the  New 
Brunswick  shore? — A.  I'es;  the  line  fishery  is.  Where  the  herrings  are 
caught  is  principally  on  the  northwest  side,  passing  Eastport  and  Lubec. 

Q.  The  weir- fishing  is  on  the  flats? — A.  It  is  between  high-water  and 
low-water  mark,  and  it  is  sometimes  outside  of  low-water  mark. 

Q.  It  cannot  be  far  outside  of  that  ? — A.  Well,  sometimes  they  weir 
fish  iu  seventeen  feet  of  water. 

Q.  How  do  they  clear  them  ? — A.  With  the  seines.  They  have  seines 
tor  all  their  weirs. 

Q.  Is  there  very  much  bait-fishing  around  there  ? — A.  The  bait-fishing 
is  principally  on  the  eastern  end  of  Campobello. 

Q.  It  is  the  New  Brunswick  shore  ? — A.  Y'es,  on  the  New  Brunswick 
shores. 

Q.  I  mean  towards  the  New  Brunswick  mainland  ? — A.  I'es,  towards 
the  New  Brunswick  mainland  and  the  island.    Between  Deer  Island 


742 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


and  Gampobello,  and  that  neighborhood,  there  is  a  strong  niariae  cur- 
rent, commonly  called  the  Quoddy  River. 

Q.  Is  that  a  good  fishing-ground  ? — A.  It  is  Quoddy  Kiver  thai  they 
fish  in  principally. 

Q.  What  do  they  catch  in  it  ? — A.  Cod,  haddock,  hake,  &c. 

Q.  At  what  seasons  do  they  fish ;  at  all  seasons  ? — A.  I  think  tliey  do 
but  along  in  the  summer  is  principally  the  season.  I  came  up  through 
a  fleet  of  boats  there  that  were  catching  a  fine  lot  of  fish.  It  was  the 
largest  fleet  I  ever  saw.  All  were  more  or  less  loaded  with  fish.  They 
were  trawling  hake,  haddock,  and  cod  principally.  I  saw  the  trawls 
and  band  lines. 

Q.  One  witness  said  that  they  got  about  700  or  1,000  quintals  a  day; 
would  they  catch  that  much? — A.  I  was  told  by  a  man  whose  boat  I 
towed  up  that  there  would  be  500  quintals  landed  that  day  in  East- 
port. 

Q.  Of  haddock  ? — A.  Yes,  principally ;  but  there  was  cod  as  well. 

Q.  You  are  well  acquainted  with  the  fisheries  of  Charlotte  County ; 
take  the  mainland  fishing  from  Letete  as  far  as  Lepreaux,  is  that  a  good 
fishing  ground  1 — A.  It  is  considered  a  good  fishing  ground.  I  am  not 
personally  acquainted  with  it,  and  can  only  say  from  what  I  have  heard. 
My  duties  have  never  carried  me  there. 

Q.  But  your  practical  knowledge  extends  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  V  ould  be  the  value  of  the  mainland  fishery,  the  British  fish- 
ery alone,  taking  it  from  Letete  to  Lepreaux  ? — A.  My  own  lishery  is, 
say,  $500,000 ;  Campobello  and  West  Isles  must  equal  mine,  and  the 
mainland  will  certainly  be  more  than  half  of  that,  if  not  equal  to  it. 

Q.  Well,  then,  you  put  Campobello  and  West  Isles  as  about  equal  to 
Grand  Manan? — A.  Yes;  speaking  as  I  do,  not  knowing  exactly,  I 
should  say  so. 

Q.  That  would  be  half  a  million  for  those  two  islands,  and  half  a  mil- 
lion for  Grand  Manan ;  that  makes  a  million ;  and  you  think  the  main- 
land is  half  as  much  as  either  of  thos3 ;  that  would  be  a  fair  estininte 
for  the  mainland  ? — A.  Yes ;  Charlotte  County  is  a  very  important  fish- 
ing county.  In  ISOl,  I  was  a  census  enumerator,  and  I  think  the  result 
of  the  fishery  in  that  county  nearly  equaled  that  of  all  the  ocher  fish- 
eries of  the  firovince,  with  the  exception  of  St.  John  County. 

Q.  Yon  put  half  a  million  as  the  catch  of  the  British  fishermen  on  the 
mainland  for  the  year,  and,  in  your  judgment,  the  American  catch  is 
the  same  ? — A.  All  I  can  judge  by  is  what  I  hear.  They  come  down  in 
their  vessels.  I  think  they  have  their  own  way  on  the  north  shore  very 
much  more  than  on  Grand  Manan.  I  have  a  great  deal  of  trouble  Mith 
them  there.  But  on  the  north  shore  I  think  they  have  things  pretty 
much  as  they  want.  I  would  say  that  they  probably  surpass  our  own 
catch. 

Q.  We  had  Mr.  McLean  here  as  a  witness,  and  he  gave  us  an  esti- 
mate of  the  fishing  population  in  the  county,  which  we  thought  must 
be  an  over-estimate.  The  whole  poi)ulation  in  the  county  is  between 
26,000  and  27,000,  is  it  not  ?— A.  By  the  last  census  it  was,  I  think, 
26,000. 

Q.  Mr.  McLean  said  he  supposed  12,000  or  13,000  were  engaged  in 
the  fisheries.  Subsequently  he  said  6,000,  and  finally  he  said  he  did 
not  know  what  it  was.  What  do  you  say,  as  a  practical  man,  is  about 
a  fair  statement  of  the  number  of  persons  engaged  in  fishing  iu  that 
county  f — ^A.  West  Isles  must  be  nearly  000,  and  in  Grand  Mauau  there 
is  something  over  400  fishermen  out  of  a  population  of  about  2,000. 
Ton  can  make  an  estimate  from  that. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


743 


g  marine  cur- 


Q,  There  would  be  about  1,200  to  1,500  for  the  whole  county  ? — A. 
Yes ;  I  think  1,500  would  be  fair  for  the  whole  county.  It  would  not 
be  over  that.    It  is  more  likely  to  be  under  than  over. 

Q.  Now,  take  Grand  Manan  ;  judging  by  the  returns  that  the  fisher- 
men give  you,  can  you  tell  us  what  each  family  makes  by  fishing  ?  Do 
you  know  that  from  statements  of  their  own  or  from  personal  observa- 
tion ?— A.  I  should  think  $1,000  a  year  would  be  the  utmost  each  would 
make.    I  do  not  mean  clear ;  they  certainly  would  not  clear  that. 

Q.  But  they  would  make  that  ?— A.  I  suppose  from  $900  to  $1,000. 

Q.  Now,  I  want  to  know  what  your  opinion  is  as  to  the  value  of  the 
fish  caught  by  the  American  fishermen  in  our  waters  year  by  year  ? — A. 
Well,  I  think  it  equals  if  it  does  not  surpass  the  value  of  those  takeu 
by  our  own  fishermen. 

Q,  You  make  our  value  a  million  ? — A.  The  value  of  our  catch  should 
certainly  be  over  a  million. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  you  sny  certainly  take  as  much  ? — A.  1  think 
go,  because  their  appliances  are  better. 

Q.  On  the  mainland  you  say  our  catch  must  be  half  a  million,  and  the 
American  catch  is  equal  to  that? — A.  Yes;  I  think  so  because  they 
come  down  in  the  winter  and  follow  these  fine  harbors  up. 

Q.  You  make  for  the  mainland  and  islands  a  million  and  a  half  to  be 
the  catch  of  the  Americans,  and  the  same  for  our  own  people  ? — A.  I 
tbiuk  that  would  be  fair. 

Q.  That  is  within  our  waters,  within  three  marine  miles? — A.  Yes. 

Mr.  Foster.  What  do  you  include  in  the  mainland  ? 

Mr.  Thomson.  From  Point  Lepreaux  to  Letete. 

Witness.  From  Point  Lepreaux  to  St.  Andrews. 

Q.  You  make  one  and  a  half  million  taken  by  Americans,  and  the 
same  by  the  British  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  is  a  low  estimate  ? — A.  Y'^es. 

Q.  Is  the  privilege  of  fishing  in  the  American  waters  of  the  slightest 
benefit  to  any  Canadian  ? — A.  Not  the  slightest,  i  never  knew  one  of 
our  fisherman  to  fish  in  the  American  waters  during  the  old  Reciprocity 
Treaty,  during  the  whole  twelve  years.  I  don't  know  why  they  should. 
We  have  more  of  our  own. 

Q.  Have  you  any  trouble  in  keeping  the  Americans  from  breaking 
the  fishing  regulations  I — A.  Well,  I  have  a  little  more  than  we  have 
with  our  own  people,  from  the  simple  fact  that  our  own  people  I  can 
catch  afterwards  if  I  don't  happen  to  catch  them  at  the  time.  I  can 
catch  them  afterwards,  within  two  years. 

Q.  Tbey  are  within  the  jurisdiction  and  you  can  get  at  them  ? — A. 
Yes,  I  can ;  anywhere  in  the  county.  But  the  Americans,  if  I  don't 
catch  them  in  the  act,  get  clear. 

Q.  And  if  you  do,  you  must  be  strong  enough  to  catch  them  ? — A.  I 
have  to  get  hold  of  a  very  weak  one  to  capture  him.  I  have  only  caught 
a  few  in  my  whole  time. 

Q.  Take  the  spawning  ground,  which  should  be  closed  from  the  15th 
of  July  to  the  loth  of  September ;  have  there  not  been  infringements  of 
that  regulation  ? — A.  I  know  one  case  that  Ifound  out  on  my  way  here. 
Last  week  it  was  stormy  and  blowing,  and  I  could  not  go  in  the  small 
boat,  but  when  I  got  to  Eastport,  on  my  way  here,  I  learned  that  a  man 
living  in  Eastport  had  taken  80  barrels.  If  he  was  a  Charlotte  County 
man  I  could  catch  him,  but  he  is  a  Charlotte  County  man  living  in  East- 
port,  and  the  American  flag  is  responsible  for  him.  He  took  80  barrels 
iu  one  night's  catch. 

Q.  Upon  your  very  spawning  ground  ? — A.  Y'es.    I  wish  the  Anieri- 


744 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


cans  would  let  us  go  across  and  catch  tbem.  I  tbink  a  great  many  of 
the  Americans  themselves  are  anxious  to  have  tlie  spawning  grounds 
protected. 

Q.  Along  that  coast,  from  Eastport  and  Lubec,  towards  Mount  Desert, 
are  there  not  great  numbers  of  fishing  villages  that  depend  upon  Ushiug 
for  a  living? — A.  They  are  about  the  same  as  our  own.  They  live  on 
coasting,  fishing,  lumbering,  and  soon,  just  exactly  as  ours  do.  I  know 
no  difference  between  them. 

Q.  Without  our  fisheries  could  they  live  by  fishing  ? — A.  No,  beoause 
if  they  could  they  would  not  come  to  our  fisheries.  They  would  not 
come  so  far  away.    They  do  not  have  fisheries  of  their  own. 

Q.  You  stated  awhile  ago  that  the  Campobello  people  fished  mon; 
than  those  of  Deer  Island ;  that  is,  of  the  West  Isles  Parish.  On  West 
Isles  I  think  the  people  own  their  farms  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  Campobello  it  is  not  so  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  It  was  formerly  owned  by  Captain  Eobertson.  It  is  now  owned  by 
his  heirs,  is  it  not  ? — A.  It  is  owned  by  Mrs.  Robertson.  They  can  only 
rent  the  land,  and  as  they  do  not  own  it  they  have  to  depend  more  upou 
fishing  than  the  people  of  Deer  Island. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Do  I  understand  that  you  have  been  fishery  overseer  ever  since  the 
death  of  your  father  in  1869  ?— A.  He  didn't  die  in  1869.  I  have  been 
fishery  overseer  ever  since  1867.    He  died  in  1861. 

Q.  Who  held  the  office  in  the  interim  ? — A.  There  seemed  to  be  no 
one  during  that  time.  It  was  under  the  old  New  Brunswick  Goveru- 
ment  and  no  one  took  his  place. 

Q.  At  the  Southern  Head  it  was  not  protected  during  that  time  ?— A. 
We  had  local  fishery  overseers  appointed  by  the  town  and  not  by  the 
government. 

Q.  (Reads)  "Owing  to  the  sudden  death  of  the  local  overseer,  in  tie 
midst  of  the  fishing  season,  no  complete  return  of  Grand  Mauan  fishery 
could  be  obtained ;"  who  was  that  ? — A.  That  was  Mr.  Drake,  of  Nortb 
Head.  I  had  charge  at  that  time  of  the  South  Head.  After  the  death 
of  Mr.  Drake  they  made  me  do  the  whole  work,  but  they  did  not  give 
me  Mr.  Drake's  salary. 

Q.  That  year  there  happened  to  be  no  complete  estimate  made  owiiiu;; 
to  his  death  ? — A.  I  did  not  use  to  make  an  estimate  when  Drake  was 
overseer.    I  made  an  estimate  after  that  year  as  best  I  could. 

Q.  Now,  you  are  a  naturalist  to  some  extent.  Y'^ou  have  made  a  stmly 
of  the  habits  of  fishes.  Are  there  no  instances  of  herring  spawning  three 
miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  We  don't  know  any  instances  about  Grand 
Manan. 

Q.  There  are  plenty  of  instances  in  the  old  country,  I  think.  It  is  not 
universally  the  case  that  the  spawning  is  inshore  ? — A.  It  seems  that 
there  are  peculiar  banks  where  they  can  spawn. 

Q.  You  have  no  knowledge  of  any  spawning-grounds  except  within 
the  three-mile  limit  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  the  catch  of  herring?  Is  it  uniformly  the  case  on 
the  American  coast,  I  mean  the  coast  of  the  American  continent,  that 
is,  either  British  or  United  States;  is  the  herring  catch  entirely  con- 
fined to  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  It  is  confined  within  three 
miles. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  considerable  catch  of  herring  outside  of  that  ?— A. 
Not  to  ray  knowledge.  There  used  to  be  at  a  place  called  the  Rip- 
plings.    I  tbink  that  would  be  outside  of  three  miles.    It  is  quite  a  large 


AWABD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


745 


patcb  of  ground.  I  think  tbe  outer  portion  of  it  is  outside.  I  think 
tbat  fishery  has  died  down  owing  to  the  destruction  of  the  spawned 
berring.  That  was  certainly  not  a  spawning-ground,  because  there  was 
DO  roe  in  the  fish. 

Q.  Enumerate  as  many  places  as  you  can  where  herring  is  caught  iu 
considerable  abundance  off  the  coast  anywhere.  Begin  as  far  north  and 
po  as  far  south  as  you  can. — A.  I  confine  myself  principally  to  my  own 
district.    T  know  they  are  caught  even  to  the  southward  of  Cape  Cod. 

Q.  Whereabouts? — A.  1  could  not  carry  the  whole  thing  in  my  head. 
I  tliiuk  there  are  very  few  caught  south  of  the  Hudson  Kiver. 

Q.  Name  some  of  the  localities  where  they  are  caught. — A.  They 
used  to  be  caught  from  Hudson  River  to  St.  Croix  liiver,  but  it  was 
tbeMaquoddy  Biver  herring.  It  is  different  from  the  common  Ameri- 
can herring,  probably. 

Q.  Those,  you  think,  are  found  between  river  St.  Croix  and  the  Hud- 
son?—A.  Yes ;  it  is  so  generally  understood.  I  don't  think  they  catch 
any  quantity  of  herring  south  of  the  Hudson. 

Q.  It  is  esteemed  to  be  the  same  flsh  ? — A.  Our  fishermen  do  not  con- 
sider it  so,  but  I  suppose  scientists  may. 

Q.  Take  herring  generally ;  tell  the  Commission  where  they  are  to  bo 
found  iu  abundance  on  the  North  American  coast. — A.  At  Machias 
Biver  they  used  to  be  taken  in  abundance.  An  old  gentleman  told  me 
tbat  seventy  or  eighty  years  ago  he  had  seen  a  hundred  sail  lying  iu 
Little  Machias  fishing  for  herring.  They  are  taken  in  great  abundance 
at  Grand  Manan,  Minas  Basin,  on  both  sides  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  on 
tbe  north  and  south  shores  of  Nova  Scotia,  at  the  Magdalen  Islands, 
Newfoundland,  and  so  forth. 

Q.  They  are  very  abundant  at  the  Magdalen  Islands,  Newfoundland, 
and  on  the  coast  of  Labrador ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  it  is  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that  at  those  places  very 
large  quantities  are  taken f — A.  Yes;  but  we  don't  think  the  Magdalen 
berring  come  to  Grand  Manan. 

Q.  You  think  it  is  a  different  variety  ? — A.  We  think  each  flsh  knows 
its  own  coast  as  a  sheep  its  pasture. 

Q.  Name  any  places  oft"  the  coast  of  the  United  States  where  you 
bave  heard  that  herring  are  caught  in  abundance. — A.  I  dou't  think  I 
could  say  that. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  are  any? — A.  There  might  possibly  be. 

Q.  But  of  your  knowledge  are  there  any? — A.  My  knowledge  does 
not  extend  to  that. 

Q.  The  berring  fishery  within  your  observation  has  not  diminished; 
tbe  quantity  of  herring  has  not  grown  less  ? — A.  It  did  grow  less  in  our 
vicinity  and  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  while  the  spawning  grounds  were 
not  protected. 

Q.  Has  not  the  herring  ttshery  increased  right  along  for  the  last  eight 
or  nine  years? — A.  It  has  increased  lor  the  last  twenty  years  simply 
from  ])rotection. 

Q.  i  was  not  asking  you  your  theory  of  the  cause  of  the  increase  nor 
as  to  whether  you  thought  protection  had  done  it;  but  it  is  a  fact  that 
in  some  way  or  other  it  has  been  increasing  for  twenty  years  past  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Now  the  estimate  yon  give  with  respect  to  the  fishing  of  Grand 
Manan  in  1869  seems  to  have  been,  as  stated  by  Mr.  Whitcher  and  Mr. 
Venning,  that  the  number  of  men  engaged  in  fishing  at  Grand  Manan 
Island  was  395  f— A.  Yes. 


746 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  the  value  of  the  fish  caught  that  year  was  stated  at  $  102,371  !^ 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Since  then  there  have  been  ofiBcial  returns  prepared  for  the  county 
of  Charlotte,  aud  also  for  the  entire  province  of  New  Brunswick  t~\, 
I  should  suppose  so. 

Q.  Has  not  the  number  of  men  employed  in  the  fisheries  of  Charlotte 
County  steadily  increased  ? — A.  It  has,  I  know,  in  my  district. 

Q.  And  does  not  your  knowledge  extend  over  the  county  so  as  to 
enable  you  to  say  as  regards  the  county? — A.  I  will  say  1  thiuk  the 
number  has  increased. 

Q.  And  also  the  total  catch  f — A.  The  total  catch  has  increased. 

Q.  Bight  along  ? — A.  Yes.  There  has  been  a  decrease  in  some  kinds 
of  fish.  The  comparative  returns  show  that  at  certain  times  cod  fish 
have  decreased. 

Q.  I  am  now  speaking  more  particularly  about  herring  i — A.  Herring 
has  increased. 

Q.  Tlicn,  no  doubt,  herring  fishery  for  twenty  years  has  continually 
:  ?'*iiase(l  ? — A.  For  nine  years  anyway. 

And  tie  aggregate  fish  product  of  your  county  has  increased  I— 


-r, 


s. 


s\ 


In  1870  there  seems  to  have  been  670  men  employed  in  tisbing  in 
Charlotte  County.  Does  that  accord  with  your  judgment  ? — A.  I  thiuk 
there  w«»uld  be  more  than  that  number  that  year. 

A»  ■  ",.";81  barrels  of  herring  were  taken  ? — A.  That  is  underesti- 
mated. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  reasonable  estimate  ?  What  percentage  under  do  yoa 
think  itf — A.  My  own  island,  I  think,  put  up  14,000  barrels  last  year. 

Q.  I  am  on  1870  ? — A.  I  am  judging  from  last  year.  That  is  a  safe 
estimate. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is  an  underestimate  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  under  it 
anything. 

Q.  It  is  not  absurdly  low  ? — A.  Not  absurdly  low. 

Q.  It  isnot  such  an  estimate  as  a  man  of  good  judgment  might  make!— 
A.  The  same  causes  are  in  action  iu  other  parts  of  the  province  as  at 
Grand  Manan.  Where  the  fishery  officer  does  not  care  about  the  re- 
turns, he  gives  estimates.  The  fishermen  are  afraid  of  taxation.  We 
have  never  been  used  to  high  taxes  in  New  Brunswick. 

Q.  So  some  of  the  fishermen  state  things  low  to  avoid  taxation  f— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  some,  by  way  of  brag,  might  state  things  a  little  high  ?— A. 
1  don't  think  they  do.  I  don't  think  any  man  is  fool  enough  to  over- 
estimate it. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  any  of  your  fishermen  have  made  a  true  statement 
to  the  official  I — A.  They  look  upon  it  as  they  do  upon  a  custom-house 
oath,  as  not  amounting  to  anything.  They  are  not  under  oath  and  they 
want  to  protect  themselves. 

Q.  The  men  who  go  round  to  get  these  returns  know  about  the  catcb, 
and  they  mean  to  make  a  proper  return  to  the  government  ? — A.  They 
must  take  the  catch  from  the  fishermen. 

Q.  Honor  bright,  do  you  mean  to  say  there  is  no  dependence  to  be 
placed  on  these  official  returns,  or  do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  official 
returns,  from  certain  causes,  are  a  low  estimate  ? — A.  They  are  a  low 
estimate  from  that  cause. 

Q.  They  are  low  but  not  absurd,  I  suppose  ? — A.  I  don't  know  what 
you  call  absurd. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


747 


at  is  uuderesti- 


;  it  is  uuder  it 


taxation  f— A. 


n't  Iviiow  what 


Q.  What  do  3'on  call  absard  ? — A.  I  should  say  that  if  the  catch  was 
30,000  and  they  said  it  was  only  5,000,  the  statement  would  be  absurd. 

(j.  Do  you  mean  to  say  the  official  returns  are  of  that  character! — A. 
They  are  not  of  that  character. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  should  be  added  to  the  amount  stated  in  the 
returns? — A.  They  are  all  of  one-third  below.  I  should  think  that 
would  be  a  fair  estimate. 

Q.  You  think  the  whole  catch  last  year  is  one-third  more  than  it  is 
eslimated  in  the  returns  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  one-third  more  than  it  is 
estimated^ 

Q.  As  to  the  number  of  men  employed,  was  that  truly  returned? — A. 
That  is  truly  returned,  because  I  took  their  names.    There  are  boys  en-. 
gaged,  but  we  don't  count  them. 

Q.  Then  as  to  the  38,551  barrels  of  herring,  what  weight  would  there 
be  in  a  barrel? — A.  Two  hundred-weight  of  salt  herring  in  a  barrel. 

Q.  Is  any  provision  made  for  their  inspection  ? — A.  If  so,  we  have  no 
inspector. 

Q.  Then  the  quantity  would  be  one-third  more  than  38,551  barrels  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  one-third  more  than  00,200  boxes  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  total  fish  product  of  Charlotte  County  is  placed  at  $172,538.80 
for  that  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  more  than  that  would  it  be  ? — A.  Of  course,  if  there 
was  one-third  more  fish  than  estimated,  there  would  be  one-third  moio 
in  money. 

Q.  Take  that  valuation,  what  is  there  in  it  besides  herring  y  of  what 
is  tlie  product  composed  ? — A.  I  cau  give  you  the  quantities  of  fish  of 
different  kinds  for  last  year. 

Q.  But  I  want  to  find  out  something  about  the  other  kinds  of  fish  con- 
tained in  the  aggregate  return  for  1870.  First,  there  is  some  salmon,  is 
there  not  ? — A.  Very  few,  I  think. 

Q.  1,600  pounds  ? — A.  That  is  a  small  quantity. 

Q.  How  much  mackerel  ? — A.  We  have  not  any. 

(i.  Is  there  any  considerable  quantity  of  mackerel  anywhere  in  the 
Bay  of  Fundy  ? — A.  I  think  there  is,  but  the  fishermen  do  not  look  for 
them.  Sometimes  mackerel  are  caught  in  the  weirs ;  in  1875  about  1,000 
barrels  were  taken  in  our  weirs. 

Q.  The  Bay  of  Fundy  has  been  practically  abandoned  as  a  mackerel- 
fishing  ground  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  goes  back  how  far  ? — A.  I  think  forty  years. 

Q.  It  is  less  than  forty  years  since  you  seized  American  schooners 
there  ? — A.  We  did  not  seize  them  in  our  waters  for  mackerel,  but  for 
other  fishing. 

Q.  Mackerel  fishing  there  died  away  before  your  day  ? — A.  I  remem- 
ber it ;  I  was  then  eight  years  old. 

Q.  Are  any  alewives  included  in  the  return  for  1870  f — A.  We  don't 
have  many  in  Charlotte  County,  I  think. 

Q.  There  are  not  any  entered,  I  see ;  then  we  come  down  to  codfish  .' — 
A.  \'es;  there  are  cod-fish. 

Q.  Eight  hundred  and  fifty-four  hundred-weight  of  dried  cod  fish  is 
entered  for  Charlotte  County  that  year  ?— A.  That  must  be  a  mistake  ; 
there  is  certainly  a  mistake. 

Q.  What  would  be  your  estimate  for  1870  of  the  dried  cod-fish  ? — A. 
I  cannot  speak  for  Charlotte  County. 

Q<  You  have  given  an  estimate  of  the  amount  taken  at  the  Grand 
Mauan  and  the  mainland  for  the  present  year,  1876  ? — A.  Yes. 


iti^ 


748 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  But  you  cannot  tell  anything;  about  the  quantity  of  dried  cod-fish 
in  18701— A.  Not  for  Charlotte  County.  1  think  we  must  have  put  up 
that  year  from  10,000  to  15,000  quintals.  We  put  up  7,000  quintals  last 
year,  and  cod  was  not  so  plentiful. 

Q.  Put  it  up  dry  f — A.  Our  line  fish  is  almost  all  put  up  dry. 

Q.  Pickled  cod  is  put  down  at  2,300  barrels  ? — A.  They  are  small 
cod  caught  inshore  at  Passamaqnoddy,  and  are  put  up  in  halt-barrels, 
We  hardly  ever  barrel  any  cod  in  Grand  Manau. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  lobster  trade  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Twelve  thousand  cans  are  entered ;  what  would  they  be  worth  per 
can  ? — A.  About  twenty-five  cents. 

Q.  Twenty-four  thousand  haddock  are  entered ;  is  that  right  ?— A. 
Only  during  three  years  have  we  been  required  to  enter  haddock  sepa- 
rately, so  many  fish.  That  was  intended  as  pounds  of  fresh  fish.  We 
did  not  formerly  catch  haddock. 

Q.  There  is  an  entry  of  420  barrels  of  haddock  and  five  hundred 
weight  of  pollock ;  are  those  approximately  just  estimates  ? — A.  I  do 
not  think  they  are.  I  think  the  quantity  is  too  small,  but  I  could  nut 
tell  you  how  much  it  was.  I  do  not  think  the  quantity  returned  is  large 
enough  for  Grand  Manan. 

Q.  Then  we  come  to  hake,  330  barrels,  and  pollock,  120  barrels ;  are 
they  too  small  ? — A.  Yes  j  they  do  not  put  much  pollock  in  barrels,  but 
in  quintals. 

Q.  Next  there  are  1,500  gallons  of  oil  ? — A.  That  is  too  small. 

Q.  And  970  tons  of  pumice,  which  is  what  remains  after  the  oil  has 
been  squeezed  out;  your  oil  is  raade  from  what  fish? — A.  From  herring, 
principally.  Hake  gives  one  gallon  of  oil  to  the  quintal  in  Grand 
Manan,  but  it  is  not  so  good  at  the  Western  Isles  and  Campobello. 

Q.  The  total  value  of  the  fish  products  of  Charlotte  County  for  1870, 
is  estimated  at  $172,538.80  in  the  official  returns? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  should  that  amount  be  increased,  according  to  your 
judgment  ? — A.  To  be  perfectly  safe,  I  would  increase  it  one-third. 

Q.  Now  we  come  to  1871 ;  there  seems  to  have  been  a  large  increase 
that  year  ? — A.  Simply  because  they  took  the  returns  correctly ;  they 
began  to  be  more  correct. 

Q.  Have  the  returns  since  1871  continued  to  be  correct  ?— A.  I  can 
speak  for  my  own  returns ;  I  have  always  tried  to  be  as  correct  as  I 
could. 

Q.  You  think  for  1871  and  subsequent  years  the  returns  for  Charlotte 
County  are  pretty  true  ? — A.  1  could  not  say  that.  I  know  I  am  about 
the  only  officer  in  Charlotte  County  who  makes  personal  inquiry.  I  am 
better  paid  than  the  other  officers. 

Q.  Is  there  reason  to  suppose  that  from  1871  down,  this  business  of 
making  statistical  returns  has  not  been  fairly  well  done,  making  allow- 
ance for  the  fact  that  there  is  a  sparse  population  and  the  officers  are 
underpaid?  Are  not  the  officers  intelligent  and  honest  men?— A.  I 
questioned  some  of  the  officers  as  to  how  they  got  their  returns.  They 
told  me  they  did  not  get  them  by  personal  inquiry.  I  know  that  each 
is  anxious  to  have  his  own  parish  estimated  as  low  as  possible  on  ac- 
count of  the  County  Council. 

Q.  They  don't  miscount  the  number  of  men  employed  ? — A.  Not  as  a 
general  thing.    I  don't  miscount  mine,  because  I  count  them  myself. 

Q.  In  1871  the  number  of  men  employed  was  1,359  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  exclusive  of  boys  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  appear  to  have  caught,  that  year,  107,746  barrels  of  herring; 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


740 


the  namber  of  boxes  is  not  given  ?— A.  That,  I  thiuk,  would  be  a  fair 
estimate. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  what  they  were  worth  per  barrel  in  1871 ! — A. 
From  $3.50  to  $4  per  barrel. 

Q.  The  total  value  of  the  fish  product  of  the  county  in  1871  is  esti- 
mated at  $413,765.  What  do  you  say  to  that  sum? — A.  I  don't  thiuk 
that  is  one-half. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  the  herring  catch  is  more  than  one-half  of  the  total 
fish  product? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  In  1872, 1,228  men  were  employed.  That  is  a  falling  off.  That 
number  may  perhaps  be  taken  as  true  i — A.  I  don't  know  why  there 
should  be  any  falling  off.  There  has  been  a  gradual  increase  in  my  dis- 
trict. 

Q.  In  1872,  according  to  the  returns,  there  were  29,962  barrels  of  her- 
ring and  571,343  boxes  taken  in  Charlotte  County.  What  do  you  say 
to  those  quantities  ? — A.  I  think  I  had  more  in  my  returns.  There  were 
300,000  or  400,000  boxes  in  my  district. 

Q.  The  total  value  of  the  Ush  products  of  Charlotte  County  for  the 
year  is  estimated  at  $617,603  ? — A.  I  am  afraid  the  returns  from  other 
parts  of  Charlotte  County  were  not  as  accurate  as  mine.  The  meu  are 
poorly  paid  and  I  don't  think  they  can  afford  to  be  correct. 

Q.  According  to  the  returns  there  were  1,388  men  employed  in  1873, 
aud  the  value  of  the  fish  product  of  Charlotte  County  was  estimated  at 
^635,429.35  ? — A.  I  think  you  would  find,  if  you  had  the  separate  returns, 
that  my  parish  produced  more  than  one-half. 

Q.  At  all  events,  has  there  not  been  a  progressive  increase  in  the  num- 
ber of  men  engaged  in  fishing  in  your  county  and  in  the  aggregate  value 
of  the  catch! — A.  In  my  district  there  has  been,  certainly,  and  I  think 
there  has  been  in  the  whole  county. 

Q.  Has  not  the  whole  province  of  New  Brunswick  gone  on  increasing 
in  the  number  of  its  fishermen  aud  in  the  value  of  its  catch  i — A.  I  don't 
iinow  tbat  to  be  the  case. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  in  regard  to  it  ? — A.  I  don't  know  any  reason 
vrhy  it  should  not.    It  is  a  progressive  province. 

Q.  And  the  fishery  has  been  prosperous  ? — A.  As  a  general  thing. 

Q.  In  your  report  you  say  :  "Compared  with  last  year  there  has  been 
a  slight  increase  in  the  catch  of  fish  of  all  kinds  in  the  waters  of  the 
Graud  Mauan,  with  the  exception  of  mackerel,  a  fish  our  people 
scarcely  calculate  on.  The  principal  causes  tor  this  cheering  increase 
are,  the  more  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  fisheries,  the  prevailing  tine 
weather  during  the  whole  year,  the  abundance  of  herring,  both  large 
and  small,  in  my  district.  Line  fish  and  herrings  of  excellent  quality 
are  uow  being  taken  in  abundance  along  the  whole  south  coast  of  the 
island,  and  our  people  are  busily  engaged  in  catching  and  selling  their 
fish  for  tbe  United  States  markets." — A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  Then  the  fishermen  and  fisheries  are  in  a  condition  of  increasing 
prosperity  f — A.  They  are  certainly  so  in  my  district,  and  we  would  like 
to  keep  them  so. 

Q.  They  have  not  diminished  since  you  began  to  be  acquainted  with 
them?— A.  No. 

Q.  Now,  about  the  inshore  fisheries,  am  I  to  understand  that  there  are 
no  tish  caught  more  than  three  miles  off  shore  ? — A.  There  is  plenty  of 
fish  caught  more  than  three  miles  off  shore,  but  boat-fishing  means  in- 
shore fishing. 

Q.  Then  there  is  a  large  fishery  outside  three  miles  from  shore? — A. 
Tbere  is  excellent  fishing  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy. 


750 


▲WAHD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Beyond  the  three-mile  limit  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  what  kind  of  flshf — A.  For  cod  principally. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Overseer  Best,  of  Beaver  Harbor  and  Letite?— -A. 
I  am  not  acquainted  with  him. 

Q.  Do  you  know  him  by  reputation  ? — A.  Ko. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Overseer  Cunningham? — A.  I  have  tLet  him. 

Q.  Is  he  an  intelligent  man  ? — A.  I  know  he  is  a  man ;  I  would  not 
like  to  say  what  he  is. 

Q.  Have  you  not  heard  it  stated,  as  coming  from  Overseer  Best,  of 
Bear  Harbor  and  Letite  district,  that  ^'  The  catch  was  made  chiefly  iu 
deep  water  this  year,  as  far  out  as  five  to  seven  miles  from  the  coast,  and 
no  line  fish  have  been  taken  within  two  miles,  except  haddock.  These 
have  been  plentiful,  but  cod  scarce,  while  bake  have  been  taken  ouly  in 
deep  water  "  ? — A.  I  read  that  at  the  time  to  our  fishermen,  and  they 
said  it  was  a  lie. 

Q.  Then  you  contradict  Overseer  Best  ? — A.  I  don't  think  many  of 
them  know  what  one  mile  from  the  shore  means.  The  Wolves  lie  off 
«ix  miles,  but  the  waters  between  them  and  the  mainland  are  ours.  That 
is  what  it  refers  to. 

Q.  It  cannot  refer  to  that,  for  he  speaks  of  "  from  five  to  seven  miles 
off  the  coast." — A.  He  means  off  the  main  coast.  Such  a  thing  as  he 
says  never  took  place  in  Charlotte  County.  I  read  it  to  our  fishermen 
and  they  laughed  at  it.  These  overseers,  I  think,  want  to  get  a  revenue 
cutter  there  to  look  after  the  American  fishermen  who  set  nets  on  Sun- 
day. 

Q.  Where  are  Americans  to  go  for  information  if  they  cannot  rely  on 
Canadian  blue-books f — A.  These  men  have  been  wanting  a  revenue- 
cutter  there  to  stop  Americans  from  setting  nets  on  Sunday ;  that  is 
what  they  were  after. 

Q.  You  say  there  is  good  fishing  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  ? — A.  Murr 
Ground,  Grand  Manan  Bank,  and  Gravel  Ground  are  excellent  fishing- 
grounds. 

Q.  There  is,  then,  first-rate  fishing  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  for  haddock 
and  cod  ! — A.  There  is  good  fishing,  but  not  so  good  as  there  used  to  be 
before  there  was  trawling  there. 

Q.  Good  fishing  for  hake  and  cod  ? — A.  For  only  cod  and  haddock. 

Q.  For  cod  and  pollock  ? — A.  Pollock  is  an  inshore  fish.  The  Hipp- 
lings  at  Grand  Manan  is  a  good  place  for  pollock.  Cod,  halibut,  and 
haddock  are  got  off  shore.  Hake  in  my  district  and  in  other  districts  is 
an  inshore  fish,  and  are  caught  on  a  muddy  bottom,  and  pollock  are 
taken  on  the  ledges. 

Q.  Cod,  halibut,  and  haddock  may  be  obtained  at  the  places  you  have 
mentioned  by  American  fishermen  i — A.  Yes ;  there  are  banks  wiiere 
they  may  be  obtained.  The  fishing  is  not  so  good  as  it  used  to  be  there, 
and  it  is  failing. 

Q.  When  did  you  first  know  trawls  used  ? — A.  Tiawling  has  been 
done  by  Americans  a  great  number  of  years.  There  was  a  law  passed 
long  before  Confederation,  and  I  suppose  still  exists,  prohibiting  trawl- 
ing in  the  county  of  Charlotte ;  I  think  it  does  not  extend  to  St,  John. 
We  had  no  trawling  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  from  that  fact.  Our 
people  were,  and  are,  unanimously  opposed  to  it. 

Q.  Give  the  Commission  the  year  when  trawling  first  began  ?— A.  It 
has  gradually  increased  since  1871. 

Q.  It  began  as  early  as  1871? — A.  I  think  a  little  earlier;  I  would  be 
safe  in  saying  1871.  Tbey  were  not  allowed  to  trawl  so  long  as  the  law 
was  in  operation. 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


751 


Q.  Do  you  not  give  too  much  credit  to  tlie  ingenuity  of  the  Americans 
io  regard  to  trawling? — A.  They  got  it  from  the  French. 

Q.  It  has  been  prosecuted  how  long? — A.  On  the  Banks,  I  supi>ose, 
{or years  and  3'ears  and  centuries;  but  not  in  so  destructive  a  manner. 
The  French  use  larger  hooks  and  do  not  take  such  small  fish.  The 
Americans  are  the  most  destructive  of  all  fishermen  in  the  world. 

Q.  Notwithstanding  the  destruction  caused  by  trawls  and  the  throwing 
orerboard  of  gurry  and  everything  of  that  sort,  the  number  of  the  men 
employed  and  the  value  of  the  fish  product  has  steadily  increased,  and 
the  business  has  prospered  this  year  ? — A.  Yes ;  but  you  must  also  re- 
member we  are  increasing  in  population  and  more  men  are  engaged  iu 
tlie  fisheries,  and  they  put  forth  greater  efforts. 

{}.  Of  all  the  herring  you  catch,  what  proportion  goes  to  the  United 
States  market  ? — A.  I  could  not  give  you  that ;  even  the  custom-house 
authorities  could  not  give  you  t  he  proportion. 

(J.  Is  it  not  a  very  large  majority  ? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  so  ? — A.  I  could  not  say.  Our  peo])le  trade  with 
different  parts  of  the  Dominion  and  United  States ;  but  I  think  a  very 
large  majority  of  our  smoked  herring  goes  to  the  United  States. 

Q.  And  frozen  herring? — A.  Our  frozen  herring  always  went  there. 
But  there  is  an  increasing  amount  going  into  our  own  country.  Almost 
all  the  frozen  line  fish  taken  by  Graud  Manau,  including  cod  and  pollack, 
bas  gone  into  the  Dominion. 

Q.  Of  frozen  as  well  as  smoked  herring,  does  not  much  the  greater 
proportion  go  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  Yes,  but  they  go  from  there  to 
Cauada  again. 

Q.  J>o  the  frozen  herring  go  from  the  United  States  to  Canada  ? — A. 
So  I  understand. 

Q.  In  what  way  ? — By  the  Graud  Trunk  Railway. 

Q.  From  what  ports  ? — A.  From  Portland  and  Boston,  and  even  from 
New  York. 

Q.  The  frozen  herring  are  first  sent  down  from  the  Bay  of  Fundy  to 
Portland  and  Boston,  and  are  then  sent  through  your  Dominion  ? — A. 
It  is  the  nearest  route. 

Q.  They  are  first  sold  to  United  States  citizens  ? — A.  So  our  merchants 
tell  me. 

Q.  Of  the  codfish,  do  you  know  what  proportion  goes  to  the  United 
States  ? — A.  I  could  not  tell  you.  I  am  asked  in  my  return  where  the 
market  is,  and  I  say  the  United  States  and  Canada.  The  custom-house 
could  not  do  better. 

Q.  You  are  not  willing  to  give  us  your  estimate  or  judgment? — A.  I 
think  I  would  be  safe  in  saying  two-thirds  go  to  the  United  States. 
Captain  Gaskill  sends  them  in  bond  to  the  United  States,  and  I  don't 
know  where  they  go  after  that. 

Q.  In  the  province  of  New  Brunswick,  what  kind  of  fish  do  Ameri- 
cans take;  the  Americans  don't  catch  any  salmon,  do  they? — A.  No; 
they  are  not  allowed  to  catch  salmon. 

Q.  The  mackerel  are  so  few  the  Americans  do  not  catch  many  of  them, 
I  suppose?— A.  No. 

Q.  They  do  not  catch  shad  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Nor  bass? — A.  I  think  they  fish  at  the  head  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy 
for  sbad  and  bass. 

Q.  But  are  not  shad  and  bass  essentially  river  fish? — A.  Y^es;  but, 
after  all,  the  very  best  are  caught  in  salt  water. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  catch  many  bass  ? — A.  I  don't  say  they  catch 
many,  but  they  fish  with  nets  at  the  head  of  the  bay. 


752 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  It  is  your  belief  that  Americans  catoli  many  bass  in  New  Brunn- 
wick  waters! — A.  I  could  not  say  tbat.  It  is  a  new  thought.  I  couU) 
not  say  so. 

Q.  It  is  rather  your  impression  that  they  do  not  catch  many  bass?— 
A.  It  is  rather  my  impression  they  catch  some. 

Q.  A  great  mau>  ? — A.  I  don't  emy  our  people  cutch  a  great  mauy, 

Q.  Do  the  Americaur  catch  some  trout f — A.  Yes;  some  of  your 
grandees,  who  have  gone  there  and  leased  rivers,  fish  for  trout. 

Q.  You  don't  understand  they  have  a  right  to  llsh  for  troutf— -A.  No. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  smelt? — A.  Smelts  never  come  "ito  our  part  of  the 
country. 

Q.  How  about  lobsters  and  oysters  ? — A.  We  have  ,  .»ity  of  lobsters, 
but  the  Americans  don't  take  them. 

Q,  How  about  lobsters  ? — A.  Americans  came  into  our  waters  aud 
built  camps  on  our  shores.  Our  tishermen  did  not  like  it,  aud  the 
Americans  left. 

Q.  They  settled  there,  but  not  permanently  ?— A.  Our  people  felt  it 
was  an  infraction  of  the  law. 

Q.  Then  of  the  $1,053,338.59,  said  to  have  been  the  total  yield  of  the 
fisheries  of  New  Brunswick  in  187G,  would  there  not  have  been  a  good 
deal  more  than  half  with  which  the  Americans  had  nothing  to  do?— A. 
In  1871  Charlotte  County's  catch  was  fully  more  than  the  whole  of  the 
rest  of  the  province  put  together. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  the  well-known  fact  that  a  majority  of  the  meu 
fishing  in  American  vessels  were  foreigners,  and  more  than  one-half  of 
British  subjects  ? — A.  I  said  from  Cape  Ann.  I  thought  more  than  one- 
half  the  fishermen  were  or  had  been  British  subjects. 

Q.  When  you  talk  of  American  fishermen,  do  yo*  ean  those  from 
Gloucester? — A.  From  Trenton,  Maine,  your  vessels .  'ed  principally 
with  Americans,  but  from  Gloucester  it  is  different. 

Q.  When  did  the  large  emigration  of  British  subjects  down  to  East- 
port  begin  ? — A.  That  has  always  been  the  case. 

Q.  Eastport  has  grown  during  the  last  twenty  years  ? — A.  It  is  almost 
composed  of  whitewashed  Yankees. 

Q.  What  is  its  population  ? — A.  About  4,000. 

Q.  How  large  was  it  when  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  in  operation  ?— 
A.  It  has  been  finished  some  years.  There  has  been  about  the  same 
population  for  a  number  of  years. 

Q.  Has  it  not  grown  for  25  or  30  years  ? — A.  Very  little. 

Q.  What  portion  of  the  fishermen  of  Eastport  do  you  estimate  to  be 
British  subjects  to-day  ? — A.  I  could  not  give  you  an  estimate.  I  find 
most  I  come  in  contact  with  have  been  British  subjects. 

Q.  Have  they  been  naturalized  ? — A.  Most  of  them  are  naturalized,  I 
think. 

Q.  How  many  years  is  it  since  British  subjects  ceased  to  move  there  J 
— A.  I  think  they  are  moving  all  the  time ;  and  we  get  a  good  many  of 
your  people  over  to  us.    They  move  backwards  and  forwards. 

Q.  Is  there  a  considerable  salt  trade  carried  on  by  your  people  with 
Americans  ? — A.  Not  so  much  as  with  the  people  on  our  own  side. 

Q.  Is  there  a  considerable  trade ;  do  not  Americans  buy  salt  from  you? 
— A.  I  don't  know  that  to  be  the  case.  There  is  no  salt  trade  with 
Americans  at  Grand  Manan. 

Q.  How  long  do  you  think  the  influence  of  dead  fish  which  drop  to 
the  bottom  will  continue  to  affect  the  waters  for  fishing  purposes  ?-|-A. 
I  think  it  affects  them  till  the  fish  are  thoroughly  decayed.  It  drives 
the  fish  from  the  ground. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


758 


naturalized,  I 


Q.  How  long  will  that  continue  to  affect  the  Ashing  ground  t — A.  I 
Kill  give  yon  an  illuHtration.  I  know  a  good  weiring.  JuHt  above  is  a 
flsli  establisbment ;  tbey  empty  the  piokle  which  runs  into  the  sea,  and 
it  destroys  the  weirs. 

Q,  Tlie  fish  establishment  is  on  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  That  is  hardly  cbageable  to  Americans,  and  it  is  hardly  an  illustra* 
tioD  of  tbe  effect  of  the  throwing  overboard  of  offal  f — A.  I  did  not  make 
any  charge  against  Americans. 

Q.  No  one  doubts  you  can  contaminate  water. — A.  That  is  generally 
underHtood  by  the  fishermen. 

Q.  But  I  want  to  know  bow  long  will  the  water  remain  contaminated 
by  garry  being  thrown  into  it  f — A.  I  would  require  time  to  think  over 
tbat. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  last  one  year? — A.  I  know  the  destruction 
of  herring  on  tbe  bottom  will  destroy  fishing  gronnds  entirely  for  herring. 

Q.  We  are  talking  about  offal  being  thrown  overboard  f — A.  Herring 
on  tbe  bottom  is  gurry.  We  consider  everything  in  the  shape  of  fish 
dead  iD  tbe  sea  as  gurry. 

Q.  How  long  will  it  be  before  the  effect  of  the  offal  disappears  1 — A. 
St.  Andrew's  Bay  has  been  cleared  out ;  there  has  scarcely  been  a  her- 
ring there  for  two  years.  They  caught  great  quantities  of  aeri'iug  there 
previously. 

Q.  Tou  attribute  tbe  disappearance  of  the  herring  to  that  cause  f — A. 
Y«8;  and  in  former  years  also  their  disappearance  from  ihe  south  head 
of  Graud  Manan.  For  the  last  two  years  the  fishermen  have  got  no  her- 
ring in  St.  Andrew's  Bay.  When  they  fished  there  two  years  ago  almost 
every  tlsh  seemed  to  be  filled  with  gurry,  and  it  destroyed  the  fishing 
almoHt  entirely. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  the  influence  of  the  gurry  continues  more 
than  two  years  ? — A.  I  said  it  was  two  years  since  we  had  taken  the  fish 
at  tbat  place.  I  think  if  tbat  practice  were  prohibited  there  would  be 
a  great  increase  of  fish  at  those  grounds — the  herring  would  gradually 
return. 

Q.  If  you  have  a  place  as  big  as  this  room  and  the  bottom  is  pretty 
well  sprinkled  over  with  gurry,  how  long  will  it  keep  the  fish  from  com- 
ing back  there  ? — A.  It  is  not  considered  by  our  fishermen  that  it  keeps 
the  fish  from  coming  back,  but  they  swallow  the  backbone  and  other 
bones  and  are  destroyed. 

Q.  They  don't  stay  away  ?— A.  They  get  sick  and  are  destroyed. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  The  returus  give  $1,953,388  as  the  value  of  the  fish  products  of 
New  Brunswick  for  1876 ;  is  it  possible  that  that  conveys  the  whole 
value  of  the  fisheries  ? — A.  T  believe  it  is  one-sixth.  It  is  not  enough 
for  Charlotte  County.  It  is  a  pity  the  government  have  any  reports  at 
all. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  returns  you  have  made,  you  have  said  you  were 
better  paid  than  the  other  overseers? — A.  I  am  not  well  paid,  but  I  am 
better  paid  than  the  others. 

Q-  You  have  taken  pains  to  make  personal  inquiry  in  making  your 
returns f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  will  underestimate  the  catch? — A.  They  are  just  like  all 
other  men. 

Q.  They  are  afraid  of  taxation  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  As  to  the  other  overseers,  from  conversation  you  have  had  you 
say  they  really  make  no  personal  inquiries? — A.  From  my  cunveiSd- 
48  F 


754 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


tions,  they  do  not.  Mr.  Lord,  who  is  a  truthful  man,  said  be  did  not 
make  personal  iuqniries  except  of  one  or  t^ro  individuals.  Each  ig 
anxious  that  bis  own  parish  should  appear  as  low  as  possible;  they  pot 
the  amount  as  low  as  possible  on  account  of  taxation.  We  bave  b^en 
building  large  school-houses  in  Charlotte  County  to  try  and  beat  our 
neighbors. 

Q.  In  regard  to  Overseer  Cunningham,  have  you  anything  to  aay?~ 
A.  He  is  hermetically  sealed  all  winter  in  a  small  gully  called  Boko 
beck. 


He  has 

He  could  hardly  see  a  vessel  out  in  the  offing  from  bis 
think  be  has  no  boat  to  go  out  in.    His  place  is  insliore, 


Q.  That  is  fifteen  miles  from  St.  Andrew's  Bay? — A.  Yes. 
$50  a  year, 
place,  and  I 
inland. 

Q.  You  have  said  that  you  liave  seen  the  report  of  Overseer  Best,  in 
which  he  says  that  the  fishing  was  doue  in  deep  water? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  read  it  to  the  fishermen  aud  they  laughed  at  it?— A.  Tliey 
said  it  was  a  lie. 

Q.  You  think  be  was  figuring  to  get  a  cutter  tuere? — A.  There  was  a 
feeling  that  they  would  like  a  cutter  there;  they  were  after  getting  a 
revenue-cutter,  and  1  think  they  need  one;  but  they  should  not  Lave 
taken  that  way  to  get  it. 

Q.  You  have  been  asked  about  the  general  increase  in  our  fisheries; 
our  fisheries  have  increased  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  you  attribute  the  fact  of  the  increase  to  increased  protec 
tiou? — A.  I  think  that. 

Q.  There  have  been  during  the  last  ten  years  strenuous  efforts  made 
by  the  Dominion  Government  to  protect  the  fisheries? — A.  Yes,  and 
they  have  had  a  most  excellent  servant  there  to  do  it ;  that  is  myself. 

Q>  There  has  been  a  good  deal  of  expense  in  connection  with  it?— A, 
Yes. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  get  the  benefit  of  that? — A.  Certainly  they  do. 

Q.  They  get  an  increased  quantity  of  fish  and  don't  pay  a  dollar  ?— A, 
The  protection  of  our  trout  and  salmon  in  our  rivers  and  the  fact  of  our 
fish  breeding  must  induce  the  fish  to  come  in  for  food. 

Q.  Trout  and  salmon  are  protected  equally  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  there  are  large  fish-breeding  establishments  for  salmoQ  at 
different  places  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  more  young  fry  there  are  in  the  rivers  the  more  the  sea  fish 
are  attracted  in  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  consider  it  is  so.  Fish  are  after  sometbiiig 
to  eat  the  same  as  men  are. 

Q.  Do  the  vessels  fishing  for  herring  in  winter  around  the  islands  and 
mainland  of  I^ew  Brunswick  fish  only  for  herring  f — A.  They  fisli  for 
herring  and  cod. 

Q.  Cod-fishing  within  the  limits  ? — A.  Yes.  There  is  no  bay  flsliiug 
in  the  Bay  of  Fuudy  in  winter.  The  Bank  flsliery  ends  about  this  time 
in  the  bay. 

Q.  They  don't  go  into  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence  ? — A.  1  never  knew 
them  to  do  so :  but  they  are  large  enough. 

Q.  But  they  don't  go  ? — A.  Not  to  my  knowledge.  Those  on  our  coast 
doli't  go;  there  is  only  one  banker,  the  Thurlow,  of  Grand  Manan. 

Q.  The  vessels  are  kept  fishing  entirely  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  ?— A. 
Yes.    When  they  leave  our  coast  they  go  to  Nova  Scotia  to  fish. 

Q.  Is  it  so  with  American  ve8.sels  also  ? — A.  Yes.  I  know  last  year 
our  people  went  over  to  Nova  Scotia  to  fish  and  American  vessels  came 
from  Eastport  and  Lubec  to  Grand  Mauau,  and  they  did  much  belter 


AWARD   OP   TUE   FISHERY   COMMISSIOJJf. 


755 


le  in  our  fisheries; 
increased  protec- 


-A.  1  never  kuew 


than  we  did.  Our  people  missed  it  by  going  out  of  their  own  waters. 
Tjis  was  last  year. 

Q.  Yoa  don't  attribute  the  increase  of  the  fisheries  for  the  last  eight 
or  ten  years  to  anything  else  but  protection;  you  don't  attribute  it  to 
the  benign  influence  of  American  fishermen  on  the  fisheries? — A.  I  think 
not.    That  is  something  new  to  me. 

Q.  IJothing  of  that  sort?— A.  No. 

Q.  Has  the  halibut  fishing  diminished? — A.  Yes;  it  has  diminished 
in  the  whole  Bay  of  Fundy. 

Q.  To  what  do  you  attribute  it  ? — A.  To  trawl  fishing.  Haddock  has 
increased. 

Q.  Haddock  happen  to  be  fish  that  cannot  be  taken  by  trawls  ? — A. 
They  can  be  taken  by  trawls;  but  the  halibut  is  a  natural  enemy  to  the 
haddock,  and  as  they  kill  the  halibut  so  the  haddock  increase.  Whether 
that  theory  is  correct  or  not  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Notwithstanding  anything  that  has  been  read  to  you  out  of  the 
reports, yon  still  adhere  to  the  opinion  that  at  the  islands  alone  $1,000,000 
worth  of  fish  is  taken  every  year? — A,  Yes,  I  am  convinced  of  it. 

Q.  And  about  half  a  million  on  the  mainland? — A.  I  think  that  would 
be  an  underestimate. 

Q.  That  is,  taken,  I  understand,  by  Americans  alone? — A.  I  think 
they  take  equal  if  not  more  than  our  people.  The  Americans  have 
better  appliances. 

Q.  You  say  that  is  an  underestimate? — A.  I  consider  it  to  be  an 
nnderestimate. 

Q.  You  value  your  o|>inion  as  highly  as  the  returns  of  those  overseers 
wlio  have  been  referred  to  ? — A.  Considerably  higher. 

Q.  Do  not  Canadian  fishermen,  notwithstanding  the  treaty,  when  they 
taiie  fish  over  to  E  istport  or  other  American  ports,  have  to  pay  a  fee  of 
GO  cents  ? — A.  I  heard  our  fishermen  say  there  is  GO  cents  levied  each 
time  they  enter;  that  most  of  them  evade  it;  but  1  know  one  load  was 
seized.  They  violate  the  law  every  time  they  go  tojan  American  port 
if  they  do  not  pay  it. 

Q.  Do  American  fishermen  pay  the  fee  ? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Only  British  fishermen  ? — A.  American  vessels  don't  have  to  pay 
it,  I  remember  one  case  in  which  a  boat  was  seized.  The  fish  belonged 
to  Mr.  Langford,  of  Massachusetts,  who  had  bought  them  from  a  Brit- 
ish .sul»ject  at  Grand  Manan.  He  did  not  go  to  the  custom-house  and 
they  were  seized. 

Q.  Was  that  fee  exacted  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  I — A.  Our 
lisheruien  say  not ;  I  could  not  say. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  You  estimated  the  population  of  Grand  Manan  at  2,000,  I  think  ? 
—A.  Yes. 

<^  How  many  are  actually  engaged  in  fishing? — A.  435,  T  think. 

Q.  So  you  estimate  that  those  435  take  $15,000  worth  of  fish  each 
year?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  satisfied  you  are  correct  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  don't  make  that 
much  money.  I  think  the  number  of  men  is  435.  There  is  quite  a  nuto- 
ber  of  boys  engaged,  but  they  are  not  down.  We  just  take  the  able- 
bodied  men. 

Q.  Explain  the  system  of  taxation ;  for  what  are  the  fishermen  taxed  ? 
—A.  They  are  generally  proi>erty  owners,  and  they  are  taxed  for  county 
aud  parish  purposes. 


r.f 


756 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Oa  what  ? — A.  They  are  taxed  on  their  real  estate  and  i^ersonal 
property. 

Q.  How  are  they  taxed  on  personal  property  f — A.  Our  free  school 
system  is  somewhat  diiferent  from  yours.  With  as,  every  parish  ig 
divided  into  districts.  Grand  Manan  is  divided  into  districts,  and  Id 
one  district  the  rate  will  be,  perhaps,  1  cent,  and  in  another  one  quarter 
of  a  cent. 

Q.  For  what  is  the  fishermen  taxed  ? — A.  He  is  taxed  on  his  hoose, 
boat,  and  personal  property,  and  on  his  income,  on  his  labor.  We  have 
county  assessors,  who  go  round  and  make  up  returns. 

Q.  If  a  man  earns  $30  a  month,  is  his  income  taken  at  $360,  and  has 
he  to  pay  a  percentage  on  that  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Just  the  same  as  on  property  f — A.  Tea. 

Q.  And  if  the  same  man  has  caught  $1,000  worth  of  fish,  do  you  carry 
in  that  $1,000  ? — A.  That  is  personal  property. 

Q.  In  addition  to  his  fishing  boat  t — A.  Yes ;  last  year  they  exempted 
fishermen  with  incomes  of  $200,  after  they  had  made  considerable  com- 
plaint. 

Q.  Don't  they  exempt  wages  to  that  amount  f — A.  There  is  no  oue 
but  a  fisherman  exem!)ted. 

Q.  Is  that  because  rhey  are  a  poor  class  or  why  ? — A.  Our  fishermen 
are  almost  all  voters,  and  make  considerable  row.  I  think  it  was  doue 
because  they  are  voters. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  You  say  there  are  a  lot  of  boys  who  do  a  large  portion  of  the  fish- 
ing t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  boys  will  there  be  to  435  men  at  Grand 
Manan  ? — A.  I  should  think  150  boys ;  there  might  be  more.  Most  of 
them  are  pretty  smart  fellows. 

Q.  That  is  about  the  proportion  of  boys  on  the  other  islands  ?— A.  I 
think  so. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  Will  you  state  the  distinction  between  fishing  vessels  and  boats  !— 
A.  Vessels  are  decked. 

Q.  Small  boats  have  masts? — A.  A  great  many  have,  but  they  have 
not  decks. 

Q.  When  you  spoke  of  ^our  vessels  going  over  to  the  Nova  Scotia 
coast,  and  American  vessels  coming  in,  was  it  into  the  Bay  of  Fuudy  !— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yon  spoke  of  the  fish  schooling  there  when  you  fished  for  them; 
do  you  mean  any  fish  except  herring  ? — A.  In  the  fall  of  the  year  the 
cod  are  fished  when  schooling ;  they  are  seldom  caught  without  school- 
ing. 

Q.  Are  they  taken  in  nets  ? — A.  They  are  taken  with  hooks ;  they 
Schvrl  when  coming  inshore;  they  follow  the  herring. 

By  Mr.  Thomson  : 
Q.  The  people  of  Grand  Manan  never  fish  in  American  waters?— A. 
No. 

No.  32. 


The  conference  met. 


Thursday,  Augtist  23, 1877. 


The  Hon.  Thomas  Savage,  merchant  and  ship-owner,  and  member 
of  the  legislative  council  of  the  Province  of  Quebec  for  the  Gulf  Divis- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


757 


here  is  no  oue 


ion  of  the  fltih- 


islaDds !— A.  I 


1  hooks;  they 


n  waters  ?— A. 


ion,  incloding  the  three  counties  of  Gasp^,  Bonaventare,  and  Rimonski, 
was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
gworn,  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  Where  do  you  reside  ? — Answer.  At  Cape  Cove,  Gasp^. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  resided  at  Gasp^? — A.  About  fifty-three  years; 
about  fifty-two  years  ago  from  last  April  I  arrived  in  this  country. 

Q.  flow  far  are  you  from  Gaspe  Bay? — A.  I  suppose  about  25  miles. 

Q.  Do  you  live  to  the  north  or  the  south  of  the  Bay  of  Gasp<:j  ? — A. 
I  live  to  the  south  of  it. 

Q.  Tlien  you  reside  between  the  Bays  of  Ghaleurs  and  Gaspe  ? — A. 
Yea. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  the  fishing  business! — A.  I 
have  been  so  doing  business  on  my  own  account  lor  these  forty-five 
years ;  and  previously  1  acted  as  clerk  for  my  brother  in  the  same  busi- 
uess. 

Q.  You  come  from  Jersey  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  Are  there  large  Jersey  firms  doing  business  in  Gaspe  ? — A,  Yes. 

Q.  What  are  their  names? — A.  There  are  Charles  Eobin  &  Co.,  Le 
Boutillier  Bros.,  and  the  Collas  Bros.;  these  are  the  largest  firms;  then 
there  are  Charles  Le  Boutillier,  who  was  born  in  this  country,  and  my- 
self. 

Q.  Wbat  fishery  do  you  chiefly  prosecute? — A.  The  cod  fishery. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  may  say  that  you  are  entirely  so  engaged? — A.  Yes; 
that  is  our  money. 

Q.  How  many  boats  do  you  employ  in  your  own  business  T — A.  I 
have  84  fishing  for  me. 

Q.  Eighty-four  of  your  own  ? — A.  Yes.  I  may  call  them  my  own ;  I 
furnish  them  with  what  they  require. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average  value  of  these  boats  all  round  ? — A. 
The  value  of  a  boat  newly  rigged  is  £30 ;  but  of  course  all  of  them  are 
uot  now  worth  that  sum.  I  suppose  that  their  value  all  round  would 
be  about  £20. 

Q.  As  they  stand  now? — A.  Yes;  counting  the  old  with  the  new,  they 
would  be  worth  from  £20  to  £22  10s. 

Q.  That  is  equal  to  between  $80  and  $90  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Those  boats  fish  for  cod  exclusively  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Within  three  miles  of  the  shore,  or  farther  out  ? — A.  Some  go  far- 
the-"-  out;  but  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  nine-tenths  of  the  cod  caught 
on  our  coast  are  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  shores,  and  the  remain- 
ing one-tenth  on  the  Banks. 

Q.  Banks  Orphan  and  Bradley  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Including  the  catch  on  Banks  Orphan  and  Bradley,  nine-tenths  of 
the  whole  fishery  there  is  done  inshore  ?— A.  Y'es. 

Q.  And  the  other  one-tenth  on  these  banks? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  has  always  been  the  case  ? — A.  Yes,  since  I  have  had  any 
knowledge  of  this  fishery. 

Q.  Where  are  your  fishing  grounds  ? — A.  All  along  the  coast. 

Q.  Do  you  fish  around  and  north  of  Cape  Gaspe  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Up  the  river? — A.  I'es,  as  far  as  Cape  Chate. 

Q.  Cape  Chate  on  the  southern  is  very  nearly  opposite  Point  Des 
Monts  on  the  northern  side  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  thousand  quintals  of  cod  do  you  cure  a  year  ? — A.  I 
consider  that  the  boats  we  have  on  the  coast  average  each  about  150 
quintals  for  the  whole  year,  including  the  summer  and  fall  fishing. 


768 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


-A.  It  may  be.    I  cau- 


Q.  That  would  make  12,600  qaiutals — what  do  yon  do  with  these  fish! 
— A.  I  send  part  to  the  Brazils,  a  coaple  o(  cargoes  to  the  West  iDdies 
and  the  remainder  to  the  Mediterranean  markets — Spain  and  Portugal' 
I  send  the  large  fish  to  Oporto. 

Q.  Do  you  ship  fish  to  the  United  States? — A.  I  have  never  sent  a 
fish  there. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  one  in  your  neighborhood  who  has  done  so  ?— 
A.  I  do  not ;  I  speak  positively. 

Q.  And  do  all  the  other  producers  at  Gasp6  trade  the  same  as  yoii 
dol— A.  Yes;  to  my  knowledge  they  have  never  sent  a  codfish  to'tlie 
United  States. 

Q.  They  sent  them  to  the  Brazils  and  West  Indies,  to  Spain  and  Por- 
tugal and  other  Mediterranean  ports  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  to  ports  iu  the 
Adriatic. 

Q.  What  are  these  codfish  worth  at  Gasp6  before  they  are  shipped  ?— 
A.  We  value  them  at  $5  all  round. 

Q.  A  quintal  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  About  what  would  you  say  would  be  the  whole  export  each  year 
from  Ga8p6  !— A.  To  the  best  of  my  opinion  from  150,000  to  200,000. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  What?— A.  Quintals. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  Would  it  be  nearer  200,000  than  150,000  ?- 
not  say  positively. 

Q.  150,000  would  be  a  low  estimate  ?— A.  It  would  be  the  least. 

Q.  And  it  might  be  200,000  ?— A.  Yes ;  I  intended  to  take  the  dif- 
ferent returns,  but  I  forgot  them. 

Q.  You  yourself  ship  nearly  13,000  each  year? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  do  a  small  business  compared  with  Kobiu  &  Co.  aud  tlie 
Le  Boutilliers  aud  others  ? — A.  O,  yesj  they  are  companies  and  I  am 
alone. 

Q.  I  believe  that  all  you  Jersey  gentlemen  rather  encourage  tlie  cod 
fishery  aud  discourage  fishing  for  mackerel? — A.  Yes;  we  would  very 
well  like  to  fish  for  mackerel  also,  but  the  Americans  do  not  give  us  a 
chance  to  do  so.  As  soon  as  these  fish  strike  our  coast  the  Americans 
are  there  and  pick  them  up ;  and  they  will  not  allow  our  flsbenuen  even 
to  get  mackerel  for  bait. 

Q.  Will  you  explain  this  matter  to  the  Commission  ? — A.  You  see 
that,  owing  to  the  Americans  fishing  for  mackerel  on  our  coast,  our 
fishermen  cannot  even  get  bait,  because  mackerel  make  good  bait  for 
cod-fishing. 

Q.  Is  it  the  bait  you  generally  use  for  them  ? — A.  Yes ;  during  tlie 
summer ;  but  the  Americans  take  the  bait  from  us.  I  consider  tbat,  if 
the  Americans  did  not  do  so,  our  fishermen  would  catch  one-quarter  as 
many  more  fisb  than  they  now  do. 

Q.  Their  coming  there  depreciates  your  catch  of  cod  to  the  extent  of 
one-quarter? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  what  time  do  the  Americans  come  for  mackerel  ? — A.  This 
does  not  occur  «t  *'>«  siuie  period  every  season.  Tliey  sometimes  ar- 
rive in  July  or  in  August,  or  iu  September.  They  come  during  these 
three  months  of  the  year. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  come  on  your  coast  in  great  numbers  ?— A. 
Yes.  I  have  seen  them  so  thick  from  my  own  place,  that  one  could  uot 
count  them. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


759 


le  exteut  of 


Q.  How  long  ago  was  that ! — A.  It  was  duriog  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty. 

Q.  Between  1854  and  1866?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  would  you  estimate  that  you  saw  there  ? — A.  I  could 
not  say  exactly  ;  it  would  be  from  150  to  200. 

Q.  In  sight  of  your  own  door! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  All  Ashing  for  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  all  fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  this  a  great  place  for  mackerel  fishing? — A.  Yes,  some  years. 

Q.  Did  you  see  many  American  vessels  there  last  year? — A.  I  was 
not  much  at  home  last  year.  I  had  to  go  to  Quebec  and  see  after  the 
repair  of  a  vessel,  and  then  I  went  to  Europe. 

Q.  Are  they  coming  there  this  year  ? — A.  The  mackerel  were  coming 
in  when  I  left. 

Q.  Then  I  suppose  that  the  mackerel  fleet  have  not,  as  yet,  come  into 
Tour  part  of  the  country  ? — A.  They  had  not  made  their  appearance 
wheu  I  left. 

Q.  It  is  hardly  early  enough  for  them  yet  ? — A.  Yes,  or  the  mackerel 
are  late. 

Q.  Tbey  follow  the  mackerel  up  there  ? — A.  They  do. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  fish  to  any  extent  for  cod,  along  your  shore  ? — 
A.  Not  within  the  three-mile  limit,  because  our  fish  are  too  small  for 
them.  They  fish  on  the  Banks,  but  if  they  did  not  come  on  shore  for 
bait,  they  could  not  fish  much  on  the  Banks. 

Q.  Wiiat  do  they  get  for  bait  on  your  shore  ? — A.  Herring  in  the 
spring,  and  caplin. 

Q.  You  have  caplin  on  your  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  lu  large  numbers? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  a  good  cod  bait  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  They  come  in  for  them  in  the  spring  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q  And  for  herring  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Without  that  they  could  not  fish  even  on  the  Banks? — A.  No; 
they  would  then  have  no  chance. 

Q.  Can  they  use  salt  bait? — A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  What  do  your  fishermen  say  about  that  ? — A.  They  say  that  the 
Americans,  wheu  they  have  no  fresh  bait,  cannot  get  fish  among  them. 

Q.  The  Americaiis,  having  salt  bait,  cannot  compete  with  your  fisher- 
men, having  fresh  bait?— A.  No. 

Q.  And  so  they  have  to  come  in  for  fresh  bait  to  your  shore  ? — A.  Yes; 
au(l  sometimes  they  get  it  on  the  Bank. 

Q.  Do  you  allude  to  Bradley,  Orphan,  and  Green  Banks  ? — A.  I  refer 
mostly  to  Orphan  Bank. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  much  of  Bradley  or  Green  Bank  ? — A.  Green 
Bank  is  to  the  northward. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  the  Bank  where  they  get  bait  you  mean 
Orphan  Bank?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  many  of  the  Americans  come  in  for  bait? — A.  A  good  many 
do. 

Q.  Can  you  estimate  how  many  do  so  in  the  course  of  the  season! — 
A.  I  could  not. 

ii.  They  have  come  since  1871  chiefly  ?— A.  Yes;  since  1872, 1  think. 

Q.  Have  they  come  in  greater  or  less  nun.  ors  each  year  ? — A.  Their 
namber  is  about  the  same  each  year. 

Q.  Can  you  not  give  me  an  approximate  number? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  they  come  and  fish  for  bait  themselves,  or  do  they  buy  it  ? — A. 


i 


760 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


I  never  sold  any  to  them,  bat  I  have  seen  them  catch  it  themselves,  or 
rather,  set  their  nets  to  do  so,  among  our  fishermen.  ' 

Q.  On  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes.    I  would  not  sell  them  bait. 

Q.  They  come  in  and  fish  for  themselves  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  seine  for  it  on  the  shore? — A.  They  do. 

Q.  Do  they  draw  their  seines  on  shore  I — A.  Yes.   They  do  as  we  do. 

Q.  They  land  the  fish  on  shore,  and  draw  the  seine  to  the  shore  !f— A 
Yes. 

Q.  They  do  not  seine  from  their  vessels  ! — A.  O,  no. 

Q.  And  they  could  not,  in  your  judgment,  prosecute  the  30(1  fishery 
without  this  privilege  of  coming  in  for  bait  ? — A.  They  would  do  very 
little  at  cod-fishing  otherwise. 

Q.  Before  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  did  they  come  m  and  take  it  for 
themselves  I — A.  Of  course ;  and  largely. 

Q.  Did  they  previous  to  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  come  and  seine  on  the 
shore  f — A.  A  good  many  did ;  and  they  also  then  fished  for  mackerel 
within  a  mile  of  the  shore.  They  would  also  watch  the  movements  of 
La  Canadienne,  and  come  inshore  as  soon  as  she  passed. 

Q.  La  Canadienne  was  one  of  the  cutters  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  As  soon  as  she  passed,  they  would  come  in? — A.  Yes;  and  fish 
for  mackerel. 

Q.  In  great  numbers  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  fishing  on  Bay  Chaleurs  ?— A. 
No ;  I  do  not.  I  have  been  told  that  a  great  many  vessels  come  aud 
lish  there  for  mackerel,  but  I  never  saw  them.    1  do  not  go  there. 

Q.  Of  late  years  the  mode  of  fishing  by  trawling  has  been  introduced? 
— A.  O,  yes ;  and  far  too  much. 

Q.  Within  what  time  has  it  been  introduced  ? — A.  It  is  a  good  many 
years  since ;  it  was  introduced  by  the  Americans,  and  more  recently  it 
has  been  used  by  our  boats. 

Q.  Your  boats  have  been  driven  to  the  same  kind  of  fishing  *— A. 
They  had  to  do  so;  or  otherwise  they  could  not  fish. 

Q.  When  did  your  boats  have  to  commence  trawl  fishing? — A.  About 
15  years  ago. 

Q.  Has  trawl  fishing  increased  since  ? — A.  O,  yes ;  and  it  does  a 
great  deal  of  harm ;  1  think  that  it  injures  the  fishery. 

Q.  In  what  way  ? — A.  I  think  that  they  thus  take  more  smiill  fish 
than  they  do  with  the  line. 

Q.  Do  they  kill  other  fish  as  well  ? — A.  No.  They  take  cod  and 
mackerel,  and  halibut  very  seldom.  Some  Americans  have  themselves 
told  me  uhat  although  they  trawl — this  was  before  our  boats  did  so— 
they  knew  that  it  was  not  a  good  or  proper  way  to  fish  ;  that  it  had 
destroyed  the  fishing  in  their  own  waters,  and  that  in  several  more  years 
they  would  thus  destroy  the  fishery  in  our  waters. 

Q.  Does  this  statement  agree  with  your  opinion  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  our 
people  would  be  very  glad  to  drop  this  system,  and  they  would  do  so  if 
the  two  governments  would  agree  on  that  point. 

Q.  Your  people  would  be  very  glad  to  drop  it  if  the  Americans  would 
do  80  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  the  Americans  to  your  knowledge  been  in  the  habit  of  throw- 
ing gurry  or  ofial  overboard  from  their  vessels  on  the  fishing  grounds? 
— A.  Yes ;  they  do.    They  do  not  bring  it  on  shore. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  this  practice  on  the  fishing  grounds !— A. 
The  general  opinion  condemns  the  practice;  and  very  many  say  that  it 
injures  'the  fishing.  Of  course,  I  have  not  been  to  the  bottom  to  see 
whether  this  is  the  case.    They  have  thrown  offal  among  our  boats,  and 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


761 


Qtl  take  it  for 


Yes:  and  fish 


lericaiis  would 


as  oar  boats  have  to  fish  in  ;hese  places,  we  find  that  the  fishing  there 
is  not  80  good  after  it  is  done  as  it  was  previously — so  I  think  that  it 
fflOHt  hurt  the  fishing. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  found  any  of  this  off'al  in  fish  caught  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Yon  think,  then,  that  they  either  do  not  eat  it  or  else  that  it  kills 
them  1 — A.  That  is  uiy  opinion. 

Q.  And  it  is  the  opinion  of  the  uoajority  of  the  fishermen  in  Gasp6 
that  it  is  a  bad  practice? — A.  Yes;  they  think  that  it  hurts  the  fishing. 

Q.  What  do  the  Americans  themselves  say  about  it? — A.  I  never 
talked  to  them  respecting  this  point. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  quantity  of  fish  the  Americans  take  each  along 
your  coast? — A.  I  could  not  say.  The  fishermen  who  fish  themselves 
know. 

Q.  You  are  not  yourself  at  all  interested  in  the  mackerel  business? — 
A.  No. 

Q.  The  fish  caught  inshore  are  too  small  for  the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  want  large  fish  for  their  market? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  the  small  fish  which  they  catch  on  Orphan 
Bai  k  ?— A.  I  have  been  told  by  my  fishermen  and  others  that  they 
throw  them  overboard. 

Q.  They  trawl  on  the  Banks? — A.  They  have  large  trawls  and  when 
they  catch  small  fish  they  unhook  them  and  throw  them  overboard. 

Q.  Being  caught  in  the  trawl  kills  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  is  the  trouble  with  trawl-fishing,  that  it  kills  the  fish? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  then  they  throw  them  overboard? — A.  Yes ;  sometimes  when 
on  shore,  they  give  them  to  our  people  in  exchange  for  anything  they 
may  want.    They  say  that  the  small  fish  are  of  no  use  to  them. 

Q.  In  their  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q,  And  they  trawl  only  to  catch  the  large  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  catch  mother  fish  and  all  ? — A.  They  do  catch  the  mother 
fish ;  the  small  ones  they  catch  they  heave  overboard. 

Q.  This  is  destructive  to  the  fisheries  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  no  trade  at  all  with  the  United  States  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  And  none  of  your  fishing-vessels  (British  vessels)  go  to  the  States 
at  ail  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  that  do  so. 

Q.  Is  the  privilege  of  fishing  on  the  American  coast,  obtained  by  the 
Washington  Treaty,  of  any  advantage  to  you  ?  Do  you  know  of  any- 
body who  avails  himself  of  it  ? — A.  It  is  not  worth  a  pin  to  us. 

Q.  As  far  as  this  treaty  is  concerned  you  would  rather  be  without 
itt— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  derive  any  benefit  at  all  in  your  part  of  the  country  from 
this  Washington  Treaty,  which  permits  the  Americans  to  come  and  fish 
in  your  waters  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Are  you  quite  willing  to  give  it  up  ? — A.  O,  yes ;  we  would  be  glad 
to  do  so. 

Q.  You  would  be  glad  to  keep  your  own  fishery  and  let  the  Americans 
stick  to  theirs?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  no  trade  in  fact  with  the  Americans  at  all  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  The  Americans  just  come  in  and  take  your  fish  and  you  obtain  no 
corresponding  advantage  of  which  you  are  aware  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  You  are  engaged  only  in  buying  and  selling  fish  and  procuring  fish 
from  other  people  ? — A.  1  keep  boats  for  fishing. 


762 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Toa  ouly  hire  men  to  fish  T — A.  Of  course  we  hire  tuea  to  do  ho 
but  the  boats  and  the  fish  and  everything  are  my  own. 

Q.  Do  you  own  the  whole  apparatus? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  Hooks,  lines,  and  seines? — A.  The  fishermen  furnish  the  hooks 
and  we  the  boats. 

Q.  Do  you  furnish  all  tuat  belongs  to  the  boat? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  what  do  you  furnish  that  belongs  to  the  flshiug-gear  ?-.A. 
The  nets  and  the  seines;  the  fishermen  furnish  the  lines  and  tlie  liooks, 

Q.  Who  furnishes  the  trawls  ? — A.  The  fishermen. 

Q.  And  all  the  hooks  that  are  in  them  ? — A.  Yes.  They  buy  them 
from  us. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  in  Gasp^  most  of  the  boats  are  owned  by  the  mer- 
chants ? — A.  A  great  many,  but  not  all,  are  so  owned. 

Q.  Are  the  most  so  owned  ? — A.  I  cannot  say  that  this  is  the  case ; 
I  suppose  that  the  proportion  is  about  half  and  half. 

Q.  Do  you  make  your  bargains  directly  with  the  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  come  to  you  themselves  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  come  to  be  hired 
in  the  fall,  In  order  to  secure  provisions  for  the  winter. 

Q.  The  hiring  begins  in  the  autumn  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  About  what  time? — A.  In  November. 

Q.  And  when  do  they  begin  to  fish  ? — A.  As  soon  as  they  can  in  the 
spring.  It  is  always  commenced  about  the  same  date — some  time  Iq 
June. 

Q.  Then  for  about  six  months  they  are  doing  nothing  with  their 
boats? — A.  Yes;  they  cannot  do  anything  in  winter. 

Q.  They  are  not  obliged  to  work  for  you  on  shore  ? — A.  No;  we  have 
men  for  that  purpose. 

Q.  Other  men  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  make  their  contracts  in  November  in  order  to  secure  credit 
for  what  they  want  ? — A.  They  do  so  to  obtain  credit,  and  to  be  sure  of 
a  place  in  the  spring. 

Q.  Whenever  yo'i  have  so  engaged  your  men  you  then  credit  and 
supply  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  what  ? — A.  Provisions. 

Q.  For  their  families  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  themselves  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  so  credit  them  on  the  faith  that  they  will  catch  fish  for  you 
in  the  spring  and  summer? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  What  difference  do  you  make  in  the  prices  to  them  from  the 
prices  you  wovM  charge  if  they  purchased  for  cash? — A.  We  have  two 
prices,  the  cash  price  and  the  tratle  price.  For  instance,  if  a  barrel  of 
flour  costs  in  Quebec  $6  we  will  sell  it  for  cash  for  $7,  and  if  in  trade 
we  charge  $10.  While,  on  the  other  hand,  as  we  do  this  year,  the  cash 
price  for  fish  is  16s.  and  the  trade  price  20«.,  so  it  all  comes  to  the  same 
thing. 

Q.  For  the  article  you  furnish  them  you  charge  $3  on  the  $7  ?— A. 
Yes;  and  we  make  a  corresponding  diii'erence  in  the  price  of  the  fish. 

Q.  That  makes  about  43  per  cent.? — A.  I  do  not  know  exactly. 

Q.  Suppose  a  man,  from  no  fault  of  his  own,  fails  to  come  and  work 
for  you  in  the  spring,  does  his  winter's  account  stand  charged  against 
him  ? — A.  Of  course,  but  it  is  then  very  hard  to  collect.  We  count  it 
lost  under  such  circumstances. 

Q.  But  it  remains  charged  against  him  ? — A.  Yes.  You  are  making 
me  say  what  profit  we  make  on  a  barrel  of  flour,  which  we  sell  in  trade 
for  $10,  and  I  want  you  at  the  same  time  to  remember  that  we  give  for 
fish  in  trade  20«.  and  in  cash  only  15a. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


763 


I  credit  and 


Q.  It  remains  on  your  books  charged,  and  if  such  a  man  ever  has 
money  afterward,  you  would  have  a  right  to  collect  it  f — A.  Of  course. 

Q.  Do  you  pay  him  more  than  the  fish  is  worth  in  order  to  make  up 
the  difference  ? — A.  We  do  sometimes. 

Q.  Do  you  agree  to  do  so? — A.  We  agree  to  give  so  much  a  draught. 
We  take  their  flsh  fresh  from  the  kuife. 

Q.  When  he  makes  the  bargain  in  November,  you  then  agree  how 
much  you  will  give  him  beyond  the  real  value  of  the  fish  ? — A.  No. 
The  price  given  for  the  6sh  is  generally  settled  in  the  spring. 

Q.  And  is  it  agreed  on  beforehand  what  he  is  going  to  get  for  the 
whole  season  ? — A.  It  is  for  the  fish. 

Q.  Before  he  catches  the  fish  ? — A.  The  price  per  draught  is  settled. 
I  refer  to  dried  tiish. 

Q.  When  the  man  hires  himself,  do  you  then  agree  with  him  as  to 
the  price  he  shall  receive  for  his  fish? — A.  We  generally  put  the  price 
we  will  pay  at  the  price  which  has  prevailed  that  year,  and  if  the  mar- 
kets become  good,  we  sometimes  allow  them  more.  As  we  did  this  year, 
we  pay  for  the  fish  11«.  Gd.;  when  the  agreement  is  made,  it  will  be  made 
at  tbat  price  per  draught,  when  the  fish  have  been  just  split  and  before 
they  are  salted. 

Q.  When  do  you  make  that  agreonieut? — A.  In  the  fall ;  and  then  we 
promise  tbat  if  the  fish  become  dearer — if  dried  fish  rise  in  price,  we 
will  allow  him  more,  in  proportion  to  the  advance. 

Q.  What  is  the  11«.  M.  for  ?— A.  For  a  draught  of  fish  when  split  and 
before  being  salted.  We  give  11».  6d.  for  two  quintals,  and  it  takes  three 
quintals  of  green  to  make  one  quintal  of  dried  fish. 

Q.  After  they  are  split  they  are  weighed  ? — A.  And  after  they  are 
weigbed  they  ai'e  salted. 

Q.  Is  lis.  dd.  the  average  market  price  ? — A.  Yes ;  of  the  markets  all 
over. 

Q.  It  is  lis.  Gd.  this  year? — A.  Yes;  last  year  it  was  13s.  Gd. 

Q.  Who  fixes  that  price? — A.  It  is  generally  fixed  by  the  big  firms. 

Q.  And  they  supply  the  price  when  the  agreement  you  mention  is 
made? — A.  Y'es;  tbat  is  the  way  in  which  I  engage  my  men,  and  I 
think  that  the  rest  do  the  same. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  price  per  quintal  for  dried  fish,  last  year 
and  during  the  past  few  years?— A.  We  have  allowed  16s.  for  the 
small  tish,  and  17s.  for  the  large  fish ;  and  in  trade  for  the  same  fish  20s. 
aud  21».  respectively. 

Q.  For  dried  fish '?— A.  Yes.  I  may  say  $3.2.")  for  the  small,  and  $3.40 
for  the  large  fish. 

Q.  Of  whom  do  you  buy  the  dried  fish  ? — A.  From  the  men  who  have 
the  boats. 

Q.  The  planters?— A.  Yes ;  and  from  the  men  who  have  boats. 

Q.  Aud  you  pay  them  the  market  price  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Who  fixes  the  market  price  ? — A.  The  principal  merchants. 

Q.  Do  they  fix  the  market  price  for  dried  fish  as  well  ?— A.  Yes ; 
they  act  in  the  same  way  as  do  grain  merchants  with  regard  to  grain. 
If  the  inhabitants  do  not  7ish  to  take  it,  they  bring  their  grain  to 
market,  and  the  same  thing  is  done  with  us. 

Q.  The  cash  price  is  iGs.  and  17s.  How  much  do  you  give  in  trade? — 
A.  20s.  and  2l8. 

Q.  Do  these  planters  sell  to  you  ?  Do  they  get  indebted  to  you,  and 
do  you  give  them  credit,  or  is  the  business  between  you  and  them  done 
in  cash  ? — A.  A  good  deal  is  done  in  cash,  and  some  is  in  credit. 
This  is  like  a  good  many  trades ;  it  is  not  always  flourishing. 


764 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Except  with  regard  to  the  merchants — they  Sourish  T — A.  Some 
may  say  so ;  but  it  was  not  very  flourishing  last  year  for  a  good  many 
of  us. 

Q.  How  have  you  found  the  business  within  the  last  two  or  three 
years? — A.  Last  year  many  thousands  of  fair  dollars  were  lost  in  the 
business. 

Q.  How  was  it  lost  ? — A.  By  bad  markets. 

Q.  Was  there  a  good  supply  of  fish  1 — A.  The  fish  were  not  over  sup. 
plied,  but  the  markets  were  too  depressed. 

Q.  What  brought  the  markets  down  ? — A.  I  may  say  that  one  cargo 
of  our  fish  was  sold  in  the  Mediterranean  lor  128.  a  quintal  to  cover  the 
cost  for  freight  and  expenses.  From  this  you  may  judge  how  bad  the 
markets  were. 

Q.  That  was  an  abandonment  of  cargo — such  always  go  low,  but  you 
would  not  say  that  when  a  cargo  is  abandoned  to  pay  expenses,  this  is 
a  test  of  the  market  price  ? — A.  Of  course  not,  but  generally  si»eakiug 
the  markets  are  bad  this  year. 

Q.  Do  you  not  iind  that  the  more  markets  there  are,  the  better  prices 
are  t — A.  The  more  markets  the  better  by  a  good  deal. 

Q.  Nu*T  the  American  market  is  a  vast  market  with  its  forty  millions 
of  people  stretching  all  over  the  continent  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  American  people  comsume  a  good  many  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  this  tends  to  keep  up  the  price  ?— A.  Not 
for  our  fish. 

Q.  What  is  the  matter  with  your  fish  ;  I  thought  they  were  the  best 
in  the  world  ? — A.  Our  fish  are  the  best  but  the  Americans  will  not  have 
them.    They  find  our  fish  too  hard  for  them. 

Q.  The  fish  are  dried  too  hard  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  you  do  not  adapt  your  fish  for  their  market— you  dry  them 
for  the  European  markets  ? — A.  We  dry  them  for  hot  climates. 

Q.  You  have  to  dry  your  fish  especially  for  that  market  ? — A.  Yes,  our 
fish  would  not  stand  the  climates,  if  they  were  not  so  dried.  We  are 
obliged  to  do  it. 

Q.  And  the  Americans  are  accustomed  to  slightly  salted  and  dried 
fish  ? — A.  They  salt  their  fish  very  heavily. 

Q.  But  they  do  not  dry  them  so  much  as  yon  do  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Yon  have  not  adapted  your  fish  to  the  requirements  of  the  Amer- 
ican market? — A.  No. 

Q.  Why  do  you  not  try  the  experiment? — A.  For  fear  of  losing  too 
much  money. 

Q.  You  have  made  up  your  mind  that  this  treaty  shall  be  of  no  ben- 
efit to  you  anyhow.  Why  do  you  not  try  to  take  advantage  of  the 
American  market,  now  that  it  and  forty  millions  of  mouths  are  open  to 
you  ? — A.  I  would  if  I  could  get  you  to  repay  me  the  loss  I  would  sus- 
tain. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  that  you  would  lose  anything — you  say  that 
your  fish  are  the  best  in  the  woild  ? — A.  They  are  too  hard  for  the 
American  market. 

Q.  Why  do  you  not  make  them  less  hard? — A.  They  then  would  not 
keep.    We  do  not  salt  them  like  the  Americans. 

Q.  Other  people  prepare  their  fish  tor  the  American  market?— A. 
This  is  not  the  case  on  our  coast. 

Q.  But  they  do  in  other  places? — A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  place 
where  this  is  done. 

Q.  Where  do  the  Americans  in  the  Valley  of  the  Mississippi,  &c.,  get 
their  fish  ? — A.  They  fish  for  themselves. 


▲WARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


765 


d  and  dried 


Q.  Tbey  do  not  find  cod  and  mackerel  in  the  Mississippi  and  Ohio 
and  Missouri  Rivers,  do  they  1 — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Have  you  made  any  inquiries  in  this  relation  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  think  yon  have  acted  prudently  in  coming  here  and  saying 
that  this  treaty  and  the  American  market  are  of  no  use  to  you,  when 
you  not  only  have  made  no  attempt  to  take  advantage  of  this  market, 
bat  aUo  have  made  no  inquiry  about  it  f — A.  I  made  inquiry  about  the 
price  our  fish  would  bring  there,  because  our  fish  are  very  good  and 
command  a  good  price,  and  I  was  told  that  this  was  not  the  kind  of  fish 
the  Americans  wanted. 

Q.  Did  you  think  the  reason  why  you  could  not  get  a  good  price  for 
yoar  tish  there  was  because  they  could  catch  cod  and  mackerel  in  the 
Missiasippi  and  Missouri  Uivers  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  not  know  perfectly  well,  that  they  could  not  catch  cod 
and  mackerel,  haddock  and  hake  in  these  rivers  to  the  westward,  where 
none  other  than  fresh-water  fish  are  taken  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  being  the  case,  why  have  you  not  tried  to  prepare  your  fish 
in  such  a  way  as  to  make  them  suitable  for  the  American  market  ? — ^A. 
It  would  be  too  risky. 

Q.  You  have  made  up  your  mind  that  you  will  not  do  it  ? — A.  We 
have  not  tried  it. 

Q.  You  have  a  hold  on  the  European  and  West  Indian  markets  ?^-A. 
Yeb ;  aud  on  the  Brazilian  market. 

Q.  And  you  have  houses  there  with  whom  you  correspond,  and  you 
understand  that  business  If — A.  If  we  thought  that  we  could  make  a 
profit  by  selling  our  fish  in  the  States,  we  would  go  to  work  and  do  so ; 
but  we  would  not  make  any  money  at  it. 

Q.  And  you  have  not  tried  to  do  so  ? — A.  No.  I  have  been  told  that 
one  person  made  the  experiment  once,  and  lost  money. 

Q.  What  did  he  send  there  I — A.  Dried  codfish. 

Q.  Dried  in  your  way  f — A.  Yes.  I  am  not  saying  whether  the  report 
is  true  or  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  an  attempt  being  made  here  to  send  to  the 
United  States  any  fish  dried  in  the  way  in  which  the  Americans  dry 
them  for  the  American  market  1 — A.  Yes,  I  am  told  that  it  was  done, 
and  that  money  was  lost  at  it. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  of  an  instance  of  a  person  in  the  Dominion 
who  has  tried  to  dry  his  fish  and  prepare  them  for  the  American  market 
iu  the  way  in  which  they  are  prepared  by  the  Americans  themselves  1 — 
A.  I  do  not  know  the  way  in  which  they  dry  the  fish. 

Q.  The  American  fish  are  less  dried  than  yours? — A.  I  cannot  say.  I 
never  saw  their  fish  after  they  were  cured. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  a  case  in  the  Dominion  who  tried  to  prepare 
his  tisL  iu  the  way  in  which  it  is  said  they  prepare  them,  in  being  less 
dried,  for  the  American  market  ? — A.  No ;  I  never  heard  of  any  such 
case. 

Q.  What  were  the  best  fishing  spots  iu  the  Gaspe  district — say  in 
1871  and  1872^for  codfish! — A.  I  do  not  recollect.  We  consider  the 
flshiug  places  good  from  Saint  Peters  to  Newport. 

Q.  And  at  Saint  Anne  aud  Point  des  Monts  ? — A.  There  is  good  fish- 
ing there. 

Q.  And  also  at  Cape  Chattel — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tliese  fishing  grounds  utterly  failed  a  year  or  two  afterwards  f — 
A.  They  are  not  the  same  every  year.  Sometimes  they  are  very  good  j 
aud  at  other  times  the  catch  may  not  be  quite  so  great. 


1,"' 


766 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  To  what  do  yon  attribute  that  T— A.  I  suppose  that  the 
depeods  on  the  coarse  which  the  fish  take. 

Q.  The  flsh  will  not  go  to  Gasp^  sometimes! — A..  Sometimes  they 
will  not  go  to  one  place  but  to  another. 

Q.  You  have  known  cases  where  bait,  which  has  been  abandiiiit  one 
year  in  one  place,  has  altogether  failed  there  the  year  t'ollowiti<;f— .^. 
Daring  the  60  years  I  have  been  there  1  have  not  seen  much  diHereiicA 
in  the  supply  of  bait.  There  is  jui^it  as  miich  now  as  there  w.is  some  oi) 
years  ago,  except  with  regard  to  m  ickerel,  when  the  AmericaiH  come 
and  drag  it  from  us.  Formerly  they  did  not  do  so,  and  then  m  ickerel 
were  a  little  more  plentiful;  as  for  herring  and  other  bait,  they  arejast 
about  as  abundant  as  they  were  40  or  50  years  ago. 

Q.  The  Gomiuis^ioner  of  Fisheries  in  his  report  for  1874,  says  that 
"  bait  which  has  been  abundant  at  Perce,  until  Auafust,  failed  all  at 
once,  and  with  the  want  of  bait  the  fish  disappeared."  Do  you  reineiu- 
ber  that? — A.  Well,  no;  this  is  on  account  of  not  having  mackerel  on 
the  coast.    They  used  to  bait  in  August  with  mackerel. 

Q.  Are  they  abundant  up  to  a  certain  time,  and  thou  do  they  all  at 
once  disappear  utterly.    Does  that  happen  sometimes  f — A.  Yen. 

Q.  That  cannot  be  owing  to  the  fish ;  it  is  the  bait  which  is  in  fault?— 
A.  I  think  that  the  quantity  of  flsh  on  the  coast  is  about  the  same  every 
year. 

Q.  Notwithstanding  seining  and  trawling? — A.  Bad  weather  and 
shortness  of  bait  niake^  a  difference. 

Q.  And  sometimes  the  bait  do  disappear  unaccountably? — A.  Yes; 
owing  to  the  bad  weather. 

Q.  And  nothing  more  ? — A.  It  is  due  to  the  bad  weather  very  com- 
monly. 

Q.  Your  coast  and  district  of  Gaspe  used  to  be  famous  for  mackerel  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  there  not  been  none  to  speak  of  there  for  some  years?— A. 
They  have  not  been  there  in  their  usual  numbers;  but  I  think  they 
come  there  in  abundance  yet.  They  do  noc,  however,  stop  very  long 
on  the  coast. 

Q.  How  long  do  they  stay  ? — A.  As  long  as  the  Americans  do  not 
take  them  from  us. 

Q.  What  did  you  mean  when  you  said  that  they  did  not  stay  long 
on  your  coast? — A.  That  the  Americans  follow  the  schools. 

Q.  Which  go  ahead,  the  vessels  or  the  fish  ? — A.  The  latter. 

Q.  During  what  years  were  the  mackerel  most  scarce  on  your 
coast  ? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Were  they  not  scarce  during  the  years  1874,  1875,  and  1S7G?— 
A.  1  could  not  say. 

Q.  Were  not  those  scarce  years? — A.  I  havo  not  M(ij.|)ed  at  home 
much  during  the  past  few  years,  during  tb* 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  very  few  Amer 
during  these  years,  when  the  mackerel 
the  mackerel  do  not  come  the  Americans 

Q.  If  a  few  Americans  come  and  find  that  th« 
known  to  the  whole  fleet  pretty  soon,  does  it  not 
where  the  mackerel  are. 

Q.  And  they  do  not  come  if  the  mackerel  are  few  in  number?— A. 
If  there  are  no  mackerel  they  will  not  come. 

Q.  A  scarcity  of  the  flsh  causes  a  scarcity  of  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  when  the  flsh  come  in  numbers  they  come  ? — A.  Yes,  and 
take  them  from  us;  and  they  flsh  within  the  three-mile  limit,  too. 


erel  season, 
ssels  were  •'  i  the  coast 
scarce  ? — A.     >t'  course,  if 
not  follow  them. 

are  few  fish,  it  gets 
A.  They  well  know 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


767 


umber  ?— A. 


Q.  Ih  the  halibut  flsbcry  carried  od  about  your  shore!} ! — A.  Not  to 
Hpeak  of  at  my  place. 

Q.  And  not  by  your  vessels  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  But  it  is  carried  on  by  United  States  vessels  all  the  way  upf — A. 
Iain  told  that  ibey  catch  a  good  many  up  the  liiver  St.  L<iwreuce 
along  the  shore ;  but  we  see  very  few  of  them  down  our  way.  We 
used  to  see  theui  more  plentifully  than  we  do  uow.  During  the  past 
few  years  we  have  seen  very  few  of  them. 

Q.  The  writer  of  the  tlshevies  report  for  ISlTt  says,  '*  halibut  is  found 
in  great  abundance  along  the  whole  north  coast."  Is  that  true? — A. 
That  is  what  I  say. 

Q,  ''And  at  Natasliquan  and  Godbout  as  well  as  around  Anticosti 
Island.  It  would  undoulttedly  be  equally  met  with  on  the  coasts  of 
Gaape,  but  noboily  there  fishes  for  it "  t — A.  I  do  not  think  they  are  very 
plentiful  there  now. 

Q.  A  gentleman  from  your  neighborhood  came  here  a  few  days  ago, 
and  this  question  was  put  to  him : 

Q.  Are  niniiy  halibut  taken,  or  liave  there  heen  many  canjfht,  if  the  catoh  haa 
devreaned? — A.  8iich  ininientib  quantitieH  have  been  caught,  that  veHnelH  used  to  take 
as  much  au  :<U,()00  uud  4U,(lU0  puuudH  of  thJH  litih  to  the  New  York  uiurket  at  uue  time. 
I  have  tteen  numbers  of  veNHelH  rejiorted  a»  having  taken  8uch  a  cargo. 

Does  that  agree  with  your  memory  ? — A.  Did  he  say  where  they  caught 
the  halibut  1  A  good  many  are  taken  on  the  north  shore,  and  it  is  there 
where  I  understand  most  of  the  halibut  are  caught.  1  am  told  that 
immense  quantities  are  taken  there,  as  many  as  the  fishermen  wish  to 
catch,  but  I  was  never  there  myself. 

Q.  So  you  know  that  this  fish  is  very  rare  on  your  part  of  the  coast! — 
A.  They  are  very  few  near  my  place. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  petitions  have  been  sent  in  by  the  fishermen  to 
tbe  legislature  or  fishery  commissioners,  or  both,  to  have  seining 
stopped  ? — A.  It  is  not  so,  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  As  to  the  coast  of  Labrador,  the  commissioners  say : 

That, after  careful  investigation,  it  appeara  to  us  that  the  main  cause  of  the  injury 
may  be  removed  without  abolishing  tishiug  by  seines. 

What  do  you  know  about  this? — A.  I  have  heard  some  talk  about 
trying  to  abolish  the  use  of  seines,  but  I  do  not  know  whether  such  an 
attempt  has  been  made. 

Q.  They  recommend  some  regulations  as  to  seining  so  as  to  prevent 
it  interfering  with  the  catch  of  the  boats,  but  they  do  not  agree  that  it 
is  injurious  and  destructive  with  regard  to  the  fisheries.  Have  you 
yourself  made  any  inquiries  concerning  this  matter  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  And  you  yourself  have  not  fished  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  read  any  reports,  British  or  Canadian,  or  anything  on 
tbe  subject  f — A.  1  do  not  remember  having  done  so. 

Q.  Do  you  buy  fish  of  the  Americans  who  go  in  there  with  the  fish? 
-A.  No. 

Q.  Do  they  ever  come  to  your  coast  and  land  and  transship  their 
fisb? — A.  I  have  seen  them  land  small  fish. 

Q.  But  not  everything  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  they  ever  exchange  small  fish  on  your  shore  for  anything  they 
may  require? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  substance  of  what  you  have  to  say  is  this :  That  the  mackerel 
fishing  on  your  coast  has  very  largely  fallen  off,  and,  it  might  be  said, 
that  two  or  three  years  ago  they  almost  disappeared  i — A.  Two  years 
ago  this  summer  they  were  as  plentiful  as  I  ever  saw  them  to  be. 


768 


▲WARD   OF  THE   FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


I 


I!  I 


Q.  Were  they  caught  ?— A,  They  did  not  stay  very  loug. 

Q.  They  were  off  very  soon  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  true  that  the  catch  of  mackerel  off  your  shores  for  a  few  years 
past  has  been  reduced  to  almost  nothing,  is  it  notf — A.  I  say  tbat  two 
years  ago  there  was  a  very  good  year ;  it  was  as  good  as  I  ever  saw.  My 
people  told  me  that  from  40  to  50  barrels  were  taken  in  ouo  baal  of 
the  seine,  and  that,  if  sufficiently  provided,  they  could  have  seined  500 
barrels  at  a  time.  The  fish  were  very  plentiful,  but  last  year  they  were 
v«ry  scarce.  When  I  left  home  they  were  only  coming  in,  and  so  I  do 
not  know  how  it  is  this  year. 

Q.  Were  they  not  very  scarce  three  years  ago  I — A.  I  do  not  krio?, 
but  they  were  not  very  plentiful  last  year. 

Q.  Then  you  say  that  there  are  not  many  halibut  caught  there !— A. 
Yes,  as  regards  my  neighborhood  that  is  true. 

Q.  Or  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ?-7-A.  No. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  the  Americans  who  fish  for  cod,  fish  oa  tbe 
Banks  ? — A.  They  do,  most  of  the  time. 

Q.  In  the  deep  sea  ? — A.  They  have  to  come  on  shore  for  bait. 

Q.  They  po  ashore  for  fresh  bait.  Who  sells  them  the  bait?— A.  I 
do  not  knew.  I  never  sold  it,  but  some  have.  They  will  set  their  uets 
for  it. 

Q.  But  if  they  can  get  it  without  catching  it,  time  is  important  to 
them.   They  will  buy  it  if  ther  can,  will  they  not? — A.  They  will  buy  it. 

Q.  Have  your  people  gone  much  into  that  trade  of  selling  bait  to  the 
Americans  ? — A.  No,  they  keep  their  bait  for  themselves. 

Q.  They  haven't  more  than  they  need? — A.  Sometimes. 

Q.  Your  fish  are  dried  specially  for  certain  markets  tbat  you  bave 
had  a  great  control  over,  auv^.  where  they  yield  the  highest  returoH,  and 
you  bave  not  tried  to  adapt  yourselves  to  this  new  open  market  of  tbe 
United  States  ? — A.  No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  You  say,  or  rather  Mr.  Dana  says  for  you,  that  you  haven't  tried 
to  adapt  yourselves? 

(Mr.  Dana  objects  to  its  being  said  that  he  made  the  statement  for  the 
witness,  and  claims  the  right  in  cross  examination  to  put  questious  io 
the  form  used.) 

A.  I  haven't  tried ;  but  I  have  been  told  by  the  Americans  that  our 
fish  are  too  dry. 

By  Mr.  Dana: 

Q.  You  said  you  had  never  tried  it  ? — A.  I  said  we  could  not. 
By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  the  Commission  to  understand  that  you  thiuii 
there  is  a  market  in  the  United  States,  but  that  you  won't  try  to  adapt 
yourselves  to  it? — A.  How  is  that? 

Q.  You  didn't  mean  the  Commission  to  understand  that  you  believe 
there  is  a  market  for  your  fish,  but  you  don't  intend  to  try  to  ailapt 
yourselves  to  it? — A.  No;  by  what  I  have  been  told  by  the  Americans 
it  would  be  a  losb  to  us.  They  have  said  to  me,  "  your  fish  are  too  dry; 
they  would  not  sell  with  us." 

Q.  Therefore  you  decline,  if  1  understand  aright,  to  furnish  cheap  fish 
to  these  forty  millions  of  whoui  Mr.  Dana  speaks?  You  do  not  thiiiii  it 
any  part  of  your  business  to  furnish  cheap  fish  to  the  Americans  iit 
your  own  expense  ? — A.  No. 


l! 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


769 


in,  and  so  I  do 
:  do  not  know, 
»ht  there!— A. 


)d,  fish  OD  the 


u  haven't  tried 


ricans  that  our 


Q.  And  that  is  the  reason  why  you  do  not  go  into  the  trade,  is  it 
notf— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  bave  got  markets  elsewhere;  in  the  West  Indies,  Brazil,  and 
other  places? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  made  inquiries  of  the  Americana,  and  they  say  you 
could  not  avail  yourselves  of  their  market? — A.  They  have  told  me 
severHl  times  that  we  were  drying  our  fish  too  much,  and  that  they 
would  not  sell  there. 

Q.  In  reference  to  that  trade,  there  is  no  determination  on  the  part 
of  yourself  or  of  any  of  your  people  not  to  trade?  You  would  be  will- 
ing enough  if  you  could  make  money  by  it? — A.  We  would  be  very 
glad. 

Q.  You  could  easily  find  agents  in  the  United  States  if  you  would 
pay  tliem  ? — A.  Yes;  we  would  be  very  glad  to  trade  if  it  would  pay. 

Q.  In  reference  to  those  small  fii^h  that  the  Americans  bring  ashore, 
they  would  have  to  throw  them  over  otherwise  ? — A.  Yes,  they  told  me 
tbat  themselves. 

Q.  Therefore  the  privilege  of  the  market  is  theirs  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  a  privilege  which  the  Americans  have,  and  it  is  no  privi* 
lege  to  your  people  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  It  is  to  the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  were  the  mackerel  two  years  ago  as  plenty  as  ever  you  saw 
tbcin!— A.  They  were  plenty. 

Q.  You  have  been  asked  with  reference  to  the  cod-fishing  from  Point 
Cbatte  or  Cape  Chatte  down  to  Cape  Ga8p<5, 1  think.  Do  you  aay  that 
that  lias  fallen  ott"  of  late  years? — A.  No;  there  is  more  caught  than 
there  was  forty  years  ago. 

Q.  All  within  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes,  except  one-tenth  that  are  caught 
oil  the  Banks. 

Q.  That  is  off  Gasp^  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  Cape  de  Cbatte  is  along  the  bank  of  the  river  ! — A.  Yes.  I 
don't  think  they  have  any  Banks  there  to  go  fishing  on. 

Q.  And  there  is  no  fishing  out  in  the  river  beyond  three  miles  II — A. 
It  is  too  deep. 

Q.  You  say  the  fishing  is  as  good  there  now  as  it  was  forty  years 
agof— A.  There  is  more  fish  caught. 

Q.  Has  not  the  halibut  been  llshed  out  ? — A.  It  has  never  been  a  very 
great  place,  my  place,  for  the  halibut. 

Q.  That  was  more  upon  the  north  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  About  Seven  Islands  and  up  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  north  of  Anticosti  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  from  your  own  agents  in  the  West  Indies, 
iiud  your  other  markets,  whether  the  Americans  have  competed  there 
with  you  f — A.  1  have  never  inquired. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  your  bait  is  as  plenty  as  it  was  twenty  years 
ago,  with  the  exception  of  the  mackerel  which  the  Americans  coaxed 
oulf— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  your  people  want  all  the  bait  that  is  there? — A.  Ye? ,  some 
flays  they  will  have  more  than  they  want,  but  another  day  thty  will  be 
short.    They  could  keep  it  a  few  days. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  that  the  bait  the  Americans  take  away  is  a 
'lead  loss  ? — A.  It  is  a  dead  loss  to  us,  of  course. 

Q.  You  put  it  down  at  a  loss  of  one-quarter  of  your  catch  ? — A.  I  say 
that  «e  would  catch  one-quarter  more  fish  than  we  do  if  the  bait  was 
not  interfered  with. 

Q.  You  were  examined  in  reference  to  the  price  you  pay  the  fishermen 
49  F 


:«.')<  ii 


770 


AWASD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


in  money  or  prodnce  for  their  catch.  You  bay  a  barrel  of  flour  for  $6 
and  sell  it  for  $7  iu  cash,  where  if  you  sold  it  for  fish  you  would  charge 
$10?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  if  I  understand  you,  you  allow  a  corresponding  increase  in  the 
price  of  the  fish? — A.  I  said  that  the  flour  we  would  sell  at  $7  would  be 
for  fish  at  16  shillings.  Selling  it  for  $10  in  trade  would  be  for  fish  at 
20  shillings. 

Q.  Didn't  you  make  use  of  the  expression  that  it  would  be  the  same 
thing? — A.  It  comes  to  the  same  thing. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  But  credit  is  one  thing  and  paying  by  way  of  trade  is  another,  is 
it  not  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Thev  pay  you  those  debts  in  trade,  don't  they  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  fish?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  when  they  pay  in  fish  you  allow  them  less  than  if  they  paid 
in  cash? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  think  you  said  to  us  25  per  cent,  was  the  difference? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  the  diffe -ence  between  cash  and  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  price  which  they  are  to  get  lor  their  fish  is  arranged  by  the 
great  houses  six  months  beforehand? — A.  Yes.  That  is  not  for  dried 
fish. 

Q.  No  ;  I  know  that  is  another  class  of  men,  the  planters.  But  the 
price  you  charge  them  on  credit  remains  on  your  books  and  has  to  be 
paid  ? — A.  Yes;  that  has  to  be  paid. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  You  give  credit  in  the  fall  of  the  year,  and  when  that  debt  is  paid 
to  you,  do  you  credit  the  amount  to  those  parties  at  the  cash  price  of 
the  fish,  or  at  the  credit  price  ? — A.  The  credit  price — we  allow  them  20 
shillings. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 
Q.  "Whereas  if  you  gave  them  cash,  you  would  only  give  them  16  shil- 
lings?— A.  It  would  be  16  shillings  instead  of  20. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  you  whether  your  fishermen  ever  sold  fish  to 
the  Americans? — A.  No,  not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Or  to  anybody  except  the  Jersey  houses,  as  they  are  called  ?— A. 
Well,  not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Your  house  is  one  of  those  called  Jersey  houses  ? — A.  I  suppose 
BO.    I  have  been  twenty  years  without  returning. 

Q.  Well,  in  speaking  of  the  Jersey  houses,  that  would  include  .yonrs  ?— 
A.  I  don't  know  ;  I  think  I  have  been  so  long  iu  the  country  that  they 
call  me  a  Canadian  now. 

No.  33. 


James  Bakeb,  of  Cape  Cove,  in  the  district  of  Gasp^,  called  on  be- 
half of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examiued. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  You  live  at  Cape  Cove — that  is  in  the  district  of  Gasp^?— 
Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  along  the  coast  between  Cape  Gasp6  and  Bay  Ghaleur 
somewhere? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  years  '  .ave  you  been  acquainted  with  the  fisheries  od 


lid  be  the  same    m 


ve  them  16  shil- 


AWABD  OP  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION.  771 

that  coast  f — A.  I  was  born  and  brought  op  there,  and  I  am  39  years  of 

age. 

Q.  Well,  since  you  have  grown  up,  have  you  been  acquainted  with 
those  fisheries  ? — A.  Yes ;  from  1855  to  1866 1  was  a  practical  fisherman. 

Q,  And  since  1866  ! — A.  I  have  been  trading. 

Q.  In  fish  ?— A.  Yes^. 

Q.  And  carrying  on  fishing  by  boats,  haven't  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  boats  of  your  own  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  branch  of  the  fishing  do  you  chiefly  pursue  ? — A.  The  cod- 
fishiu?. 

Q.  How  many  boats  have  you  of  your  own  ? — A.  Seven  of  my  own. 

Q.  What  size  are  those  boats  ? — A.  From  24  to  26  feet  in  length,  and 
from  8  to  9  feet  beam. 

Q.  How  many  men  to  a  boat  ? — A.  There  are  two  men  to  each  boat. 

Q.  These  boats  are  engaged  in  the  cod  fishery  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  what  time  of  the  year  I — A.  From  May  to  October — the  latter 
part  of  October;  sometimes  in  November. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average  catch  of  those  boats  1  You  say  yon 
Lave  7. — A.  Of  my  own  boats,  150  quintals  per  season. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  of  green  or  driecl  fish? — A.  Dried  cod. 

Q.  How  many  green  f — A.  336  pounds  of  green  fish  would  make  only 
112  pounds  of  dry  fish. 

Q.  Then  it  would  take  450  quintals  of  green  fish  to  make  150  quintals 
of  <iry  fish  ;  that  would  be  fiorrect  ? — A.  That  would  be  correct. 

Q.  Now  tell  the  Commission  where  these  fish  are  taken — how  far 
from  the  shore?  Is  it  inshore  fishing? — A.  The  principal  part  is  in- 
shore; inside  of  three  miles  from  the  land. 

Q.  Do  you  fish  outside,  too? — A.  Yes;  on  Miscou  Bank.  That  is, 
after  the  spring  inshore  fishing  is  done. 

Q.  What  proportiuii  of  your  codfish  would  be  taken  outside,  and  what 
proportion  in  ? — A.  That  is  of  my  own  boats  ? 

Q.  Yes ;  if  there  is  any  difference  between  that  and  the  general  aver- 
age I  will  ask  you  about  it  afterwards. — A.  I  think  my  own  boats  would 
take  about  two-thirds  inside  and  one-third  outside  on  Miscou  Bank. 

Q.  Will  you  distinguish  between  your  own  and  other  boats  ?  Where 
do  the  other  boats  take  their  catch  ? — A.  The  principal  part  of  our 
boats  taliO  about  three-fourths,  or  more  than  that,  inshore. 

Q.  They  take  more  than  three-fourths  inshore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  do  the  Americans  have  any  cod-fishing  vessels? — A.  Yes; 
I  Lave  seen,  during  my  experience  as  a  fisherman,  as  many  as  40  schoon- 
ers on  Miscou  Bank  fishing. 

Q.  That  is  directly  off  your  own  coast  ? — A.  That  is  about  20  miles 
oflf. 

Q.  A  small  Bank,  is  it  not  ? — A.  No;  a  very  large  Bank. 

Q.  What  size  do  you  sui>pose  it  is  ? — A.  It  runs  about  50  miles  east 
and  west. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average  number  of  American  schooners  occu- 
pied with  Bank  fishing  alone? — A.  I  have  seen  as  many  as  40  schoon- 
ers during  my  experience  fishing  on  that  Bank. 

Q.  How  do  they  fish? — A.  Principally  with  trawls. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  bait  ? — A.  Well,  they  bring  some  salt  bait  with 
them  to  the  Banks,  but  they  principally  get  it  in  around  our  shores. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  these  American  cod  fishers  that  fish  off  Miscou 
Bank  bring  some  bait,  and  that  they  fish  with  trawls?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  require  fresh  bait,  or  can  they  use  salt  bait  with  the 
trawls  ?--A.  They  require  fresh  bait. 


772 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Where  do  they  get  their  fresh  bait  I — A.  They  come  in  along  our 
shores,  at  different  places. 

Q.  Now,  I  want  to  know,  do  they  catch  this  bait  for  themselres  or  do 
they  buy  it? — A.  They  principally  catch  it  for  themselves. 

Q.  Along  your  shores ? — A.  Yes;  close  inshore. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  do  they  catch  ? — A.  Herring,  squid,  and  mack- 
erel, and  caplin  as  well. 

Q.  They  catch  this  bait  for  themselves,  within  three  miles  1 — A.  0, 
yes. 

Q.  Close  in! — A.  Some  within  half  a  mile,  in  many  of  the  coves. 

Q.  Do  they  purchase  much  bait  there  too  ? — A.  1  have  known  tliein 
purchase  some  ;  not  a  great  quantity. 

Q.  They  generally  catch  for  themselves  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  how  did  they  manage  to  get  bait  the  year  the  cutters  were 
watching  the  coast  ? — A.  They  used  to  come  in  when  the  cutters  were 
not  there  and  take  their  bait  and  go  away. 

Q.  They  would  catch  out  of  view  of  the  cutters  ? — A.  Yes,  whenever 
the  cutters  went  out. 

Q.  Suppose  they  were  not  allowed  to  take  bait,  how  could  they  carry 
on  the  cod  fishery  I — A.  I  do  not  see  how  they  could  carry  it  on  profit- 
ably. They  could  not  carry  it  on  profitably  if  prevented  from  coiuiug 
inshore  for  bait. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  it  is  absolutely  essential  to  them  to  get 
this  bait  in  order  to  carry  it  on  ? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  an  idea  of  the  total  number  of  the 
codfish  fleet  engaged  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence ;  you  cannot  see  them 
all  at  one  time,  of  course! — A.  I  should  say  300  or  400.  I  have  heard 
that  there  were  as  many  as  200  at  one  time  at  one  port  on  the  north 
shore. 

Q.  You  have  known  as  many  as  200  at  one  time  at  one  port  ?— A. 
Yes,  cod  fishing. 

Q.  What  do  you  call  the  north  shore? — A.  The  north  shore  of  the 
river  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Is  the  cod  fishery  pursued  by  the  American  fleet  on  that  north 
shore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  any  extent  ? — A.  They  come  there  with  schooners  and  go  along 
the  shore  about  there. 

Q.  On  your  shore  where  do  they  take  the  codfish,  with  reference  to 
the  land  ? — .\.  Half  a  mile  from  the  shore,  and  less. 

Q.  Do  they  take  any  codfish  beyond  3  miles  from  the  land  on  the 
north  shore? — A.  Not  that  I  am  aware  of;  there  are  no  banks  alougthe 
river  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Then  they  are  all  taken  within  the  limits  on  the  north  shore  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  wouli.  !  e  the  average  catch  of  one  of  those  American  cod 
fishing  vessels  ?  xuke  the  average  for  the  season ;  we  want  to  get 
some  average  if  we  can. — A.  It  depends  a  good  deal  upon  the  schooner. 
But  you  want  an  average.  That  will  depend  upon  ditferent  circum- 
stances ;  I  should  say  about  700  quintals  of  codfish. 

Q.  Dry  or  green  ? — A.  Dry. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  would  be  a  fair  average? — A.  I  think  so.  Some 
of  the  cod-fishermen  make  two  trips.  They  go  down  the  north  .shore 
early  in  the  spring;  then  they  come  back  on  our  Banks  later  in  the 
summer. 

Q.  Taking  those  that  make  two  trips  together  with  the  rest  you  aver- 
age it  at  700  quintals  of  dry  cod  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


773 


res,  whenever 


land  on  the 
tnksalougtbu 

h  shore  ?— A. 


est  you  aver- 


Q.  Of  course,  in  a  green  state  it  is  very  much  more? — A.  Yes. 

q.  What  extent  of  coast  have  you  intimate  knowledge  of  along  there  ? 
_A.  About  45  miles. 

Q.  Between  what  points  ?— A.  Between  Perce  and  Point  Macquereau. 
I  may  not  be  quite  correct  about  the  distance. 

Q.  Is  that  near  Gaspd? — A.  No;  that  would  be  40  miles  from  Gasp«^ 
Basin.    Perce  is  about  40  miles  from  Gasp6  Basin. 

Q.  Taking  that  catch  you  have  named,  how  many  boats  are  there 
engaged  in  the  cod-fishery  1 — A.  I  have  been  making  a  calculation  from 
Point  St.  Peter's — that  is  12  miles  more  to  the  eastward — to  Paspe- 
biac,  and  I  should  say  there  are  something  like  1,100  boats  belonging 
to  the  coast. 

Q.  That  would  be  about  65  miles  oflf  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  there  would  be  about  1,100  boats? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Bach  manned  by  two  men  ? — A.  Yes. 

(I,  They  catch  within  3  miles  of  the  coast! — A.  Yes,  principally 
within. 

Q.  Has  the  presence  of  the  American  fishermen,  when  they  come  in 
to  take  bait,  an  injurious  effect  upon  the  boat-fishing? — A.  Very  often 
they  have.  They  anchor  into  the  moorings  where  the  fishermen  put 
their  nets ;  consequently,  they  can't  set  out  their  nets.  That  very  often 
happens. 

Q.  I  refer  chiefly  to  their  effect  in  the  catching  of  bait.  I  understand 
you  to  say  the  American  fishermen  come  in  and  catch  bait  along  your 
shores;  does  that  interfere  with  you  ? — A.  Certainly,  it  takes  a  consid- 
erable quantity  of  bait  away  from  us. 

Q.  Does  it  create  any  difficulty  in  your  getting  bait  ? — A.  Well,  very 
often. 

Q.  You  have  plenty  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  the  herring  season  and  squid  sea- 
sou  it  is  very  plenty. 

Q.  As  a  general  rule,  have  you  sufficient  bait  along  the  coast  ? — A. 
Occasionally  it  slacks  off. 

Q.  To  any  material  extent? — A.  Not  any ;  sometimes  for  a  week  or 
Ro,  and  then  it  comes  in  again.  I  believe  it  depends  principally  upou 
the  weather.  When  the  weather  is  very  warm  it  sinks  to  the  bottom ; 
if  the  wind  blows  a  little  oft"  shore  it  rises. 

Q.  Taking  the  fishing  season  all  round,  you  have  a  plentiful  supply  ? — 
A.  We  have  a  fair  supply,  generally  speaking. 

Q.  Now  about  the  mackerel ;  you  do  not  prosecute  the  mackerel  fish- 
ing there  to  any  very  large  extent? — A.  Nothing  more  than  for  bait. 
The  fishermen  take  them  for  bait  for  the  cod-fishery. 

Q.  Taking  the  range  of  coast  from  Cape  Chatte,  on  the  south  side  of 
the  river  Saint  Lawrence,  around  to  and  including  the  Bay  Chaleurs,  how 
far  from  the  shore  do  the  mackerel  keep?  That  is,  on  the  south  shore  of 
the  Saint  Lawrence,  from  Cape  Chatte  to  Cape  Gasp^,  take  first. — A.  I 
do  not  understand  you. 

Q.  I  ask  how  far  from  the  shore  the  mackerel  are  ? — A.  They  follow 
aloug  the  shore,  because  there  is  no  fish  remains  in  the  bed  of  the  river. 
The  current  is  too  strong. 

Q.  Then  from  Cape  Gasp^  to  Bay  Chaleurs,  and  including  Bay 
Chaleurs,  they  generally  keep  within  the  three  mile  limit? — A.  They 
keep  within  the  bays  and  shores.  They  come  right  into  the  shore, 
great  numbers  of  them,  schooling  along  the  shore.  They  keep  close  into 
the  shore. 

Q>  Do  the  American  mackerelers  visit  your  coast  in  any  large  num- 


m 


774 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERT  COMMISSION. 


II 


bersT — A.  Yes;  I  have  seen  the  whole  shore  dotted  with  American 
schooners,  as  many  as  200  schooners  at  one  time  along  our  shore. 

Q.  Taking  the  period  when  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  in  force,  when 
they  bad  liberty  to  fish  along  the  coasts,  how  many  vessels  frequented 
your  coast — I  am  speaking  of  from  Gape  Oasp^  to  Bay  Gbaleurs,  In. 
eluding  Bay  Gbaleurs? — A.  Well,  of  course,  when  I  say  that  great 
numbers  came,  I  mean  that  some  days  there  would  not  be  so  many  as 
others.  One  day  there  would  be  from  100  to  200,  and  the  other  day 
they  might  disappear  and  move  away.  I  should  say  the  average  woulil 
be  300  or  400  of  the  fleet. 

Q.  Tbat  is  the  number  that  frequented  this  coast  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  coast  of  Prince  Edward  Island 
or  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  are  just  speaking  of  that  particular  locality  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  after  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  expired,  and  the  cutters  came 
along,  did  the  Americans  continue  to  frequent  the  coast  as  much  as 
before? — A.  Not  quite  m  much. 

Q.  But  did  they  frequent  the  coast,  although  they  fell  off  somewhat  !— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Within  what  distance  did  this  American  fleet  get  mackerel  at  tbat 
time  ? — A.  They  would  get  them  along  the  shore  as  usual.  They  would 
run  in  when  the  cutters  would  not  be  there. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  would  they  get  them  ? — A.  It  depends 
upon  the  cove  they  were  in.  Sometimes  they  would  get  them  half  a 
mile  off,  and  sometimes  from  one  and  a  half  miles  to  two  miles. 

Q.  Would  they  catch  them  outside  of  three  miles  ? — A.  Sometimes 
they  would. 

Q.  What  proportion  ?  Have  you  conversed  much  with  those  Amer- 
icans ? — A.  During  the  time  I  fished,  I  mixed  a  great  deal  with  them 
and  conversed  a  great  deal  with  them. 

Q.  You  were  aboard  their  schooners  a  great  deal  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  was 
very  frequently  on  board. 

Q.  And  you  talked  the  whole  fishery  question  over? — A.  Yes;  very 
often. 

Q. 
erel. 


You  saw  their  catches  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  saw  them  taking  the  mack- 


Q.  From  the  information  you  got  from  them  and  the  experience  yon 
have  yourself,  and  from  what  you  saw,  what  proportion  of  their  catch 
would  you  say  was  taken  within  three  miles?  Is  it  all  taken? — A.  I 
fully  believe  the  principal  part  is  taken  inside. 

Q.  Tbat  leaves  it  undefined.  Give  us  an  idea  of  the  proportions.- 
A.  I  would  say  three-fourths  was  taken  inside. 

Q.  The  Banks  Oliphan  and  Bradley  are  situated  off  that  coast ;  they 
are  fishing  grounds  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  used  to  catch  some  there,  but  not 
in  rough  weather.    In  rough  weather  they  would  be  obliged  to  come  in. 

Q.  You  put  the  proportion  at  three-fourths  inside? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  had  a  great  number  of  years'  experience? — A.  Yes; 
eleven  years. 

Q.  You  were  then  in  constant  intercourse  with  the  Americans !— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  talk  upon  this  very  question  of  where  the  fish  were 
taken  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  they  say  that  proportion  was  caught  inside? — A.  They  admit- 
ted themselves,  even  when  the  cutters  were  on  the  coast,  as  long  as 
they  could  get  a  few  acres  ahead  of  the  cutter,  they  didn't  cure  fur 
them. 


f: 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


775 


11  off  somewhat?— 


he  proportions.- 


Q.  Why  uot  t — A.  They  coold  get  away  or  sail  aroand. 

Q.  If  I  understand  your  evidence,  it  is  that  from  Cape  Gbatte  to 
Gape  Gasp6  all  the  fish  is  takeu  within  three  miles,  and  that  from  Gape 
Gasp^  down,  and  includng  Bay  Chaleurs,  three-fourths  are  taken  in- 
side t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  time  of  the  year  do  the  mackerel  come  along  ? — A.  About 
the  beginning  of  July. 

Q.  When  do  they  leave  ? — A.  I  would  say  the  latter  part  of  Septera- 
bar. 

Q.  That  is  three  months  they  are  on  the  coast?— A.  Yes;  and  in  Oc- 
tober I  have  seen  lots  of  mackerel  on  the  coast,  even  then ;  that  is  three 
and  a  half  months,  depending  upon  the  season  a  good  deal. 

Q.  Then  from  your  experience  during  this  number  of  years,  from 
what  you  saw  when  you  visited  the  American  vessels  and  from  what 
yoa  beard  from  the  Americans  themselves,  at  what  would  you  place  the 
average  catch  ! — A.  It  greatly  depends ;  some  seem  to  be  very  success- 
ful where  others  are  very  unsuccessful. 

Q.  What  is  "very  successful"? — A.  Well,  some  get  as  much  as  1,200 
barrels  in  the  season.  They  make  two  or  three  trips.  Others  are  two 
or  three  mouths  out,  and  get  no  more  than  200  to  250  barrels. 

Q.  Are  yon  able  to  give  us  a  fair  approximate  estimate  of  the  catch 
of  the  Americans  during  these  years — the  catch  per  season? — A.  To  the 
best  of  my  judgment  I  think  about  700  per  schooner  would  be  a  fair 
average. 

Q.  Suppose  they  were  prevented  from  fishing  within  three  miles, 
would  they  be  unable  to  prosecute  the  mackerel  fishing  with  any  suc- 
cess at  all  ? — A.  I  think  they  would  not  be  able  to. 

Q.  Do  you  think  they  would  attempt  it? — A.  They  might,  but  they 
would  not  succeed.    They  would  not  come  back. 

Q.  Now,  go  back  to  the  codfish  for  a  moment.  Where  do  you  sell 
your  fish — that  is,  the  fish  taken  by  your  seven  boats? — A.  I  generally 
»e!l  Q)y  fish  to  the  exporters — those  merchants  who  export — that  is,  the 
principal  part  of  my  fish.  A  part,  secured  in  the  fall,  we  send  away  to 
Quebec  or  Montreal. 

Q.  Where  do  these  large  exporters  send  them  ? — A.  They  send  to  Bra- 
zil and  Mediterranean  ports,  the  West  Indies,  Portugal,  and  all  those 
places. 

Q.  Do  they  send  any  to  the  United  States? — A.  I  have  known  a 
couple  of  cargoes  to  be  sent  there  late  in  the  fall.  That  was  prepared 
green  for  the  Canadian  markets,  and  it  was  too  late  to  send  them.  They 
went  to  Boston  and  proved  a  failure. 

Q.  What  proved  a  failure? — A.  The  experiment  proved  a  failure. 
The  price  they  got  did  not  pay  to  continue  it. 

Q.  So  that  the  trade  runs  in  the  channels  you  have  mentioned  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  send  to  the  United  States  because  it  does  not  pay  ? — A. 
No. 

Q.  Then  you  don't  make  a  great  deal  out  of  this  free  American  mar- 
ket f — A.  No ;  it  is  no  advantage  to  us. 

Q.  Do  your  foreign  markets  pay  pretty  well  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  pay 
very  well. 

Q.  What  do  you  pay  the  fishermen  actually  engaged  in  fishing  per 
quintal  for  his  fish? — A.  That  depends  a  great  deal  upon  the  season. 

Q.  Give  us  a  rough  idea,  taking  any  season. — A.  138.  M.  a  draught. 

Q.  What  is  the  price  this  year  ?— A.  11«.  Gd.  this  year.  Last  year  it 
was  15«. 


i^ 


776 


AWABD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  The  average  is  what  7 — A.  I  would  put  the  average  at  138.  6d. 
That  is  our  trade-price. 

Q.  Do  you  now  send  any  of  your  vessels  down  to  fish  on  the  Amer- 
ican coast  ? — A.  No.    It  would  not  pay  us  to  send  vessels  there to 

send  them  away  from  our  own  grounds. 

Q.  I  think  I  understood  you  to  say  and  to  be  quite  emphatic  upon  the 
point  that  unless  they  could  fish  for  this  fresh  bait  along  your  shore 
they  could  not  carry  on  the  codfishery. — A.  Not  successfully,  not  to 
any  advantage. 

Q.  What  would  they  have  to  fish  with  ?  Can  they  trawl  with  salt 
bait? — A.  They  could  do  nothing — no. 

Q.  And,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  are  the  Commission  to  understand  from 
you  that  they  take  large  quantities  of  bait  along  your  shores  ?— A.  Yes, 
at  times. 

Q.  How  do  they  catch  that  ?  In  seines  ? — A.  They  come  and  set  their 
nets  for  herring,  they  jig  for  squid,  and  they  bob  for  mackerel. 

Q.  They  bob  for  mackerel,  and  jig  for  squid,  and  set  their  nets  for 
herring? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  Your  people  have  never  been  in  the  habit  of  catching  mackerel  for 
market,  but  only  for  bait  ? — A.  Only  for  bait. 

Q.  When  was  that  year  when  you  saw  as  many  as  200  American  ves- 
sels at  one  time  ! — A.  I  am  not  able  to  give  the  exact  year. 

Q.  Give  us  as  near  as  you  can. — A.  I  think  it  was  1856. 

Q.  What  years  were  they  when  there  was  an  average  of  300  or  400 
that  frequented  your  coasts  ? — A.  I  think  from  1855  to  1860. 

Q.  When  did  the  number  begin  to  fall  off? — A.  It  appears  to  nie  the 
number  began  falling  off  then.  I  remained  on  shore  after  that,  and  did 
not  observe  them  as  much  perhaps. 

Q.  You  ceased  to  be  a  fisherman  in  1866 1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  was  then  a  considerable  number,  but  not  so  many  as  iD  for- 
mer years  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Has  your  observation,  although  you  have  not  been  a  fisherman, 
been  sufficient  to  enable  you  to  say  that  the  number  has  very  iiiucli 
fallen  off  within  the  last  seven  or  eight  years  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  say  it  Las 
fallen  off  considerably. 

Q.  Well,  you  say  considerably ;  has  it  not  fallen  off  from  200  or  300 
down  to  50  i — A.  Not  so  much  as  that. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  were  50  American  mackerel  catchers  on  your 
shore  last  year  ? — A.  I  think  so ;  yes. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  have  you  estimate  the  number  that  you  think  was 
there  in  1876  ? — A.  Of  course  that  is  including  the  whole  shore  ? 

Q.  All  you  know  of  personally ;  all  that  are  within  those  places  where 
you  have  said  there  were  300  or  400. — A.  I  have  not  seen  tliem  in  f,'reat 
numbers  around  my  own  place  as  I  used  to  see  them  ;  but  I  should  say, 
from  information  collected  from  others,  that  there  would  be  at  least  from 
75  to  10(t  along  the  shore  last  year. 

Q.  Do  you  think  so? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Year  before  last? — A.  There  was  about  the  same,  I  think. 

Q.  Take  1874,  the  year  before  that— A.  I  should  think  there  would 
be  more. 

Q.  How  many  were  there  in  1874,  do  you  think  ? — A.  Perhaps  there 
would  be  as  high  as  200. 

Q.  1873  ?— A.  Well,  I  don't  really  know. 

Q.  Well,  I  won't  trouble  you  any  more.    You  have  given  us  now  the 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


777 


wl  with  salt 


hers  on  your 


rtsnlts  of  yonr  own  observation  and  information  derived  from  others. 
Suppose  you  were  asked  how  many  American  mackerel  vessels  you  saw 
last  year,  what  would  you  say  1 — A.  We  see  them  very  often  when  we 
can't  tell  whether  it  is  the  same  vessel  we  have  seen  before  or  not. 

Q.  You  might  see  the  same  vessel  a  dozen  times  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Don't  they  usually  come  iu  a  fleet,  and  keep  together  pretty  well  1 — 
A.  Formerly  they  used  to. 

Q.  Don't  they  now  ? — A.  No ;  not  in  the  same  way. 

Q.  The  fleet  is  broken  up  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  years  were  these,  during  which  you  think  the  average  catch 
was  700  barrels! — A.  I  should  say  during  the  11  years  I  had  experience 
among  them. 

Q.  Down  to  1866?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  from  such  observation  as  you  have  made,  and  from 
iuforuiation  you  have  had,  that  the  average  has  been  smaller  than  that 
of  late  years? — A.  I  have  not  had  the  same  chance  of  conversing  with 
the  Americans  since  that. 

Q.  Then  you  would  not,  perhaps,  like  to  hazard  an  opinion  as  to  late 
years? — A.  No. 

Q,  It  was,  when  you  knew  it,  an  uncertain  business  ?  A  lucky  vessel 
would  get  1,200  barrels,  and  an  unlucky  one  only  200  or  300  iu  the 
course  of  the  same  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  what  extent  do  your  people  catch  mackerel  for  bait  for  the  cod- 
fisbery  ? — A.  That  depends  principally  upon  what  other  bait  they  have. 
When  they  have  plenty  of  herring  they  do  not  try  much  for  mackerel 
Tbe  herring  is  better.  The  herring,  squid,  and  caplin  are  the  chief  bait. 
It  is  only  when  those  are  scarce  and  the  mackerel  are  plentiful  that  they 
catch  them  for  bait. 

Q.  They  don't  use  a  great  many  mackerel  for  codfish  bait,  do  they  ? — 
A.  Considerable. 

Q.  Well,  give  us  some  idea  of  what  you  mean  by  "  considerable." — A. 
Well,  it  depends — some  fishermen  may  catch  60  or  80  mackerel  aud  then 
go  out  and  use  that  up  catching  codfish. 

Q.  How  many  do  you  think,  in  an  average  season,  one  of  your  boats,  with 
two  men,  would  use  for  bait,  besides  their  more  favored  bait  ? — A.  It  would 
be  pretty  hard  to  estimate  the  number  of  mackerel.  It  depends  princi- 
pally upon  what  other  bait  they  have. 

Q.  I  know  it  is  hard,  but  you  say  <'  a  considerable"  is  used,  and  as 
tbat  does  not  convey  any  kind  of  an  idea  at  all  I  wish  you  to  say  as  well 
as  you  can. — A.  Well,  when  they  have  no  other  bait 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  average  a  barrel  of  mackerel? — A.  O,  my, 
yes.    Five  or  six  to  ten  barrels,  some  of  them. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  would  be  the  average  ? — A.  Five  or  six  would 
be  the  average. 

Q.  At  what  time  do  they  use  this? — A.  Principally  in  the  months  of 
July  and  August  they  take  the  mackerel  for  bait. 

Q.  You  begin  with  herring? — A.  Yes;  we  commence  with  herring, 
then  caplin. 

Q.  Do  the  herring  come  in  good  abundance? — A.  There  is  no  trouble. 
We  have  never  known  any  scarcity  of  herring  bait  for  any  length  of 
time.  Occasionally  the  bait  gets  scarce.  As  I  have  said,  iu  warm 
weather  it  settles  down  to  the  bottom. 

Q>  As  a  rule,  the  herring  bait  would  be  abundant? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  you  get  the  herring? — A.  In  nets. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  squid  ! — A.  We  get  that  generally  about  the  Ist 
August. 


778 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISUEBT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  Ion);  does  it  lastt — A.  It  is  the  last  flsb.  It  lasts  until  the 
latter  part  of  October. 

Q.  Do  tbey  use  squid  altogether  fresb  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tbey  don't  salt  it? — A.  No;  tbey  take  it  as  tbey  require. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  tbe  necessity  of  having  fresb  bait;  does  not  tbat 
squid  salted  make  a  good  bait  ? — A.  It  is  very  poor. 

Q.  Tbe  squid,  you  say,  lasts  until  tbe  end  of  tbe  fishing  season  f~ 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  I  would  like  to  know  a  little  more  about  tbe  course  of  your 
own  codfish  business.  You  have  seven  tK>ats,  each  of  which  has  two 
men,  and  makes  an  average  catch,  you  say,  of  150  quintals  of  dry  fish  !- 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Those  150  quintals  of  fish  sell  for  $3.40  a  quintal  ?— A.  Dried  I  It 
sold  for  a  great  deal  more. 

Q.  What  does  it  sell  for? — A.  It  depends  of  course 

Q.  Give  me  this  year's  prices. — A.  It  is  16  shillings  this  year;  last 
year  it  was  20  sbilliugs. 

Q.  I  gave  you  tbe  right  price  for  this  year  then  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Last  year  it  was  20  shillings  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  say  you  sell  to  the  exporters;  you  mean  to  tbe  Jersey  bouses, 
I  suppose? — A.  To  Robins,  Savage,  aud  that  class;  to  tbe  one  thac 
gives  me  tbe  highest  price. 

Q.  Last  year,  was  tbat  an  unlucky  year  for  them,  so  that  they  lost 
money  on  the  flsb  they  bought  from  you  f — A.  Some  of  them  say  so. 

Q.  Don't  you  believe  it  ? — A.  I  do  to  a  certain  extent.  Their  markets 
were  very  bad  last  year.  Year  before  last  the  markets  were  very  good ; 
but  last  year  they  were  very  bad. 

Q.  What  was  the  trouble  ?  Was  the  market  overstocked !— A,  I 
believe  it  was. 

Q.  Aud  you  can't  tell  what  it  is  going  to  be  this  year,  I  suppose?— A. 
It  is  pretty  hard  to  say. 

Q.  But  this  year  the  price  is  $3.40  a  quintal  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Aud  each  man  you  employ  will  catch  75  quintals,  or  150  quintals 
to  a  boat.    How  do  you  pay  them  ? — A.  So  much  a  draught. 

Q.  How  much  a  quintal  do  you  pay  them  for  dried  fish  ? — A.  I  pay 
them  the  price  you  mention,  20«.  a  quintal  in  trade  and  16«.  in  cash. 

Q.  Do  you  pay  them  the  same  price  you  get  ? — A.  Of  course,  tbat  is 
a  matter  of  business. 

Q.  And  you  only  get  $3.40  this  year? — A.  I  expect  to  get  more  thau 
that.    That  is  the  price  I  pay  my  men. 

Q.  Then  the  price  paid  by  Savage  to  you  is  not  the  price  which  the 
planters,  as  they  call  them,  who  own  tbe  boats,  pay  to  the  poor  fisher- 
men ? — A.  O,  of  course,  those  that  are  independent  and  can  hold  their 
fish  up  will  do  so  to  take  advantage  of  good  markets. 

Q.  Tbe  men  get  from  you  $3.40?— A.  Yes;  that  is,  they  get  $3.20 or 
16«.  cash. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  charged  to  them  for  the  boat  ? — A.  Not  with 
mine. 

Q.  You  furnish  the  boat,  what  else? — A.  The  rigging. 

Q.  The  books  and  lines? — A.  No,  tbey  find  them  themselves,  and 
they  find  the  nets. 

Q.  You  give  them  the  boat  and  rigging  and  take  all  their  catch  and 
pay  them  $3.20  ? — A.  Yes ;  that  is,  I  take  them  from  them  green.  I  give 
them  lis.  6d.  a  draught  trade  price. 

Q.  And  you  do  the  labor? — A.  Yes.  11«.  6d.  is  the  trade  price,  and 
when  a  man  has  it  coming  to  him  I  deduct  one-fifth. 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


779 


hing  season!- 


-A.  Dried !  It 


get  more  thau 


smselves,  and 


Q.  You  keep  a  store  yonraelf  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  generally  keep  iu  debt  to  yoaT — A.  I  try  to  keep  them 
out  ot  debt. 

Q,  Are  they  most  indebted  to  you  through  the  winter  1 — A.  In  the 
winter  they  are  obliged  to  get  advances. 

Q.  What  else  do  they  do  besides  catch  fish  for  yon.  What  other 
mode  of  living  have  they? — A.  We  generally  employ  them  at  farming. 

Q.  Wlienf — A.  When  they  have  time  and  wish  to  work. 

Q.  They  cannot  earn  money  working  on  a  farm  iu  winter? — A.  Well, 
they  can  cut  wood  and  haul  it. 

Q.  They  fish  from  May  to  November.  What  do  they  do  from  Novera- 
ber  to  May  ? — A.  They  cut  wood  and  saw  boards. 

Q.  Do  your  men  work  for  you,  too  ? — A.  Yes,  we  genenerally  employ 
our  own  men. 

Q.  How  do  you  pay  them  ? — A.  In  produce. 

Q.  How  much  do  you  pay  them  ? — A.  According  as  they  work. 

Q.  Do  you  pay  them  by  the  quantity  they  cut? — A.  Yes;  fifty  cents 
a  cord  generally  for  wood,  cut  to  two  and  a  half  feet  length.  Some  make 
$1  a  day  and  some  Is.  Gd. 

Q.  How  many  cuts  have  they  to  make  ?  It  is  not  cutting  trees  ? — A. 
No;  I  mean  cutting  wood  into  lengths  of  two  and  a  half  feet. 

Q.  Taking  the  tree  as  it  falls  and  cutting  it  into  lengths  of  two  and  a 
half  feet  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  there  many  that  can  earn  $1.50  a  day  throngh  the  winter  ? — A. 
It  depends  upon  the  man.  There  are  not  a  great  many  can  do  as  much 
as  that.    There  are  more  that  will  cut  only  one  cord. 

Q.  They  would  not  average  much  over  one  cord  ? — A.  No;  one  or  one 
and  a  half. 

Q.  The  average  would  be  75  cents  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  would  get  about  $2.50  in  summer,  would  they  not  ? — A.  Some 
of  thetu  earn  that  much  in  the  summer  time. 

Q.  Has  there  not  been  considerable  complaint  of  the  monopoly  of  these 
Jersey  merchants  controlling  prices,  so  that  the  fishermen  don't  have  a 
fair  chance? — A.  There  has  been  some  complaint,  but  it  depends  prin- 
cipally upon  the  fishermen  themselves. 

Q.  There  are  complaints  by  the  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes ;  but  it  depends 
npou  themselves  principally.  Some  of  them  depend  too  much  on  the 
credit  system.  So  long  as  they  can  get  credit  they  are  satisfied,  but 
when  it  comes  to  paying  they  are  not  so  well  satisfied  then. 

Q.  So  they  have  complaiue<l  a  good  deal  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Away  back  for  a  series  of  years  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  The  complaint  has  been  that  these  poor  fishermen  are  in  vassalage 
to  the  great  fishing  houses  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  the  fishing  bouses  fixed  the  price  for  the  fish  and  for  their 
goods  in  such  a  way  that  they  keep  them  indebted,  and  that  from  one 
generation  to  another  they  have  remained  in  debt  and  in  vassalage  ? — A. 
Yes.    It  depends  a  great  deal  upon  themselves. 

Q.  O,  yes ;  there  are  slaves  who  earn  their  own  freedom  by  working 
extra  hours,  but  as  a  class  they  are  in  a  very  poor  condition  ? — A.  They 
are  in  a  poor  condition. 

Q.  And  the  public  officers  in  their  reports  have  made  it  a  subject  of 
comment  year  after  year,  haven't  they  ? — A.  Yes,  some  of  them. 

Q.  You  have  read  it  yourself  in  the  fishery  reports  ? — A.  Of  course  a 
great  class  of  them  are  poor,  but  it  is  their  own  fault.  A  great  many 
of  them  who  have  been  poor  have,  by  economy,  become  better  off  than 
those  that  were  well  to  do. 


780 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  I  suppose  it  is  their  own  faalt ;  it  is  the  fault  of  man  that  sin  came 
into  the  world  and  death.  But  tliis  system  you  speak  of  hm  guim  ou 
from  freueratiou  to  generation  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  is  no  place  that  they  can  sell  their  flsh  except  directly  or 
indirectly  to  these  exporters? — A.  It  is  not  very  easy  for  them  to  do 
otherwise.  In  the  fail  they  are  bound  to  go  to  these  exporters,  or  who- 
ever employs  them,  and  jg^et  advances  for  the  winter;  so  it  is  notbiug 
but  fair  to  give  them  their  earnings  in  the  summer  time. 

Q.  Last  year  business  was  dull.  The  markets  were  overstocked 
80  that  the  Jersey  houses  lost  money ;  they  said  so,  and  you  believe  it 
to  be  truef — A.  Yes;  some  of  them. 

Q.  Well,  whether  all  the  fish  they  sold  in  1875  have  been  eaten  or  not 
you  do  not  know,  or  whether  there  will  be  a  good  market  or  a  bad  one 
this  year  1 — A.  No ;  it  is  hard  to  tell. 

Q.  You  do  not,  I  suppose,  think  it  possible  that  a  more  extensive  mar- 
ket for  such  fish  as  you  send  to  Montreal  and  Quebec  could  do  your 
people  any  good  f — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  You  think  it  would  not,  under  any  circumstances,  place  the  people 
in  such  a  situation  that  they  could  gut  butter  prices? — A.  I  think  not. 
We  have  bad  experience  before  of  fish  going  into  Boston,  and  it  did  uot 
realize  a  sufficient  price  there. 

Q.  There  were  too  many  tish  for  sale  ? — A.  We  have  better  markets 
in  our  own  provinces. 

Q.  But  the  price  is  kept  low  because  there  are  too  many  fish  ?— A. 
Yes;  I  think  it  is  overproduction. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  never  fished  in  vessels  ? — A.  Never. 

Q.  Does  uot  this  question  of  boat-fishing  and  vessel-fishing  come 
pretty  much  to  this — that  vessel-fishing  is  principally  in  deep  water, 
and  boat-fishing  principally  inshore  ? — A.  O,  no,  no ;  I  think  not.  It 
depends  altogether  upon  the  weather.  If  the  weather  is  rough  they 
can  do  nothing  outside,  and  so  they  come  inshore.  They  come  to  get 
shelter  in  our  harbors  and  bays — the  schooners  do. 

Q.  That  is,  they  did  when  they  used  to  come  in  considerable  nam 
bers? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  When  a  fisherman  goes  to  the  merchant  who  supplies  him  in  the 
autumn  he  is  supplied  on  credit  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  that  credit  differs  from  the  cash  price  about  43  per  cent., 
does  it  not  ? — A.  The  trade  price. 

Q.  Well,  a  man  goes  in  the  autumn  to  be  supplied  by  a  merchant,  the 
merchant  is  going  to  supply  him  and  his  family  until  he  goes  and  catches 
fish  and  settles  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  the  prices  that  are  charged  under  these  circumstances,  where 
he  is  to  pay  by  fishing  next  year — I  don't  refer  to  the  ultimate  result- 
but  the  price  charged  him  on  the  articles  sold  him  at  the  time  is  about 
43  per  cent,  more  than  it  would  be  if  he  paid  down  cash  ? — A.  It  is  not 
80  much  as  that ;  it  is  about  25  per  cent. 

Q.  You  are  taking  into  consideration  the  way  he  pays  in  the  summert— 
A.  No;  I  mean  if  he  came  with  cash  to  purchase  instead  of  purcbasing 
on  credit  he  would  get  things  about  25  per  cent,  cheaper  for  cash  tbau 
for  trade. 

Q.  Take  the  case  of  flour.  The  last  witness  told  us  that  flour  coultl 
be  bought  for  cash  for  $7,  and  that  he  would  charge  $10  to  the  persou 
who  took  it  on  credit.  The  difference  is  between  $7  and  $10  ?— A.  Yes; 
but  what  confounds  the  thing  is  the  trade  system ;  that  confounds  the 
thing  and  makes  it  appear  higher. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


781 


liderable  nam 


ies  bim  in  the 


Q.  I  know  it  appears  higher  at  the  start,  but  it  begins  at  that  rate. 
He  biiyH  tlour  at  $10  which,  if  be  had  the  cash,  he  would  liave  got  for 
$7.— A.  Yes.    Weil,  there  would  not  be  quite  so  much  ditt'erence. 

Q.  Well,  that  is  the  way  the  last  wituess  put  it ;  that  would  be  43 
per  cent.  Now,  if  he  has  made  a  catch  of  fish  he  can  pay  that,  but  he 
may  not  be  able  to  pay  for  it,  and  what  ho  does  not  pay  for  stands  at 
tlm'trate,  $10,  and  the  merchant  draws  interest  on  it?— A.  No;  I  do  not 
think  there  is  interest. 

Q.  Well,  if  he  has  bad  luck  it  stands  there  as  a  debtf — A.  Yes. 

(j.  Now,  suppose  he  has  luck  enough  to  catch  the  dsh  to  pay  his  debt ; 
I  uiiderMtHud  that  the  merchant  credits  him  with  that  flsh,  not  at  the 
cash  price,  but  at  a  trade  price.  Now,  when  do  they  settle  with  the 
merchant — as  fast  as  they  come  in,  or  at  the  close  of  the  season  f — A.  As 
hist  as  they  come  in.  Very  often  the  tisherman  settles  his  account  every 
week. 

Q.  Now  what  would  be  the  difference  between  what  is  called  the  trade 
price  of  fish  and  the  cash  price  ?— A.  20  per  cent. 

Q.  I  mean  to  ask  you  the  difference  between  the  credit  price  of  flsh 
when  a  man  buys  flsh  at  the  credit  rate,  atid  the  cash  price  of  flsh  ? — 
A.  I  can  hardly  understand  you.  I  do  not  know  what  is  meant  by  the 
credit  price  of  flsh.  He  gets  20  per  cent,  more  trade  price  than  he 
vrould  cash.  For  instance,  if  he  has  cash,  as  many  flshennen  have,  he 
liiiys  and  sells  for  cash.  A  flsherinan  who  buys  bis  goods  for  cash, 
whenever  he  brings  in  his  flsh  and  lands  them  will  get  the  cash  price 
for  them ;  that  would  be  9«.  3d.  instead  of  11«.  C^.  Many  of  them  have 
great  iulvautages  and  by  that  means  they  pay  their  way,  and  it  makes 
that  ditt'erence. 

Q.  You  think  the  difference  between  the  cash  paid  for  the  flsh  and 
the  trade  price  allowed  is  20  i)er  cent.? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  half  what  he  lost  in  tlie  autumn  in  getting  his  supplies? 
You  say  that  many  of  them  buy  for  cash. — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  are  not  many  of  them  that  are  in  a  condition  to  do  that  ? — 
A.  Quite  a  number  of  them. 

Q.  Out  of  the  whole  number  what  proportion  is  there? — A.  Oh,  not 
a  quarter. 

Q.  Then  I  am  right  in  saying  that  they  don't  allow  them  the  same 
rate  of  advance  upon  the  cash  price  of  the  flsh  bought  from  them  that  they 
charge  them  in  the  autumn  upon  the  goods  sold  to  them  on  credit? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  allow  what  amounts  to  about  20  per  cent.? — A.  Unfortu- 
nately the  good  pay  for  the  bad  in  many  cases.  The  merchant  is 
ubiiged  to  add  that  to  protect  himself. 

By  Mr.  Davies ; 

Q.  What  do  I  understand  to  be  the  difference  between  the  price  at 
which  yon  sell  goods  on  credit,  and  the  price  at  which  you  sell  for 
cash?— A.  25  per  cent. 

Q.  iSiipposiug  a  man  catches  a  certain  amount  of  flsh  for  you  and 
wants  cash  instead  of  goods,  do  you  give  it  to  him? — A.  We  deduct 
oue-fifth  from  the  trade  price,  and  give  him  his  cash,  which  he  can 
spend  where  he  likes. 

Q.  So  the  difference  is  20  per  cent.? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  he  wants  to  deal  with  you  and  take  your  goods,  you  charge  him 
20 per  cent,  in  addition  to  cash  price? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  say  one-fltth.  Did  you  make  43  per  cent,  of  it  in  any  way  ? 
Do  you  charge  in  any  of  your  dealings  43  per  cent,  differeuce  against  the 


i 
m 


782 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


fisherman  who  deals  with  you  on  credit,  as  compared  with  one  wbo 
dew  Is  on  cash  ? — A.  No. 

Mr.  Dana.  I  did  not  ask  him  what  he  did,  but  what  raercbaiits  gen- 
erally did. 

Q.  Yoii  are  a  mcichant,  are  you  not? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  hire  men  and  pay  them.  You  sell  to  the  larger  merchants!- 
A.  Yes,  and  L  sell  to  a  great  many  of  the  inhabitants. 

Q.  They  deal  at  your  store  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  buy  goods! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  price  do  you  get  after  the  fish  are  cured  and  dried,  from  tlie 
Jersey  merchants? — A.  That  differs,  of  course.  It  is  a  private  agree- 
ment between  me  and  the  exporters. 

Q.  It  is  after  they  are  dried  that  you  sell  them.  You  have  to  dry 
them  ? — A.  Yes.    I  make  a  private  agreement  with  the  exporter. 

Q.  What  is  the  general  price  paid  for  dried  fish?— A.  Sixteen  sLiUings 
cash  and  twenty  shillings  trade. 

Q.  That  is,  dried  fish  this  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  1  would  like  to  see  if  I  understand  your  statement.  It  has  been 
said,  and  I  did  not  understand  you  to  diffcir  from  that,  that  a  barrel  of 
flour  was  soid  at  $7  if  paid  for  in  cash,  and  at  about  $10  (although  I 
understood  you  were  not  quite  of  the  same  opinion  as  the  other  witness) 
if  entered  in  the  book  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  that  would  be  a  difference  of  about  43  per  cent.  ? — A.  Yes, 

Q.  Well,  is  there  any  difference  in  the  rate  of  advance  you  make  ou 
flour  and  on  the  other  articles  that  you  supply,  or  is  a  correspoudiug 
advance  nuide  in  every  other  article? — A.  It  is  .just  about  the  same. 

Q.  Well,  in  regard  to  the  price  charged,  you  have  told  us  you  liave 
charged  25  per  cent,  in  general  terms  (it  appears,  however,  to  be  more), 
and  that  you  deduct  from  the  price  of  the  fish  20  per  cent.  ? — A.  Ypi. 

Q.  Very  well,  those  are  equivalent  amounts,  because  25  per  ci'iit.  on 
sixteen  shillings  is  four  shillings,  which  would  make  h  twenty  shilling", 
and  20  per  cent,  of  twenty  shillings  is  also  four  shillings,  whicli  deducted 
reduces  it  to  sixteen  shillings. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  sell  flour  at  $7  caslj,  and  on 
credit  for  $10!    Mr.  Dana  has  given  you  an  instance,  and  Sir  Alex 
ander  Gait  lias  repeated  it,  assuming  flour  to  be  sold  at  cash  for  87  and 
credit  for  $10.    Is  that  so?— A.  No. 
By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  Let  us  understand  exactly,  On  a  general  average  of  articles,  what 
difference  do  you  make  for  giving  a  winter's  credit  to  those  tisliermen! 
How  much  advance  do  you  put  on  Hour? — A.  As  a  general  rule,  we  put 
on  the  credit  system  from  CO  to  75  per  cent. ;  that  is  the  advance  we 
generally  put,  on  the  credit  system. 
By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  That  is  over  cost?— ^A.  That  is  over  cost.  For  cash  we  sell  von 
cheap;  we  sell  for  20  per  cent,  over  cost  for  cash.  We  charge  a  large 
additional  sum  on  credit. 

Q.  But  that  has  to  be  paid  for  with  fish  at  trade  prices? — A.  Yes. 
By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  if  yoii  are  being  paid  an  old  debt  that  stood 
over  last  year — in  th«t  case  do  you  allow  tlie  trade  or  the  cash  price  ot 
the  fish  brought  in  to  pay  for  them  !— A.  The  trade  price. 


V  merchants!-. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


783 


By  Sir  Alexauder  Gait : 

Q.  1  wish  to  ask  you  a  question  on  a  dififerent  siiHject,  in  regard  to 
the  dependence  of  t'lose  fishermen  npon  the  fisheries  for  the  existence 
of  themselves  and  their  families,  i'^ou  spoke  of  their  being  employed 
ou  farms  during  the  wintar.  Do  we  understand  from  you  that;  the  sub- 
sistence of  those  fishermen  and  their  families  is  dependent  practically 
upon  the  fish  that  they  catch  during  the  summer  ? — A.  Practically  on 
tbat. 

Q.  If  those  mercantile  bouses  did  not  buy  those  fish,  or  if  from  any 
cause  they  were  to  move  away,  these  fishermen  might  be  exposed  to 
distress? — A.  Yes.  For  instance,  if  the  merchants  were  to  refuse  to 
give  them  an  advance  in  the  autumn  it  would  be  simple  starvation. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  When  you  charge  that  large  percentage  on  credit,  do  you  give  a 
correspondingly  large  increase  in  the  price  of  thy  fish  you  take  from 
theiuf— A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  that  practically  it  becomes  even  ? — A.  Of  course  the  merchants 
are  bound  to  make  »u  advance  on  account  of  bad  debts. 

Q.  But  I  understand  you  to  allow  him  the  same  ditierence  in  the  trade 
price  that  you  pay  him  for  bis  fish  f — A.  Yes. 

No.  34. 

James  Jessop,  builder  and  farmer,  formerly  a  fisherman,  of  Newport, 
Gaspe,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
swum  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  You  are  a  fisherman  ? — Answer.  I  went  fishing  for  thirty 
years. 

Q.  Yon  were  born  at  Perce  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  resided  at  Newport  for  fourteen  years? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  reside  there  at  prese:st? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  is  that  from  Perce  f — A.  About  30  or  40  miles  westward 
from  Pf.rce. 

Q  Have  you  been  fishing  all  your  life? — A.  I  have  been  fishing  all 
my  life,  except  during  the  last  five  years. 

Q.  Did  you  live  among  fishermen  » — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  your  father  a  fisherman  ? — A.  No.  I  have  lived  among  fish- 
ermen all  my  life,  and  I  went  fishing  when  twelve  years  of  age. 

Q.  During  all  that  i)eriod  have  you  known  American  vessels  and 
American  crews? — A.  Yes;  and  1  have  often  been  on  board  of  the  ves- 
sels and  had  conversations  with  the  crews.  They  have  been  at  my  place 
several  times. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  on  shore  and  on  board? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  the  whole  of  that  period  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  fished  on  boaril  of  their  vessels  ? — A.  Y'es.  I  fished 
0  1  board  of  a  Gloucester  vessel,  Madame  Roland. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  fish  iu  her? — A.  Twelve  or  fifteen  days. 

Q.  In  what  year  was  that  ?— A.  In  18(18. 

Q.  What  fishery  did  you  carry  on  ? — A.  The  cod-fishery. 

Q.  Where  I — A..  Off  Perce  and  Newport.  I  fished  for  two  jrears  on 
tlie  north  shore  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  What  did  you  fish  there?— xV,  Cod-fish. 

Q.  Have  y:;  i  Si'en  the  Atnerican  fishing  fieet  ? — A.  I  saw  a  great  many 
vessels  at  Natasbquau — 100  sail— but  I  did  not  go  ou  board. 


ill 


StJ 


4^-&.i 


I's 

^"^  ■ 

N^ 'ilMIWI^ 

;|!i^^^ 

';;jil;^^|^3NS 

V'  '  ^AmfiSvrWn 

||^^ 

■' '  '?W»^fv^ 

'  21,'  ^  j''t'  J  i^'^jB 

"^''i'^^if^^ 

4i,;i^M 

?« 

k^ 

Sji^Wwa 

n 

i| 

f^^,V^^' 

te^" 

a 

d 

1^,- Ay*  \ 

784 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  many  years  were  you  flsbing  on  the  north  shore? — A.  I  was 
one  year  at  Natashquan. 

Q,  You  saw  the  American  fleet  ? — A.  The  best  part  were  Halifax  ves- 
sels, and  from  along  the  coast  at  Halifax. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  Americans  fishing  on  the  south  shore ?--A. 
Yes;  fishing  for  mackerel  and  cod. 

Q.  From  Cape  Chatte  to  Cape  Gasp^,  how  far  from  the  shore  did  tbe 
Americans  fish  ? — A.  From  Cape  Chatte  to  Cape  Gasi)^  the  Americans 
came  in  along  the  shore.  1  never  fished  there.  I  have  j)assed  up  and 
down  and  seen  American  vessels  fishing  for  mackerel  right  along  the 
shore. 

Q.  Did  you  see  or  hear  of  Americans  fishing  for  mackerel  outside  of 
three  miles  from  shore? — A.  No;  all  within  one  mile,  one  mile  and  a 
half,  and  two  miles  from  shore. 

Q  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  fishing  outside  three  mih^s?—  \  Not  on 
that  coast. 

Q.  On  the  north  side  of  B.iy  Chaleurs  where  an-  >iiackerel  found  ?— 
A.  The  great  body  of  mackerel  is  along  the  shore.  A  few  may  be  caiifjlit 
outside  in  deep  water,  but  the  mackerel  make  into  the  shore  uiul  '-mi  - 
after  small  bait. 

Q.  Where  are  most  of  the  mackerel  caught  ? — A.  Handy  to  the  shore, 
sometimes  a  mile  and  a  half  out,  sometimes  not  five  acres  out. 

Q.  Do  you  know  from  the  Americans  themselves  whether  they  catch 
the  greater  part  of  the  mackerel  inshore  ? — A.  Yes.  Tlie  vessel  I  »'r!«  on 
board  fished  inshore  with  boats.  The  vessel  was  at  anchor  iu  y^wput 
Harbor. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  land  ? — A.  About  300  yards. 

Q.  Did  jou  catch  all  the  fish  there?— A.  There  were  no  fish  ia  tbe 
harbor;  we  caught  them  iu  a  cove  called  Carnaval. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore? — A.  About  two  cables'  length.  We  got 
100  barrels  one  day. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  your  fish  far  from  the  shore? — A.  The  farthest  we 
caught  might  be  half  a  mile  off. 

Q.  How  many  <lid  you  catch  ? — A.  1  could  not  say  exactly,  but  we 
pretty  nearly  loaded  her.  I  left  her,  and  she  afterward  left  to  transship 
her  cargo. 

Q.  At  what  place  was  she  going  to  transship? — A.  Some  port  to- 
ward Prince  Edward  Island,  the  skipper  told  me.  About  ten  days  after 
I  was  down  at  Perce,  and  the  skipper  came  back  looking  for  me ;  he  left 
word  for  me  to  come  down,  but  there  was  a  storm  aud  I  did  not  see  hiui 
after. 

Q.  How  many  days  were  you  on  board  ?— A.  Twelve  or  fifteen  days. 

Q.  You  got  the  load  during  that  period? — A.  The  best  part  of  tbe 
load. 

Q.  Do  you  know,  from  information  derived  from  Americans,  whether 
it  would  be  worth  their  while  to  carry  on  the  fishery  if  they  were  ex- 
cluded from  the  inshore  fisheries  ? — A.  They  could  not  do  mucli  if  ex- 
cluded from  the  inshore  fisheries. 

Q.  You  know  that  from  themselves  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  they  undertake  the  fishery  if  excluded  from  the  inshoro; 
fislieries  ? — A.  1  could  not  say. 

Q.  Do  yon  know,  from  what  you  have  heard  from  them,  whether  they 
would  engage  in  it  ? — A.  1  don't  think  it  would  pay  them.  It  is  easy  to 
see  they  would  risk  tlieir  vessels,  which  might  be  seized  and  taken. 

Q.  You  sty  you  have  been  in  communication  with  crews  of  Auiericaa 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


785 


vessels,  aud  they  have  been  ashore  at  your  house ;  how  many  crews  have 
you  seen  at  one  time  ? — A.  I  saw  the  crews  of  four  vessels  at  one  time. 

Q.  You  have  constantly  mixed  with  t!\em  ? — A.  Yes;  there  was  Cap- 
taiu  Ellwood  and  his  crew,  who  always  came,  aud  another  crew. 

Q.  Do  you  know  from  theai  their  estimate  of  the  number  of  barrels  of 
mackerel  a  schooner  would  take  in  a  season  ? — A.  On  an  average  600  or 
;00 ;  some  take  more,  and  some  less. 

Q.  What  would  you  understand  to  have  been  some  of  the  larger 
catches  of  American  vessels,  as  you  have  heard  from  them  ? — A.  Some 
vessels  have  made  three  loads  of  r)00  barrels  each. 

Q.  You  have  heard  that  from  them  f — A,  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  1,500  barrels  for  the  season  ? — A.  Yes.  They  do  not  all  do 
that. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  a  mackerel  vessel  that  did  not  get  one  full 
faro  f — A.  I  never  heard  of  it. 

Q.  How  many  b.arrels  do  the  majority  of  the  vessels  catch  ? — A.  They 
catch  from  600  to  700  barrels  on  an  average. 

Q.  In  how  many  trips  ? — A.  Some  make  three  trips  aud  some  only 
one. 

Q.  Do  many  of  them  make  two  trips  ? — A.  I  suppose  about  two  trips 
ou  au  average. 

Q.  Do  you  know  from  the  Americans  what  they  consider  to  be  the 
advantage  of  transshipping,  what  it  saves  them? — A.  It  is  a  great  ad- 
vantage. Tbrty  are  thus  able  to  remain  in  the  fishing  grounds,  where 
otherwise  they  would  be  going  home  with  their  loads.  It  is  the  advan- 
t'\ge  ot  a  trip. 

Q.  You  know  that  from  themseh  t's  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tliat  they  consider  it  the  advantage  of  a  trip  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  what  period  do  the  mackerel  come  to  your  shores  1! — A.  On  our 
shores  we  get  nmckerel  on  loth  June ;  the  larger  body  comes  in  about 
Ijth  July,  and  from  that  to  15th  and  20th  August. 

Q.  How  late  do  they  remain  ? — A.  I  have  seen  them  on  15th  October 
oil  our  shores,  and  vessels  there  even  then. 

Q.  Usually  how  long  do  they  remain  ? — A.  Until  about  the  middle  of 
September;  they  are  always  there  till  about  15th  September. 

Q.  How  plentiful  are  they  on  your  coast  ? — A.  Some  years  they  are 
so  plentiful  that  you  can  see  nothing  but  a  school  for  three  miles  out 
with  the  mackerel  rising  and  breaking  the  water.  Some  days  there 
will  be  a  solid  body  of  Tiiem  right  into  shore,  within  a  quarter  of  a  mile 
from  shore,  sometimes  within  ten  acres,  among  the  rocks. 

Q.  How  long  would  rhey  remain  that  plentiful  ? — A.  G-euerally  about 
three  weeks. 

Q.  Continuously  during  that  time? — A.  Y'^fs;  every  day  they  are 
schooling  for  about  three  weeks. 

Q.  You  say  they  ai)pear  to  be  almost  a  solid  bou-  •  v  'he  water  ? — A, 
Yes. 

Q.  The  fishery  j'ou  carried  on  was  the  cod-flsherj'  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  about  what  quantity  of  codfish  the  American  schoon- 
ers would  catch,  on  an  average,  to  each  vessel  ? — A.  As  far  as  I  can  uu- 
tlerstiURl  from  them,  something  about  100  or  450  barrels  in  the  Gulf  of 
Saint  Lawrence, 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  they  usunlly  catch  ? — A.  They  almost  always 
getloailod.  They  don't  catch  any  inside  our  coast;  they  catch  the  cod 
out  ou  the  Banks. 

Q.  These  are  different  vessels  from  those  engaged  in  the  mackerel 
fisheries?— A.  Yes. 
COf 


iiM 


.■^ 


II 


ill 


I 


li^--  Z'  trt 


Iv^y-yAi 


"'aJs 


'^r-^' 
■-.'M^ 


t::.%^' 


JM 


786 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Have  you  been  on  board  of  tbose  cod-fisbing  vessels?— A.  Yes* 
I  have  been  on  board  of  them  on  the  Banks.  ' 

Q.  And  you  have  fished  there  yourself? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  do  they  remain  on  the  Banks  ? — A.  Two  days,  generally, 

Q.  Where  do  the  boats  catch  the  largest  part  of  their  codtisb  ?— a, 
The  largest  part  is  taken  inshore. 

Q.  About  how  many  boats  have  you  on  the  coast  from  St.  Tetei's  to 
Paspebiac  I— A.  Between  800  and  1,000. 

Q.  What  is  their  average  catch  f — A.  The  average  catch  on  the  whole 
line  will  be  from  100  or  110  to  120  quintals  of  dried  fish. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  the  American  fishing- vessels  get  their  bait  !— 
A.  They  very  often  run  up  to  Shippegan  and  Caraquette  and  fish  for 
herring. 

Q.  How  do  they  get  their  bait? — A.  With  nets. 

Q.  Do  you  know  wbat  else  besides  herring  is  used  for  cod-bait  ?— A. 
Mackerel  and  squid. 

Q.  How  do  they  practice  that  bait-flshing  ? — A.  They  catch  mackerel 
with  jigs,  and  squids  with  lines. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  tlie  codfish  feed  and  spawn  ? — A.  I  think  the 
cod  spawn  on  the  ground  where  they  remain. 

Q.  What  grounds  do  you  mean  ? — A.  The  large  cod  are  fished  on  the 
Banks  and  in  deep  water,  and  they  have  been  caught  spawning  there. 
In  hauling  them  on  the  coast  also,  we  have  found  them  in  the  act  of 
prawning.    So  we  think  thej'  spawn  where  they  are. 

Q.  On  tlie  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  other  way  the  cod-fishermen  have  of  getting 
heir  bait  tban  that  you  have  mentioned  ? — A.  They  get  their  bait  some 
times  outside  on  the  Banks. 

Q.  How  ? — A.  With  nets.    They  catch  the  bait  the  same  outside. 

Q.  So  far  as  your  experience  goes,  do  you  know  of  any  other  way  of 
getting  codfish-bait  ? — A.  They  seine  caplin  on  the  coast  sometimes. 

Q.  Have  you  knowledge  of  any  other  way  of  procuring  bait  for  cod- 
fishing?— A.  No. 

Q.  The  fisbin^t  could  not  be  carried  on  with  salt  bait  ? — A.  They  cau 
do  nothing  fishinsi"  with  salt  bait. 

Q.  Have  you  tried  it? — A.  I  have  tried  it. 

Q.  Could  you  not  succeed  with  it '? — A.  You  can  do  nothing  with  it: 
you  may  get  an  odd  fish,  but  it  will  not  pay  to  fish  with  it.  Tish  arc 
very  particular  about  bait. 

Q.  Suppose  the  Anierican  cod  fishers  wore  excluded  from  catcliins' or 
bu.ying  fresh  bait,  do  you  know  of  any  way  by  which  they  could  cany 
on  the  codfishing  business  ? — A.  I  doti't  know  of  any.  They  might  (■  urv 
on  a  little  fisliing  on  the  Banks,  but  when  the  bait  failed  they  couhliioi 
do  jiaything. 

Q.  To  what  extent  could  they  carry  on  the  fishing  ? — A.  It  is  very 
hard  to  tell;  some  years  there  will  be  some  herring  on  the  Uanksami 
other  years  very  few. 

Q.  Would  it  be  worth  while  for  them  to  engage  in  the  cod  fisliing  bib 
iness  ? — A.  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  where  do  they  get  most  of  the  bait;  ou  tin' 
shores  or  on  the  Banks? — A.  JNIore  inshore  than  ou  the  Bank:^. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  come  inshort^  constantly  for  bait? — A.  They 
may  not  come  on  our  shores,  but  on  other  shores  they  do.  Most  of  tiieii: 
go  to  Shippegan,  which  is  a  great  place  for  fisliing  herring.  Tlie  ii'^' 
ring  come  in  from  the  Banks  to  Shippegan;  the  Americans  catch  thin 
and  also  follow  them  inshore. 


AWARD   OF    THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


787 


-A.  They  can 


Q.  The  Americans  come  from  the  Banks  on  purpose  to  catch  bait? — 
A.  Yes ;  and  when  they  go  out  of  the  bay  they  get  fresh  bait  when  the 
herrinp;  school  is  passing  out. 

Q,  How  long  does  the  fresh  bait  last  ? — A.  It  will  only  keep  fresh  one 

dftV. 

Q.  That  is  when  there  is  no  ice  on  board  to  preserve  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  there  is  ice,  how  long  will  the  bait  keep  fresh  ? — A.  Two  or 
tbree  day^. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  Americans  purchasing  ice  on  the  shores  of  Nova 
Scoiia ! — A.  I  have  heard  that  they  do. 

Q.  Do  they  take  that  ice  to  preserve  their  bait  '—A.  They  never  take 
any  on  our  coast. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  spoke  of  some  codfish  having  been  caught  In  the  act  of  spawn- 
ing; will  you  describe  what  you  mean  by  the  act  of  spawning? — A. 
When  the  lish  were  hauled  in,  the  spawn  was  found  running  from  them, 
quite  soft. 

Q.  When  were  they  caught  spawning? — A.  In  July. 

(I  AVhere  I — A.  On  the  grounds  where  we  catch  the  fish. 

(},  The  large  tish  on  the  Banks  ? — A.  The  large  fish  in  deep  water. 

Q.  Can  you  fix  the  month  when  they  spawn  ? — A.  July. 

Q.  Whether  large  or  small  cod  t — A.  They  are  large  outside  and 
small  inside  on  our  coast. 

(}.  When  spawning  can  they  be  trawled  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  will  bite  ' — A.  They  will  bite  on  trawls  w  hen  they  will  not 
bite  on  hand-lines. 

Q.  Can  they  be  caught  by  hand-lines  when  spawning? — A.  Only 
\-er.v  lew. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  cod  live  on  ? — A.  AVe  fmd  in  them  herring, 
mackerel,  crabs,  and  offal,  such  as  cod  heads  and  backbones,  where 
Americans  have  been  splitting. 

i}.  So  far  as  the  Americans  are  concerned,  they  do  not  care  for  the 
small  cod  caught  near  the  shoi'e  ? — A.  No ;  I  have  seen  them  haul  a 
trawl  and  throw  away  the  small  cod. 

i).  They  go  to  the  Banks  to  catch  the  large  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

No.  35. 

William  Flynn,  custom-house  officer,  and  secretary-treasurer  of  the 
I'lHuity  council  of  (iaspc,  residing  at  Perce,  Gaspe,  called  on  behalf  of 
tlie  Government  of  ller  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

<iHiestion.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  fisheries  ? — Answer.  I  have 
been  trading  in  fish  for  15  years. 

(l  111  what  branch  of  the  fisheries  have  you  been  engaged? — A.  The 
cod-fishery. 

Q.  And  in  mackerel  to  any  extent  ? — A.  Not  in  mackerel.  We  don't 
ilsh  for  nm«'kerel,  except  for  bait. 

Q.  How  many  boats  have  you  employed  ? — A.  Some  seasons  five  or 
six ;  vometimes  less  and  sometimes  more. 

^>.  ilow  far  from  the  shore  do  they  take  codfish  ? — A.  About  two 
miles  or  two  miles  and  a  half. 

Q.  How  many  boats  are  there  in  the  harbor  of  Perce?  A.  About 
1G5. 


■"1*5 


i 

I 


i€ 


"788 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHELY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  mail}'  boats  are  there  alonp:  the  coast  from  I'asnebiac  to 
Ga8p<?  ?— A.  About  1,100.    Between  1,000  aud  1,100. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  catch  of  the  boats  you  have  employed  ami  of 
those  1,100  boats? — A.  I  thiuk  the  average  would  be  from  lliO  to  1L*5 
quintals  all  round  per  season. 

Q.  What  would  the  value  of  the  fish  be  to  the  man  who  cau"bt 
them  ? — A.  Some  years  from  $5  to  $0  per  quintal. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  $5  or  $G  green  or  dried  ? — A.  I  mean  dried. 

Q.  Green  they  would  not  be  worth  so  much  ? — A.  Not  so  much. 

Q.  What  would  you  pay  for  green  cod  If — A.  We  pay  about  63  per 
quintal. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  fish  along  your  shores  for  cod  ? — A.  Thoy  do. 

Q.  Within  three  miles  from  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  any  extent? — A.  They  don't  fish  codfish  to  any  great  extent 
within  three  miles  from  shore. 

Q.  Where  do  they  fish  for  cod? — A.  On  Miscou  Bank  and  Bank 
Orphan. 

Q.  What  is  the  number  of  the  fleet  engaged  in  fishing  on  Miscou 
Bank  alone? — A.  I  have  heard  my  men  say  from  40  to  50  sail. 

Q.  You  would  put  the  avera{,v^  at  40  sail  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  is  the  number  of  the  cod-fishing  fleet  in  tbe 
bay  on  an  average  each  year? — A.  hrom  300  to  400  vessels. 

Q.  Nearer  400  than  300  ?— A.  Aboi  t  400. 

Q.  Where  do  these  cod-fishermen  g«  t  the  bait  they  use?— A.  A  great 
deal  of  it  inshore,  along  our  coast. 

Q.  How  do  they  get  it? — A.  By  setting  nets  inshore,  and  sometimes 
by  buying  it. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fish  do  they  catch  for  bait? — A.  Herring.  I  have 
seen  them  seining  herring.  I  have  heard  that  they  jig  squid  aud  bob 
mackerel. 

Q.  They  catch  caplin  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  These  are  the  baits  used  for  cod  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  catch  them  in  large  quantities  ? — A.  I  could  not 
say  what  quantities  they  catch. 

Q.  They  catch  all  they  require  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  These  herring,  caplin,  and  mackerel  are  all  very  close  to  tbe 
shore  ? — A.  Quite  close,  within  half  or  a  quarter  of  a  mile.  The  capliu 
are  taken  close  inshore. 

Q.  How  did  American  cod-fishing  vessels  obtain  bait  when  the  cutters 
were  around  ? — A.  We  d»d  not  see  so  many  vessels  come  in  wben  the 
cutters  were  about.  They  would  watch  the  opportunity,  and  come  iu 
and  take  bait  when  the  cutters  were  away. 

Q.  They  did  not  abstain  from  coming  in  for  this  bait  because  tliecut 
ters  were  about  ? — A.  No ;  they  would  always  come. 

Q.  Suppose  they  were  prevented  from  taking  any  bait  within  three 
miles  of  the  shore,  how  could  they  carry  on  the  cod-fishing  ? — A.  Idout 
believe  they  could  carry  it  on  to  any  advantage. 

Q.  They  catch  the  cod  by  trawling  ? — A.  Yes. 

0.  In  trawling  you  require  fresh  bait? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  fresh  bait  can  only  be  obtained  on  our  shores?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  get  it  farther  out  than  three  miles  from  shore?— A.  You 
can  sometimes. 

Q.  To  any  extent  ? — A.  Not  to  any  great  extent. 

Q.  To  any  extent  which  would  warrant  them  in  prosecuting  the  fish- 
eries?— A.  No. 

Q.  I  understand  the  meaning  of  your  evidence  is  that  it  is  absolutely 


AWARD   OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


789- 


m  who  caught 


—A.  I  could  not 


because  the  cut- 


necessary  to  get  fresh  bait  to  carry  out  the  cod-flshery  ?— A.  Yes ;  that 
is  the  meaning  of  my  evidence. 

Q.  And  that  this  bait  is  got  from  half  a  mile  to  a  mile  from  shore! — 
A.  Most  of  it. 

Q.  Ou  the  north  side  of  the  St.  Lawrence  where  are  the  codfish 
taken?— A.  I  have  heard  fishermen  say  they  take  tliem  very  close  to  the 
shore.    I  don't  know  much  about  that  myself. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  annual  catch  of  the  American  cod-fishermen? 
_A.  I  could  not  give  an  average. 

Q.  Have  you  sufficient  knowledge  to  enable  you  to  give  a  fair  opinion 
about  it? — A.  I  bave  heard  some  say  thej'  used  to  make  two  trips  some 
years. 

'  Q.  Do  you  know  what  they  took  per  trip? — A.  I  could  not  say  exactly 
what  they  took. 

Q.  You  catch  mackerel  to  some  extent  for  bait;  is  it  used  to  any  ma- 
terial extent  for  bait  ? — A.  It  is. 

Q.  As  much  as  herring? — A.  Not  exactly  as  much  as  herring.  At 
certain  seasons — in  .July  for  instance — it  is  mostly  mackerel  we  use. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  are  they  taken? — A.  Quite  close 
to  the  shore;  about  half,  three-quarters,  or  a  mile  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  the  Commission  why  the  mackerel  go  close  inshore; 
oil  what  do  they  feed  ? — A.  On  shrimp. 

Q.  It  is  close  inshore?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is  the  shrimp  which  take  the  mackerel  there? — A. 
It  is  supposed  that  this  is  what  takes  them  there. 

Q.  The  Americans  follow  the  mackerel  fishing  to  a  large  extciifc  on 
your  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  have  done  so  for  many  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Does  your  recollection  cover  the  period  during  which  the  Reci- 
procity Treaty  Avas  in  force? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  the  Commission  how  many  American  vessels  were 
ia  the  habit  of  frequenting  your  coast  during  the  existence  of  the  Reci- 
ciprocity  Treaty? — A.  I  should  say  fn  m  300  to  400. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  a  large  number  of  them  at  one  time? — A.  As 
many  as  150  sail  in  Perce  at  one  time. 

Q.  You  put  the  number  of  American  mackerel  vessels  cruising  off 
your  coast  at  from  300  to  400? — A.  There  may  have  been  more. 

Q.  These  vessels  are  distinct  and  separate  from  the  cod  fishing  ves- 
sels?—A.  Yes;  perhaps  there  may  have  been  500. 

Q.  Did  the  number  continue  the  same  after  the  Reciprocity  Treaty 
was  abolished  ?— A.  No;  the  number  fell  off. 

(}.  What  effect  had  the  presence  of  the  cutters  ? — A.  We  did  not  see 
so  many. 

Q.  Did  the  Americans  keep  offshore  altogether  when  the  cutters  were 
about?— A.  No. 

Q.  How  did  they  act  then  ? — A.  Thej'  came  in  when  the  cutters  were 
away;  they  watched  the  cutters. 

<t*-  Where  do  thoy  generally  catch  the  fish  ?  You  could  see  where 
they  fished  ? — A.  Within  three  miles. 

Q.  How  clo.se  to  the  shore? — A.  1  saw  thoin  fish  within  liaUa  mile. 

^].  Where  would  thoy  generally  catch  their  lish '' — A.  Within  tliree 
miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Did  they  catch  them  well  within  the  throe  miles  or  close  to  the 
ctljte?— A.  Close  in  the  three  miles.  Mo.st  of  them  wore  caught  inside  <>t 
tliroe  miles. 

<t>.  Do  yon  wish  the  Commission  to  understand  that  they  were  caught 


Hi 


m 


% 


!'  ■  <« 


In  1 
.1  • 

it  «■ 

"t'  il 


790 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


near  tbe  edfje  of  tbe  three  miles  or  close  in  to  tbe  shore  ?— A.  Within 
one  mile  of  the  shore. 

Q.  The  bulk  of  tbe  fish  was  taken  there  ? — A.  The  largest  quantity 
of  fish  was  taken  within  three  miles  from  the  shore. 

Q.  What  proportion  would  be  so  taken? — A.  1  sboulil  say  about 
three-fourths. 

Q.  Does  the  same  rule  apply  along  tbe  south  coast  of  tbe  St.  Law- 
rence from  Cape  Chatte  to  Gaspe  ? — A.  They  are  mostly  all  talieu  within 
three  miles  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Are  any  taken  outside  ? — A.  None,  from  what  I  hear. 

Q.  What  time  of  the  year  have  you  mackerel  on  your  coast  ?— A. 
They  generally  commence  in  July.  July,  August,  and  September  are 
the  three  principal  months. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  in  conversation  with  American  captains?— A, 
I  have ;  I  have  been  on  board  their  vessels  and  talked  to  tboni  about 
their  catches  and  the  season  they  take  them. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  made  an  estimate  of  the  average  catch  of  these 
mackerel  vessels  ? — A.  As  far  as  I  could  judge  they  would  take  about 
600  or  700  barrels  per  season  on  an  average. 

Q.  Have  you  known  them  take  more? — A.  I  take  it  in  this  way; 
Many  of  them  make  two  trips,  I  have  heard  them  say,  and  they  are 
vessels  which  would  take  from  350  to  400  barrels  each  trip,  and  in  some 
cases  more. 

Q.  What  is  the  ordinary  tonnage  of  American  mackerel  schooners 
nowadays  ? — A.  I  should  say  they  would  average  about  70  tons. 

Q.  Are  they  not  larger  than  they  used  to  be? — A.  I  think  they  are 
larger. 

Q.  Would  they  range  about  100  tons? — A.  I  have  seen  some  li!0 
tons. 

Q.  You  put  the  catch  of  eacli  vessel  at  about  700  barrels,  taking  tbe 
fleet  through  ?— A.  From  G50  to  700  barrels. 

Q.  Where  do  you  send  your  codfish  ? — A.  To  the  Brazils,  Italy,  Portu- 
gal, and  Spain. 

Q.  You  don't  send  finy  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  To  my  knowleilge, 
two  small  cargoes  were  sent  from  Perce. 

Q.  When  was  that? — A.  In  1868.    They  were  sent  to  Boston. 

Q.  Was  the  fish  prepared  for  that  market  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  was  mostly 
green  fish. 

Q.  Was  the  venture  successful  ? — A.  Tbe  result  was  not  very  lavora- 
able,  and  I  understand  from  the  merchants  they  did  not  realize  for  tlie 
f^li  what  they  get  at  the  port  of  (Quebec. 

Q.  They  found  it  unprofitable  ? — A.  It  did  not  pay  them  at  all. 

Q.  I  believe  it  is  understood  that  your  foreign  trade  with  roitugal, 
Italy,  and  the  Brazils  does  pay  ? — A.  Yes ;  the  price  is  from  $4  to  JJS 
per  quintal. 

Q.  Then  there  is  not  much  chance  of  opening  a  market  in  the  United 
States,  even  if  you  have  a  free  market  there? — A.  1  do  not  see  it  is  any 
advantage  to  send  our  fish  to  that  market. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  any  Canadian  vessel  going  to  American 
waters  to  catch  fish  ? — A.  I  never  heard  of  any. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  American  mackerel  fleet  could  prosecute  tlio  fish- 
eries on  our  coasts  if  they  were  excluded  from  fishing  within  tbe  three- 
mile  limits? — A.  They  could  not. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  of  it? — A.  I  have  not  much  donbt,  because 
I  know  most  of  the  bait  is  taken  inshore,  and  thoy  would  not  be  able  to 
do  without  bait. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


791 


By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  What  was  the  year  when  you  saw  100  mackerel  vessels  at  Perce  ? — 
A.  I  could  not  exactly  say ;  eight  or  nine  years  ago. 

(}.  From  that  time  the  number  has  been  decreasing? — A.  Yes. 

q.  Steadily  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Until  it  has  got  down  to  very  few  ? — A.  Very  few ;  I  have  not  seen 
any  this  year. 

Q.  You  never  had  any  mackerel  flshiug  by  your  own  people  in  your 
vicinity "?— A.  No. 

Q.  Uas  the  cod-fishing  business  grown   better  or  worse,  larger  or 
smaller,  during  the  last  ten  years  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  something  better. 

Q.  You  have  an  abundant  supply  of  bait  ? — A.  Y'es,  there  is  a  very 
good  supply  this  year. 

Q.  And  for  ten  years  past  the  business  has  been  improving  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  And  so  has  the  condition  of  your  people,  1  suppose  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  And  so  with  the  men  engaged  in  the  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  not  suffered  anything  in  the  cod-fishing  business  vet  ? — 
A.  Xo. 

No.  36. 


y  to  Aiiiei'icau 


JosEni  Couture,  fisherman.  Cape  Despair,  Gasp^',  called  on  behalf  of 
the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

(This  witness  gave  his  evidence  in  French,  which  was  translated  by 
Mr.  Doutre.) 

To  Mr.  Doutre : 

I  am  forty-two  years  of  age.  I  live  at  Cape  Despair,  in  the  county  of 
Gaspe.  I  am  a  fisherman,  and  at  present  employ  men  in  the  fishing 
business.  This  fishery  is  carried  on  along  the  coast  from  one  to  three 
miles  from  the  shore,  and  also  on  Miscou  Bank.  The  Americans  fish 
there.  I  have  seen  as  many  as  forty  sail  fishing  there  at  the  same  time. 
The  Americans  procure  their  bait  along  and  near  the  coast.  This  bait 
consists  of  herring,  caplin,  and  squid.  The  cod-fishery  cannot  be  prose- 
cuted to  advantage  with  salt  bait.  The  Americans  cannot  bring  with 
them  to  Miscou  Bank  a  sufficient  supply  of  bait.  In  1857  I  fished  in  an 
American  schooner  called  the  Maria.  I  do  not  remember  her  captain's 
mme.  The  schooner  was  fitted  out  at  and  started  from  Tortland.  Dur- 
ing the  first  three  mouths  of  the  voyage  we  fished  for  cod  along  Cape 
Breton,  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  Miscou  Bank.  At  Cape  Breton  we 
took  the  cod  at  distances  of  from  a  mile  to  a  mile  and  a  half  from  the 
!«!!ore.  We  fished  at  about  the  same  distance  from  the  shore  at  the  Mag- 
(liileii  Islands.  We  took  330  quintals  of  cod.  We  caught  about  three- 
quarters  of  our  load  within  three  nules  of  the  coast  off  Cape  Breton  and 
the  ]\Iagdalen  Island,  and  the  remainder  at  Miscou  Bank.  We  procured 
our  bait  on  the  Cape  Breton  shore.  \\'e  went  back  to  Portland  and 
unloaded  our  cargo,  and  left  for  a  trip  for  mackerel.  We  caught  mack- 
erel off  Prince  Edward  Island,  all  within  two  miles  of  the  shore.  We 
fished  exclusively  off  Prince  Edward  Island,  between  East  Point  and 
West  Point.  We  caught  200  barrels.  The  vessel  was  of  about  04  tons. 
We  took  some  of  our  bait  from  Portland,  and  wo  caught  the  remainder 
where  we  were  fishing,  off  the  Island.  Over  450  American  schooners 
were  there  fishing  for  mackerel  in  the  Bay  of  Saint  Lawrence.  The  ton- 
nage of  these  vessels  would  run  from  35  to  130  tons.  Stormy  weather 
takes  the  mackerel  off  shore  into  deep  water,  and  the  fishermen  follow 
them  there  sometimes.  When  fine  weather  returns  the  fish  come  back 
near  the  coast.    A  vessel  of  70  tons  requires  a  load  of  between  450  and 


«   , 

ill 


II 


« 1 

I 

ll 


U' 


792 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


500  barrels.  I  state  that  tbis  is  tbe  load  geuerally  taken  by  such  a 
vessel  from  my  o\;vn  observation  and  tbe  conversation  I  have  bad  with 
fishermen  on  tbe  subject. 

Those  who  only  fish  for  mackerel  make  at  least  two  trips  a  season, 
and  some  make  three  trips.  If  a  vessel  of  70  tons  were  loaded  to  its  lull 
capacity,  it  would  carry  each  trip  from  450  to 500  barrels;  but  tlioy  aic 
not  always  fully  loaded.  If  the  Americans  were  excluded  from  coming 
within  tbe  three-mile  limit,  either  as  respects  fisbing  or  tbe  securing  oi 
bait,  it  would  not  pay  tbem  to  come  to  our  shores  to  fish.  Some  Britisli 
subjects  may  have  been  employ  ed  on  American  vessels  in  American 
waters,  but  I  never  heard  of  any  Canadian  or  other  British  subject 
going  to  American  waters  to  flsh  on  his  own  account.  I  do  not  think 
tbat  it  would  be  any  advantage  to  British  subjects  to  go  and  lisb  there. 
Large  establishments  are  engaged  in  prosecuting  the  cod-fishery  on  the 
coast  of  Gasp«3.  They  do  not  send  vessels  to  the  banks  of  Newfound- 
land to  flsh  for  cod.  The  larger  part  of  tbe  cod  taken  by  these  estab 
lishments  is  caught  witbm  three  miles  of  the  coast,  Miscou  bank  ex- 
cepted in  this  relation.  Three  quarters  of  the  cod  caught  in  tbe  Gulf 
are,  in  my  opinion,  taken  within  three  miles  of  tbe  shore ;  I  refer  in  this 
regard  to  the  catch  throughout  tbe  Gulf.  Those  engaged  on  American 
fishing  vessels  consider  tbat  they  bave  a  good  season  if  they  realize  each 
during  it  $400 ;  but  to  do  so  they  must  be  uu<ler  an  intelligent  captain. 
I  DOW  am  speaking  of  men  who  work  on  sbares,  under  which  system 
they  get  one-half  of  all  they  catch.  Such  a  man  would  obtain  tbis  $400, 
exclusive  of  his  maintenance,  wbich  is  at  tbe  charge  of  the  owner.  The 
mackerel  feed  on  shrimps,  lantz,  and  cbevrettes,  which  generally  keep 
near  the  shore  in  fair  weatber.  Like  other  flsb,  during  stormy  weather 
they  go  off  shore.  The  fact  of  their  presence  near  the  shore  explains 
why  the  fish  are  caught  within  a  short  distance  of  it,  as  tbey  are 
attracted  in  near  the  shore  in  search  of  such  food. 

To  Mr.  Teescot  : 

We  took  some  barrels  of  bait  from  Portland.  This  bait  consisted  of 
clams,  to  be  mixed  with  other  bait.  I  do  not  know  where  the  bait  wbich 
was  taken  from  Portland  is  generally  caught. 

No.  37. 


Friday,  Augmt  24, 1877. 


The  conference  met. 


T.  J.  Lamontaigne,  fish-merchant,  St.  Anne  des  Monts,  Province  of 
Quebec,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 
Question.  You  come  from  Cape  Chatte? — Answer.  I  have  a  fishing 
establishment  at  Cape  Cbatte,  but  I  reside  at  St.  Anne  des  Monts. 
Q.  Tbat  is  8  or  9  miles  from  Cape  Chatte  ? — A.  About  10  miles. 
In  wbat  business  are  you  engaged  ? — A.  In  tbe  cod-fishing  busi 


Q. 

ness. 

Q. 
Q. 


Exclusively  cod-fishing  ?-^A.  Yes. 

How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  the  fishing  business?— A. 
Since  the  spring  of  1859. 

Q.  Along  what  part  of  the  coast  has  your  fishing  business  extended  ?— 
A.  From  Cape  Cbatte  downwards  as  far  as  ten  miles  l»elo\v  St.  Anno 
des  Monts.    About  20  mile^  alon;;  tli<'  oust. 


busiuess  ?— A. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


793 


Q,  What  do  you  do  with  your  flsh  ? — A.  I  dry  it  and  send  it  to  market. 

(}.  Where  do  you  send  your  fish  ? — A.  Most  of  it  is  sunt  to  Italy,  and 
some  of  it  to  the  Brazils. 

Q.  Do  you  send  any  portion  to  the  United  States  .'—A.  None  what- 
ever. 

Q.  Why? — A.  Because  it  would  not  pay  to  send  it  to  the  United 
States. 

Q.  Ifave  you  made  inquiry  on  that  subject  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  found  it  would  not  puy  ? — A.  We  found  it  would  not  pay. 

Q.  Is  any  portion  sold  in  the  Dominion  t — A.  Simo  of  it.  Some  {jreen 
tisU  is  sent  to  Quebec  and  Montreal  markets,  and  what  is  called  table- 
tisb. 

Q.  You  are  acquainted  with  the  trade  all  around  the  north  shore  of 
Gaspe  and  down,  I  suppose,  to  the  Bay  of  Gaspo  ? — A.  I  have  been 
several  times  in  those  places,  ami  have  bad  communications  with  some 
of  the  merchants  there. 

Q.  Take  from  Cape  Chatte  to  Gasp(5,  alonpr  the  south  shore,  what  is 
the  average  annual  export  each  year  of  tish ;  I  refer  to  codfish  and  liue- 
lisli?— A.  From  my  place  down  to  Cape  Gaspti  there  will  be  2.5,000  quin- 
tals, at  least  of  dried  fish,  exported. 

Q.  Taking  the  whole  Gasp^  shore  M'hat  would  you  say? — A.  I  should 
think  not  less  than  from  180,000  to  200,000  quintals  of  dried  fish. 

Q.  What  is  the  value  per  quintal  previous  to  exportation  ? — A.  They 
sbouUl  not  bo  worth  less  than  $.j  per  quintal. 

Q.  How  are  these  flsh  taken ;  by  vessels  or  boats  ? — A.  By  boats. 

Q.  Are  they  taken  with  hook  and  line? — A.  Yes.  What  we  take  on 
our  coast  are  all  taken  with  boats  and  with  hook  and  line. 

Q.  You  don't  use  trawls? — A.  In  our  part  of  the  river  we  never  use 
trawls. 

Q.  What  is  the  eflfect  of  trawl-fishing,  so  far  as  you  are  aware? — A.  I 
think  it  is  very  disastrous  to  the  flsh  especially  to  large  fish. 

Q.  Why? — A.  Because  the  large  fish  are  consiuered  to  be  the  spawn- 
ing flsh,  at  least  as  far  as  it  is  within  uiy  knowledge  and  ability  to  ascer- 
tain. 

Q.  It  kills  the  mother-fish? — A.  Trawls  take  the  bottom-fish,  which 
are  the  large  fish. 

Q.  Cod-trawlers  take  many  fish  which  they  do  not  use  ? — A.  I  believe 
a  few  small  fish  are  taken,  but  they  are  mostly  large  fish. 

Q.  What  do  fishermen  say  as  to  the  effect  of  throwing  overboard  gur- 
ry on  the  fishing-grounds? — A.  I  never  heard  many  fishermen  complain 
of  it,  except  that  the  gurry  takes  the  fish  from  them. 

Q.  Is  all  the  fish  of  which  you  have  spoken  along  Gaspd  shore  taken 
far  out  from  shore  or  close  in  ? — A.  Close  in  shore. 

Q.  Within  what  distance  of  the  shore  ? — A.  From  one  to  two  miles, 
never  outside  of  two  miles,  on  our  part  of  the  coast. 

Q.  Over  in  the  center  of  the  river  Saint  Lawrence  is  there  any  fish  ? — 
A.  Onr  fishermen  have  tried  to  get  fish  there,  but  never  could  find  auj' 
outside  of  three  miles. 

Q.  Do  j'ou  find  the  fish  outside  of  two  miles? — A.  No. 

Q.  Out  in  the  middle  of  the  river  there  are  no  fish  at  all  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Is  the  fishing  on  the  north  shore  of  the  river,  ojiposite  to  where 
you  reside,  and  from  there  down  to  the  Bay  of  Seven  Islands,  as  good 
as  any  on  >our  side  of  the  river? — A.  Generally  so;  the  fish  get  there 
later,  but  the  Ashing  is  generally  as  good. 

Q.  The  fish  strike  into  the  south  shore  first? — A.  Yes. 

^l  And  afterwards  cross  the  river  ? — A.  Y'es. 


•i  i!i:.i!S 

ir 


''it 

mi 


i!  J 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


/y 


4r   *<V 


1.0 


1.1 


l^iUl    |2.S 

|50     "^^       HKV 


■  40 


1.25  1  ,.4 

r 

-< 6"     - 

► 

y] 


y^ 


o: 


> 


7J 


/A 


''U 


Photographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


33  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  MStO 

(716)  S72-4S03 


\ 


iV 


% 

'^ 


<> 


6^ 


^.V^ 


'^ 


794 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  fish  do  you  refer  to !— A.  Cod. 

Q.  What  time  do  the  cod  strike  on  your  coast  T — A.  In  June. 

Q.  How  long  do  tbey  stay  ;' — A.  Generally  all  through  June,  and  they 
go  over  in  July  to  the  north  shore.  Our  best  fishing  is  in  June,  after 
which  the  fish  go  over  to  the  north  shore,  when  the  fishing  there  is  aa 
good  as  it  is  with  us  in  June. 

Q.  Is  your  fishing  during  July,  August,  and  September  generally 
good  f — A.  The  fish  are  not  qaite  so  abundant,  but  there  is  alwuyH  fair 
fishing  during  the  season. 

Q.  How  many  boats  are  employed  in  the  district  you  speak  of,  twenty 
miles  from  Cape  Cbatte  downward  T — A.  I  should  say  from  2UU  to  2oU 
boats  at  least. 

Q.  How  many  men  would  they  employ  ? — A.  There  are  generally  two 
men  to  each  boat. 

Q.  Do  the  mackerel  come  in  there  as  well  as  cod  f — A.  Yes,  gener- 
ally. 

Q.  I  believe  you  don't  fish  for  mackerel  ? — A.  We  do  not. 

Q.  You  never  turned  your  attention  to  mackerel  fishing  ?— A.  Not 
except  for  bait. 

Q.  Yon  find  the  codfishing  pay  better  f — A.  Yes,  that  is  the  reason ; 
we  have  enough  to  do  with  the  codfishing  business. 

Q.  Are  mackerel  plentiful  this  year  ? — A.  Yes,  on  our  coast  they  are 
quite  plentiful. 

Q.  Have  you  any  halibut  on  your  coast  ? — A.  Not  at  present. 

Q.  What  is  the  reason  f — A.  We  attribute  it  to  the  Americans  lish- 
ing  for  halibut  on  our  coast. 

Q.  What  time  did  they  fish  ? — A.  About  August. 

Q.  What  years  did  they  come  there  f — A.  From  1856  to  18GC  aud 
1870,  as  near  as  I  can  remember. 

Q.  In  18Ci^,  the  Beciprocity  Treaty  came  to  an  end ;  did  the  Americans 
fish  for  halibnt  there  in  1870 1 — A.  I  could  not  say  exactly  the  year,  but 
I  am  sure  ^hey  fished  there. 

Q.  Did  they  fish  after  the  abrogation  of  the  Beciprocity  Treaty  in 
1866?— A.  The  Americans  did  fish  there. 

Q.  Was  halibut  taken  within  two  miles  of  the  shore? — A.  Near  the 
shore. 

Q.  The  Americans  came  in  after  the  Beciprocity  Treaty  was  abro- 
gated, did  they  ? — A.  I  believe  they  did. 

Q.  And  they  cleaned  out  the  halibut  f — A.  Fishermen  all  a;^ree  iu 
saying  that  they  took  away  all  the  halibut  on  our  coast. 

Q.  They  all  agree  that  the  Americans  spoiled  the  halibut  fishing  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  any  one  on  your  part  of  the  coa^t  try  the  experiment  of  send- 
ing fish  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  Not  iti  our  part.  I  have  heard  of  a 
firm  sending  cargoes  to  the  United  States. 

Q.  What  firm  t — A.  Leboutillier  Bros. 

Q.  They  tried  the  experiment? — A.  They  lost  money  by  it. 

Q.  To  what  extent  is  fish  exported  from  your  part  of  the  coast  to  Que- 
bec aud  Montreal? — A.  It  is  pretty  considerable.  The  dried-fish  trade 
terminates  in  August,  and  the  green  fish  is  taken  up  to  Quebec  after 
that.  I  should  think  the  quantity  of  green  cod  and  table  fish  would 
amount  to  about  25,000  barrels  caught  on  the  coast  of  Gaspu  and  sent 
to  Quebec  and  Montreal  markets.  There  is  a  quantity  of  draught  fish 
besides  the  barrels.  I  should  think  from  10,000  to  15,000  quintals  of 
large  draught  fish  go  up  to  the  markets  of  Quebec  and  Montreal  besides 
the  25,000  barrels  of  green  fish. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


795 


is  the  reason ; 
coast  tbey  are 


5  to  18GG  aud 


Q.  Why  do  you  call  them  draught  fish  T — A.  They  are  large  greeu 
fish. 

Q.  Does  it  pay  better  to  seud  them  to  Quebec  and  Montreal  than  to 
dry  them  aud  scud  them  to  Brazil  and  Spain  f — A.  It  does  with  the 
large  tisb,  because  they  are  difficult  to  dry  at  that  late  baason. 

Q.  When  does  that  season  begin  ! — A.  In  iSeptember ;  it  is  then  too 
late  to  dry  large  green  fish. 

Q.  Up  to  tbet  time  you  dry  the  small  fish  for  the  markets  of  Brazil, 
the  West  luiitcs,  and  Mediterranean  ports  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  the  trade  with  Montreal,  Quebec,  and  other  parts  of  the  Domin- 
ion a  paying  trade  ! — A.  Generally  so. 

Q.  Does  it  pay  as  well  as  the  export  trade  to  foreign  markets  f — A. 
Not  (|uite  as  well. 

Q.  In  point  of  fact,  for  all  the  fish  you  can  catch  on  your  coast  yon 
have  ample  m.^rkets  without  the  United  States  f — A.  Yes ',  wo  have 
alnays  found  a  ready  market  so  far. 

By  Mr.  Trescot : 

Q.  As  I  understand,  you  belong  to  what  is  generally  knowu  as  a  Jersey 
firm  f— A.  I  don't  belong  to  a  Jersey  firm. 

Q.  The  sort  of  business  you  do  is  that  of  curing  fish  hard  and  sending 
them  to  the  Brazils,  Spain,  and  Portugal  markets  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  regard  to  that  business  at  Gaspu  and  the  neighborhood,  the 
business  has  materially  increased  from  year  to  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  a  profitable  business f — A.  Yes;  it  is  a  pretty  good  business. 

Q.  There  has  been  no  competition  by  American  fishermen  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Tbey  don't  interfere  with  your  markets  f — A.  Not  in  our  part  of 
the  country. 

Q.  So  that  if  the  treaty  of  1871  did  not  give  you  any  great  advantages, 
it  has  not  imposed  any  disadvantage  upon  you ;  you  have  neither  gained 
nor  lost  as  far  as  your  trade  is  concerned  ? — A.  Not  that  I  can  see  at 
this  moment. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  mode  in  which  you  prepare  your  fish  and  the 
Bl)ecial  market  you  have,  the  trade  may  almusc  be  considered  as  a  mo- 
nopoly, aud  you  don't  think  it  worth  while  to  leave  that  trade  to  enter 
into  trade  with  the  United  States  and  to  prepare  fish  in  another  way 
for  that  market? — A.  Because  we  have  always  been  under  the  impres- 
sion that  it  would  not  pay. 

Q.  You  say  you  send  some  of  the  large  cod  up  to  Quebec  and  Mon- 
treal ;  tbey  are  lightly  sulttMl  ? — A.  They  are  green  fish. 

Q.  That  is  a  recently-established  business,  is  it  not  t — A.  No,  we  have 
always  prepared  the  fish  in  the  same  w«iy. 

Q.  Have  yon  ever  attempted  to  send  those  cod  into  the  United 
States?— A.  No. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  it  probable  that  a  market  for  them  could  bo  found 
in  the  United  States,  though  a  market  cannot  be  found  there  for  hard- 
salted  cod  t — A.  We  have  always  found  a  ready  market  elsewhere  for 
our  tlsb. 

Q.  Hut  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  you  sending  these  fish  to  the 
United  States? — A.  If  the  market  was  better  in  the  United  States  we 
would  try  it. 

Q.  The  thing  has  not  been  attempted  ? — A.  No  ;  for  the  good  reason 
I  have  stated. 

Q.  That  you  find  a  ready  market  for  all  your  fish  T — A.  Y'^es. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  mackerel  fishing,  it  is  a  very  uncertain  busi* 
ne88?-A.  Sometimes. 


Hi 


796 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Is  not  this  a  true  statement  of  wbat  the  mackerel  fishery  is  ?  I 
read  from  Mr.  Lavoie : 

Of  all  tho  fisb  which  frequent  Cnnadian  waters,  there  is  none,  I  dare  say,  upon  the 
regnlar  appearance  of  which  so  little  rdlianoe  can  be  placed  as  on  inaclcerel,  exueptitifr 
always  Magdalen  Islands,  where  they  repair  every  spring  and  sninmer  in  smaller  or 
larger  numbers,  so  fond  are  they  of  these  imrticular  shores.  Mackerel  was  ahuiidant 
for  several  years  in  Bay  de  Chaleurs,  Gasp<^  Hay,  and  Seven  Islands.  Car^roes  of  tlii» 
lish  were  to  be  caught  at  Godbout,  Cape  Chatte,  and  Mccatina,  but  this  year  a  few 
only  were  taken  in  herring  nets  and  used  as  bait  for  cod.  Mackerel  were,  howevi-r,  an 
abundant  as  ever  in  Magdalen  Islands,  and  if  the  quantity  caught  is  not  up  to  la.tt 
year's  mark,  this  is  due  to  the  appearance  of  animalculiii  which  floated  on  the  Hiir- 
face  of  the  water,  and  which  mackerel  appeared  to  be  fonder  of  than  bait.  Tiiesc  Mi 
usnally  enter  our  Avaters  about  the  middle  of  July,  and  leave  them  only  towards  the 
end  of  October.  Not  a  single  barrel  of  mackerel  was  caught  on  the  North  sliore  tluH 
season  ;  the  statistics  of  last  year  showed  32  barrels.  In  1874, 1,322  barrels  were  caught 
on  the  coast  of  Gasp6,  last  year  75  barrels,  and  this  year  none  at  all. 

So  there  are  reasons,  besides  the  presence  of  the  Americans,  why 
you  don't  catch  mackerel  always  in  that  neighborhood? — A.  I  say  our 
fishermen  do  not  give  their  attention  to  it;  tliat  they  do  not  care  about 
the  mackerel  fishery. 

Q.  You  were  asked  as  to  the  effect  of  trawling  or  usiug  bill  tows  on 
the  fisheries,  and  you  said  you  thought  it  was  very  injurious  ?--A.  It 
is,  in  my  opinion,  from  wbat  I  have  heard  stated  by  the  tishermeu  them- 
selves. 

Q.  I  find  in  this  report  of  Mr.  Lavoie,  he  says : 

Several  complaints  were  made  before  me,  so  that  I  was  reluctantly  compelled  to  ab- 
solutely forbid  bultow  fishing  within  the  prescribed  limit  of  three  miles,  and  to 
threaten  with  fines  those  who  should  violate  this  regulation.  Although  I  caiiuot  pos- 
sibly understand  what  difference  there  can  be  in  fishing  with  these  lines  at  a  distance 
of  1  or  2  miles  from  shore,  when  none  is  found  in  there  being  used  all  round  tiie  I8land8 
inside  the  bays.  Such  of  the  fishermen  who  are  not  provided  with  these  Hues  com- 
plain of  their  use,  and  give  no  reason  to  justify  their  pretensions.  So  far  as  my  own 
opinion  is  concerned ,  I  think,  far  from  prohibiting  these  fishing  engines,  they  should 
be  encouraged  in  certain  places. 

You  don't  agree  with  that  ? — A.  No. 
By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  In  your  opinion  the  statement  of  Mr.  Lavoie  is  sheer  nonsense  ?— 
A.  Mr.  Lavoie  is  a  physician.  Like  some  lawyers,  he  does  not  know 
what  fishing  is. 

Q.  Your  people  do  not  prosecute  the  mackerel  fishery  f — A.  No,  they 
tried  it  for  one  year  and  found  it  would  not  pay  them. 

Q.  Whether  Mr.  Lavoie  is  correct  or  not  you  do  not  know  and  do  not 
care  1 — A.  Quite  so.  Generally  our  fishermen  take  a  few  mackerel  for 
the  winter,  for  their  own  winter's  stock. 

Q.  And  use  the  rest  they  take  for  'ait? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  These  are  important  fish  for  bait  purposes  ? — A.  Yes,  mackerel  is 
considered  a  good  bait  for  (ish. 

Q.  This  trade  you  have  with  Montreal  and  Quebec  is  not  a  recent  one, 
but  has  existed  as  long  as  you  have  had  auything  to  do  with  the  fisiiing 
business? — A.  Since  I  have  been  on  the  coast,  I  have  always  known 
table  and  green  cod  sent  to  Montreal  and  Quebec. 

Q.  If  you  have  a  good  market  near  home  you  prefer  to  go  there  instead 
of  going  to  another  market  where  you  cannot  do  so  well  ? — A.  Yes,  no 
doubt. 

Q.  You  are  not  in  the  same  position  as  American  fishermen ;  yon 
have  a  good  n)arket  and  the  flsh  at  your  own  doors  ? — A.  We  liuve 
always  got  the  fish,  any  amount  of  them. 

Mr.  TuESCOT.  As  you  think  Mr.  Lavoie's  testimony,  he  being  a  pliysi 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


797 


—A.  Ko,  they 


ciaD,  ia  uot  important,  I  will  read  you  an  extract  from  a  report  by  Mr. 
Whitclier: 

Setting  bultows  or  trawls  for  codfish  is  represented  to  bo  a  practice  injurious  to 
tbe  tislierieM,  und  bus,  on  that  iicoount,  been  petitioned  against.  Tlie  department  has 
inquired  into  this  mode  of  tishin^  as  practiced  at  various  localities,  but  has  not  yet 
fouuil  sutHcient  reason  fur  interfering  with  it  to  tlic  extent  of  prohibition. 

Q.  As  to  fishing  after  18G6,  just  after  tlie  abrogation  of  tbe  Recipro- 
city Treaty,  are  you  not  aware  that  from  186G  to  1869  our  flslienuen 
tithed  with  licenses  f — A.  Yes,  some  tooic  out  license  and  some  evaded  it. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  Did  not  a  large  majority,  more  than  one-half,  of  the  American 
fishermen  tish  without  licenses? — A.  I  have  always  been  under  the  im- 
pression that  the  largest  part  of  the  schooners  evaded  taking  out  licenses, 
liotn  what  I  have  heard  from  the  captains  themselves. 

Q.  In  18C7,  the  year  in  which  most  of  the  licenses  were  taken  out,  did 
more  than  one-half  of  the  American  vessels  take  out  licenses  ? — A.  I 
cannot  tell  you  whether  half  the  vessels  did  so ;  but  I  am  under  the 
impression,  from  what  tbe  captains  have  told  me,  that  they  did  not  care 
about  taking  out  licenses,  and.  that  they  could  do  without  them. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 
Q.  Do  you  ever  take  to  Montreal  and  Quebec  fish  prepared  in  the 
same  way  as  that  prepared  for  tropical  markets,  the  West  Indies,  Bra- 
zil, and  elsewhere? — A.  No;  we  do  not  take  to  Montreal  and  Quebec 
tish  prepared  in  the  mode  for  warm  climates.  Wo  take  large,  green  fish 
to  those  markets. 

No.  38. 

John  Short,  M.  P.,  Gaspe,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of 
Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined : 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  What  is  your  occupation  ? — Answer.  I  represent  the  county 
of  Gaspe  in  the  Dominion  house  of  commons. 

Q.  Have  you  been  engaged  in  the  tishery  business  for  a  number  of 
years? — A.  For  about  eight  years  I  have  been  directly  interested  in  the 
tishiug  business. 

Q.  At  what  establishment? — A.  At  the  eMtablishment  of  John  Lebou- 
tillier. 

Q.  Is  that  one  of  the  largest  Jersey  houses  ? — A.  It  was  one  of  the 
largest  Jersey  houses. 

Q.  Did  your  business  bring  you  into  connection  with  fishermen,  by 
which  you  obtained  an  acquaintance  and  knowledge  of  the  fishery  busi- 
ness !— A.  Yes,  a  thorough  knowledge. 

Q.  Over  what  extent  does  your  knowledge  extend  and  enable  you  to 
speak  ?— A.  He  had  one  establishment  at  St.  Ann's  de  Monts,  another 
at  Griffin's  Cove,  another  at  Perce,  and  the  chief  place  of  business  at 
Gasp<3  Basin.    That  would  be  along  a  coast-line  of  about  200  miles. 

Q.  How  many  boats  are  employed  along  that  extent  of  coast  ? — A.  I 
could  not  state  positively. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  an  estimate  of  the  quantity  of  flsU 
taicen  by  your  fishermen  annually  along  the  coast? — A.  From  Cape 
Gbatto  to  New  Bichmond  the  catch  would  be  about  100,000  quintals. 

Q.  Where  is  New  Bichmond  ? — A.  On  Bay  Chaleurs.  There  is  Anti- 
costi  and  the  north  shore  of  the  St.  Lawrence,  from  Mount  Joli  north- 


798 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


westward,  which  will  give  100,000  quintals,  making,  together,  200,000 
quintals. 

Q.  The  north  shore  of  the  St.  Lawrence  and  Anticosti  will  give  100,000 
quintals  ? — A.  Yes,  with  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fish  is  taken  ? — A.  Codfish  chiefly.  Herring  is  tbe 
next  catch  in  quantity  and  importance. 

Q.  You  don't  flsh  mackerel  to  any  extent  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  don't  go  into  it  for  the  purposes  of  trade! — A.  No  we  tiud 
the  codflshery  more  remunerative. 

Q.  What  is  the  value  of  those  200,000  quintals  of  flsh  !— A.  The  coast- 
value  is  about  $5  per  quintal,  which  would  give  a  value  of  $1,000,000. 
The  market-value  is  higher  ;  it  ranges  from  $5  to  $8  per  quintal. 

Q.  How  far  are  those  flsh  taken  from  shore  by  the  fishermen  ?  Take 
the  north  shore. — A.  Principally  and  nearly  altogether  inshore. 

Q.  Now  take  the  south  shore. — A.  From  Cape  Chatte  to  Cape  Gas]M' 
they  are  all  taken  inshore,  and  from  Cape  Gasp6  to  New  Bichmond  tlie 
greater  portion  is  taken  inshore ;  some  are  taken  on  Banks. 

Q.  How  much? — A.  One  quarter,  I  suppose. 

Q.  So  that  nine-tenths  of  the  whole  catch  are  taken  inshore  ?— A.  Yes. 
When  the  flsh  are  not  inshore,  and  the  flshermen  fail  to  catch  tliem, 
they  go  out  to  the  Banks ;  but  that  is  the  exception. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  flsh  for  cod  to  any  extent? — A.  On  the  IJanks 
they  do ;  not  inshore  to  any  extent. 

Q.  You  are  able  to  state  the  average  number  of  the  American  cod- 
fishing  fleet? — A.  I  don't  know  of  more  than  thirty  vessels. 

Q.  You  are  now  speaking  only  of  the  fleet  on  Miscou  Bank  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  know  the  number  of  the  fleet  in  the  whole  Saint  Law- 
rence ? — A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  There  are  thirty  on  Miscou  Bank  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Miscou  Bank  is  100  miles  from  the  shore,  1  believe  ? — A.  Not  so 
far ;  not  more  than  35  miles. 

Q.  Where  do  the  American  cod-flshermen  get  their  bait? — A.  Tliev 
get  a  great  quantity  from  the  inshore  fishery. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  catch  bait  ? — A.  1  have  seen  them  set  nets, 
but  not  take  them  up. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  that  they  do  catch  bait? — A.  I  have  not, 
They  often  draw  seines  to  shore  for  caplin  and  small  bait. 

Q.  Could  the  Americans  carry  on  the  deep-sea  cod-fishery  witlioiit 
that  bait  ? — A.  Not  with  success. 

Q.  You  are  quite  sure  about  that  ? — A.  Y^es ;  I  have  no  hesitation  in 
saying  it  could  not  be  carried  on. 

Q.  Will  you  state  to  the  Commission  the  number  of  the  Americau 
mackerel  fleet  which  frequented  the  coast  during  the  years  you  were  iii 
the  fishing  business  ? — A.  I  have  seen  myself  from  Gaspe  to  Point  Mac- 
ereau  about  150  sail.  I  have  seen  even  more  than  that  number,  but  I 
will  give  that  as  an  average.  From  Bay  Chaleurs  down  to  Cape  Cliatte 
and  around  Anticosti,  I  have  heard  from  the  Americans  of  about  400 
sail. 

Q.  That  number  of  vessels  frequent  the  localities  named  annually  ■— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  mean  that  that  number  would  include  the  fleet  about 
Prince  Edward  Island  and  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  I  don't  know  much  about 
that  fleet.  They  may  have  changed  ground,  but  I  am  not  aware  they 
did  so. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  of  the  localities  named  by  you  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  The  average  you  place  at  about  400  sail  ? — A.  Y'^es. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


799 


3n  the  IJanks 


Q.  Yoa  have  often  had  conversations  with  American  captains,  I  sup- 
pose !— A.  Yes,  very  often  ;  some  men  I  saw  year  after  year. 

Q.  You  have  tallied  with  them  about  the  result  of  the  season^g  work  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  any  estimate  of  the  average  annual 
catcli  of  these  vessels  f — A.  It  would  be  vr  jrely  an  estimate. 

Q.  From  what  they  have  told  you  ? — A.  Their  tonnage  would  run 
from  OU  to  120  tons.  [  would  average  it  at  about  75  tons.  In  estimat- 
ing the  catch,  I  could  not  place  it  at  more  than  700  barrels  per  season. 
Tbat  would  leave  a  large  margin  for  those  not  successful. 

Q.  To  what  countries  do  your  large  houses  export  the  codfish  taken 
by  your  fishermen  ? — A.  Principally  to  South  America,  Brazil  markets, 
Italy,  Spain,  West  Indies,  &c. 

Q.  Not  any  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  None  whatever. 

Q.  Can  you  explain  the  reason  ? — A.  In  the  first  place,  I  think  the  fish 
are  not  cured  in  a  manner  which  would  suit  the  American  markets ; 
tbey  are  dried  too  hard.  The  market  also  is  not  as  good,  and  the  mer- 
chants can  do  better  in  other  markets.  I  have  heard  that  some  have 
tried  the  American  market,  but  that  they  failed  to  make  it  profitable. 
In  one  instance  I  know  the  result  was  such  that  they  never  shipped 
again.    They  lost  money  by  transactions  both  on  codfish  and  herring. 

Q.  \  report  was  read  by  one  of  the  counsel  of  the  United  States  stat- 
ing a  very  ridiculously  small  number  of  mackerel  as  having  been  caught 
by  some  fishermen  on  our  coast;  you  don't  prosecute  the  mackerel  fishery 
at  all,  I  believe  ? — A.  No ;  except  for  bait. 

Q.  Y^ou  have  no  doubts  however,  that  mackerel  do  frequent  your 
coast  ? — A.  I  am  quite  positive  of  that.  They  are  abundant  there  this 
year. 

Q.  Mackerel  have  come  in  very  plentifully? — A.  Yes ;  in  every  direc- 
tion all  round  the  coast. 

Q.  Is  mackerel  used  largely  as  an  article  of  bait? — A.  While  they 
last,  and  can  be  caught,  entirely. 

Q.  But  they  are  not  caught  by  your  people  for  other  purposes? — A. 
Xo;  except  in  bays  where  cod-fisliing  is  not  prosecuted. 

Q.  So  the  catch  of  your  fishermen  along  the  coast  will  be  almost  nil 
in  the  article  of  mackerel  for  trade  pur[)oses  ? — A.  I  don't  suppose  more 
than  50  barrels  are  caught  for  sale. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  During  the  last  few  years  have  not  the  American  mackerel  fleet 
ceased  to  come  to  your  bay  ? — A.  They  have  not  ceased  to  come ;  they 
bave  diminished  to  a  great  extent,  not  ceased. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  have  you  known  to  be  there ;  we  will  take  1870 
for  example  ? — A.  I  should  say  that  on  the  same  ground  where  formerly 
tbere  were  400  vessels,  there  would  not  be  more  than  100  in  1870. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  are  100? — A.  Two  American  vessels  were  in 
our  port.  I  was  on  board  of  one,  and  that  was  what  the  captain  esti- 
mated as  the  number  there;  he  said  there  were  about  100  in  the  bay. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  the  bay? — A.  I  mean  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  captain's  name? — A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  Was  the  estimate  he  gave  you  that  there  were  100  American  ves- 
sels in  the  bay? — A.  He  said  in  the  bay;  I  always  understand  that  "the 
bay"  means  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Is  it  not  called  Bay  St.  Lawrence? — A..  Gulf  is  the  proper  name 
for  it. 

Q.  Have  you  not  always  heard  it  spoken  of  as  *  the  bay"?    When 


800 


AWARD   OV  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Americans  are  spoken  of  as  coming  to  the  bay,  don't  they  meau  to  Bay 
St.  Lawrence? — A.  Ship  captains  always  call  it  the  gnlf. 

Q.  Is  not  the  mackerel  caught  there  known  as  bay  mackerel  f— A. 
Not  to  my  knowledge;  I  never  heard  them  so  called. 

Q.  You  wish  the  Commission  to  understand  that  the  eHtiiuatc  yon 
received  from  this  American  captaiu  was  that  there  were  lOU  Ainoricati 
mackerel  schooners  in  Bay  Cbaleurs  last  year! — A.  That  is  as  I  under- 
stood it;  not  in  Bay  Chaleurs  only,  but  along  the  coast  up  to  Cape 
Chatte. 

Q.  1)0  you  mean  in  the  whole  gulf? — A.  Not  in  the  whole  gulf. 

Q.  What  part  do  you  mean  to  exclude  f — A.  It  would  include  the 
waters  between  Magdalen  Islands  and  Oasp^,  including  Anticosti. 

Q.  Then  his  estimate  was  that  there  were  lUO  American  vessels  in  all 
that  region  of  Bay  Ohaleurs  and  around  the  Magdalen  Islands?— A. 
Yes;  that  is,  I  understood  him  so. 

Q.  Do  you  exclude  or  include  the  shore  of  Prince  Edward  Island!— 
A.  He  did  not  refer  to  them  at  all ;  it  is  further  away  from  us. 

Q.  Within  your  own  observation  in  1876,  how  many  American  vessels 
did  you  see  ? — A.  Not  nearly  as  many  as  before. 

Q.  Not  nearly  as  many  as  100? — A.  Not  more  than  eight  or  ten;  I 
have  seen  eight  or  ten  off  the  coast  in  the  offing. 

Q.  They  were  mackerelers? — A.  I  presume  they  were  changing  ground 
going  from  one  place  to  another. 

Q.  In  what  month  was  that? — A.  At  the  latter  part  of  July  and  be 
ginning  of  August, 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  fact  that  the  mackerel-fishing  last  year  was  a 
total  failure  ? — A.  I  have  heard  it  was  a  very  short  catch. 

Q.  Nearly  a  total  failure  ? — A.  I  understand  so.  We  don't  prosecute 
the  mackerel  fishery  to  any  extent,  and  we  don't  notice  it,  commercially. 

Q.  How  about  1875  ? — A.  It  was  also  a  short  catch  that  year.  In 
1874  it  was  better,  but  it  was  not  a  good  catch. 

Q.  There  has  not  been  a  good  mackerel  year  within  your  observation 
and  information  since  1873,  has  there  ? — A.  No ;  that  is,  not  a  very  good 
one. 

Q.  The  cod  fishery  has,  on  the  whole,  been  in  a  prosperous  condition 
in  your  vicinity  ? — A.  Yes,  it  has. 

Q.  Increasing  in  quantity? — A.  Yes,  I  think  so. 

Q.  Almost  invariably  profitable? — A.  Yes;  there  is  au  increased 
number  of  boats  every  year. 

Q.  And  the  merchants  have  made  vast  profits  ? — A.  They  generally 
make  very  good  profits. 

Q.  What  percentage  are  the  profits  commonly  estimated  to  be  ?— A. 
I  don't  know  that  the  profits  of  prosecuting  the  fisheries  are  so  very 
great.  It  is  hard  to  say  what  they  are,  the  cost  of  handling  fish  is  so 
heavy. 

Q.  I  want  to  see  whether  you  agree  with  Captain  Lavoie's  view,  as 

stated  in  bis  report  in  1876 : 

Whilst  I  am  ou  this  matter,  I  shall  take  the  pres'^^t  opportanity  to  correct  an  error 
which  I  have  made  in  my  report  of  last  year,  with  regard  to  the  price  of  cod.  lu  order 
to  give  an  idea  of  the  enormous  profits  realized  by  merchants  from  Qaspd  ia  tiieir 
dealings  with  tishermen,  I  was  led  to  state,  through  an  involuntary  mistake,  that  the 
purchase-price,  as  well  as  the  price  of  sale  of  fish,  formed  a  net  profit.  This  error  was 
very  properly  pointed  out  to  me ;  but  every  correction  being  made,  there  still  remains 
about  lUO  per  cent,  profit  on  the  sales  of  nsb,  and  at  least  50  per  cent,  on  the  sale  of 
goods,  which  is  not  so  bad  after  all. 

Is  that  a  correct  estimate  ? — A.  I  should  say  not.    It  is  exaggerated. 
Q.  How  much  is  it  exaggerated  ? — A.  150  per  cent,  is  very  niucli  ex- 
aggerated. 


AWAfiD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


801 


jrous  condition 


Q.  We  will  take  goods ;  what  is  the  profit  on  goods  f — A.  It  is  not  a 
cash  business  and  you  cannot  estimate  the  profits  without  you  find  out 
vbflt  the  losses  are. 

Q.  You  are  able  to  estimate  it  sufficiently  to  say  that  Mr.  Lavoie's 
gtAt«ment  is  exaggerated  ? — A.  After  keeping  tlie  books  of  an  establish- 
ment for  eight  years  I  can  say  it  is  largely  exaggerated. 

Q.  If  it  is  not  150  per  cent.,  what  is  the  percentage  of  profit  f — A.  It 
is  not  more  than  25  per  cent,  on  a  year's  busincMs. 

Q.  Tbe  magnitude  of  the  cod-fishing  business  has  been  increasingt— 
A.  res. 

Q.  Do  you  agree  with  the  last  witness  that  you  can  always  get  en 
abundance  of  cod  fish  f — A.  The  catch  varies,  but  when  the  catch  is  short 
on  the  south  side  of  the  gulf  and  river  it  is  generally  large  on  the  north 
shore. 

Q.  Tbere  is  an  abundant  supply  somewhere  f — A.  Yes.  The  fish 
change  their  grounds,  but  there  is  an  abundant  supply. 

Q.  So  that  in  some  quarters  there  will  be  a  scarcity  and  in  others  a 
great  abundance  T — A.  A  great  abundance. 

Q.  Sometimes  they  won't  come  to  the  St.  Lawrence  and  to  Gasp^  until 
as  late  as  August  T — A.  Not  so  late  as  that. 

Q.  Here  is  what  a  government  officer  says  about  that  matter: 

When  I  visitei]  the  coast  of  Oanp^  dnrioK  tbe  month  of  AuKuat,  most  of  the  fittheriuen 
bad  given  up  all  hope;  Hfterwunts  tinh  were,  however,  caught  near  the  shore,  where, 
in  oniinary  seasons,  they  had  disappeareii  fur  two  or  three  seasontt  past.  This  led  to 
the  expectation  that  they  would,  in  time,  return  on  tht)  Banks,  where  they  could  be 
caugiit,  and  that  they  would  remain  there  longer  than  uxual. 

A.  Oiven  up  all  hope  of  a  good  catch  ;  not  of  catching  some  fish. 

Q.  I  don't  mean  a  solitary  cod-fish  every  year,  but  I  mean  cod-fish  in 
such  a  quantity  as  to  be  a  good  business  1 — A.  Tlie  catch  was  only  one- 
half  np  to  that  date. 

Q.  The  movements  of  these  fish  are  past  finding  out,  are  they  not? — 
A.  I  don't  know  that. 

Q.  You  cannot  account  for  their  appearance  and  disappearance  at 
certain  places,  and  their  changes  from  year  to  year? — A.  I  think  so. 
They  have  their  grounds ;  they  move  to  certain  places  on  the  feeding- 
grounds  ;  that  is,  the  inshore  fish.  The  inshore  fish  never  go  out  into 
deep  water,  that  is  to  the  Banks,  it  is  supposed. 

Q.  While  there  is  always  an  abundance  of  fish,  there  is  no  counting 
that  tbey  will  be  found  in  exactly  the  same  spots  and  in  the  same  quan- 
tity!—A.  Not  in  the  same  quantity. 

Q.  You  estimate  tbe  catch  of  mackerel  at  700  barrels  per  season  for 
each  inackereler  on  an  average  ? — A.  Yes,  that  would  be  two  trips. 

Q.  To  what  year  would  that  apply? — A.  It  would  apply  to  some  years 
ago,  from  1857  to  18G6. 

Q.  Your  fishermen  don't  absolutely  keep  out  of  the  Bank  cod  fishery, 
but  they  resort  to  it  only  when  tbere  is  a  failure  of  the  inshore  fishery? — 
A.  Yes,  when  the  fish  cannot  be  taken  inshore. 

Q.  Has  there  been  a  disposition  to  cultivate  the  Bank  fishery,  as  there 
has  been  in  Newfoundland? — A.  By  inshore  fishermen,  do  you  mean? 

Q.  In  Newfoundland  they  pay  a  bounty  on  every  banker  fitted  out  ? — 
A.  There  has  been  nothing  in  that  way  with  us. 

Q>  Is  it  not  understood  that  the  Bank  fishery  is  the  most  profitable 
provided  there  is  capital,  skill,  and  enterprise  to  prosecute  it  ? — A.  Not 
with  their  means  of  prosecuting  it;  that  is,  our  inshore  fishermen. 

Q>  With  adequate  means,  is  it  not  more  profitable  than  the  inshore 
'  ? — A.  I  am  not  aware  what  the  proWi  of  the  Bank  vesseL}^  are. 
51  F 


S02 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


No.  39. 

Josef.  O.  Sirois,  merchant,  Grande  Biviere,  conntj  of  Gaspd,  called 
ou  bfbult  of  tUe  Government  of  Her  Britannic  M^esty,  sworn  and  ex- 
amined. 

To  Mr.  Doutre : 

I  am  a  merchant  at  Grande  Riviere,  county  of  Gasp^.  I  have  em' 
ployed  men  to  fish  for  me  round  my  neighborhood.  I  have  flnhed  on 
the  south  Hide  of  the  River  St.  Lawrence,  from  Paspebiac  to  Cape  Oa8|i«, 
a  distance  of  about  90  miles.  My  fishing  was  done  witli  smull  Ixmts, 
eacli  hiiving  two  men ;  I  generally  have  six  of  such  boats  employed 
fishing.  I  have  carried  on  this  kind  of  business  during  the  last  twenty 
yetirs.  It  is  cod  we  take  on  that  coast.  Cod  is  slightly  more  abniidant 
than  it  wns  20  years  ago ;  it  may  be  that  each  boat  takes  less,  but  the 
number  of  boats  has  considerably  increased  during  that  period.  Part  of 
the  cod  is  taken  along  the  coaat,Hnd  the  remainder  on  Miscou  Bank.  Cod 
is  taken  from  one  to  two  miles  from  the  coast.  They  take  about  half 
their  catch  on  the  coast  within  the  distance  mentioned,  and  the  remain- 
ing half  on  Miscou  Bank.  They  take  cod  with  bait  consisting  of  caplin, 
herring,  squid,  smelt,  and  mackerel.  The  bait  is  obtained  at  from  a 
quarter  of  a  mile  to  two  miles  from  the  coast ;  it  is  very  rare  the  tish- 
ermen  would  have  to  go  out  as  far  as  three  miles  to  take  bait.  Ameri- 
can fishermen  could  not  bring  fresh  bait  from  their  homes.  It  caiioot 
be  kept  with  ice  to  be  used  advantageously  for  more  than  two  days. 
The  effect  of  placing  bait  on  ice  is  to  soften  it  so  that  it  will  not  hold  on 
the  hooks.  I  have  seen  a  number  of  American  schooners  fishing  mack- 
erel on  the  coast  I  have  mentioned,  and  have  myself  counted  80  sail 
coming  out  of  Bay  Chaleurs  to  fish  along  the  coast.  At  times  when 
the  fish  were  abundant,  there  were  some  500  or  600  American  schooners 
frequenting  the  coast  I  have  mentioned.  These  vessels  are  40  to  100 
tons  capacity.  Americans  bring  their  bait  with  them  when  they  come 
mackerel  fiishing.  Each  American  vessel  takes  irom  400  to  6U0  barrels 
as  a  load. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  make  more  than  one  fishing  trip  a  season  ?— A. 
I  have  heard  that  some  of  them  make  two  and  some  three  trips  a 
year. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  any  Canadians  fishing  in  American  waters? 
— A.  No,  never. 

Q.  Judging  from  what  you  know  of  the  mackerel  fishery  in  your 
neighborhood,  do  you  think  that  the  Americans  could  profitably  carry 
on  this  fishery  near  your  part  of  the  coast,  if  they  were  prevented  from 
fishing  within  the  three-mile  limit? — A.  I  do  not  believe  that  tbey 
could. 

Q.  Large  establishments  conduct  the  cod  fishery  at  Gasp6  and  Fas- 
pebiac,  I  believe  ? — A.  Yes :  and  all  along  the  coast. 

Q.  They  are  interested,  above  all,  in  the  cod  fishery? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  Do  these  establishments  send  their  codfish  to  the  United  States, 
or  elsewhere? — A.  I  never  heard  of  any  being  sent  to  the  United  States. 
The  cod  is  generally  exported  to  Brazil,  Spain,  Portugal,  and  Italy. 

Q.  What  do  fishermen  like  you  do  with  the  codfish  they  catch  !--A. 
Some  Canadians  export,  and  others  sell  them  to  the  large  establish- 
ments of  Robin  and  Boutillier  and  Collas,  and  to  other  houses. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  every  year  more  than  you  use  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  take  them  to  sell  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  you  gener^ll^'  dispose  of  your  fish  f — A.  I  sell  part  of 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


803 


nerican  waters! 


3^a8p6  aud  Pas- 


them,  in  the  dried  state,  to  Robin  and  Coy,  and  other  parties ;  and  the 
large  fl^h,  in  the  salt  and  green  state,  I  send  in  barrels  to  Quebec  aud 
Montreal. 

Q,  For  home  consumption  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  boats  in  your  parish  conduct  a  similar  busi'.essf — A. 
About  150. 

Q.  What  is  the  population  of  your  parish? — A.  About  2,000  souls. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Do  you  know  Gaptain  Lavoie  f — A.  Yea. 

Q.  When  did  you  see  him  last  f — A.  In  my  parish,  about  a  mouth 
ago. 
Q.  Do  you  know  where  he  is  now  ? — A.  No. 
Q.  Was  he  in  pretty  good  health  when  you  saw  him  T — A.  Yes. 

No.  40. 

Abraham  Lebbun,  fish  merchant,  of  Perce,  county  of  Gaaixj,  was 
called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Uer  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn 
and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Woatherbe : 

Qneation.  How  long  have  you  resided  at  Perce  ? — Answer.  For  a  few 
years. 

Q.  Where  did  you  previously  reside  f — A.  On  the  north  shore. 

Q.  On  the  north  side  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where !— A.  At  Sheldrake. 

Q.  How  many  years  did  you  live  there  t— A.  Ten. 

Q.  Are  you  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  Ashing  grounds  from 
Polut  (les  Monts  to  Sheldrake  1 — A.  Yea. 

Q.  This  is  on  the  north  side  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Since  when  have  you  had  experience  in  this  relation  f — A.  Since 
1850. 

Q.  For  how  many  miles  have  you  knowledge  of  this  coast  ? — A.  For 
ISI). 

Q.  Yon  have  been  acquainted  with  it  year  after  year  during  that 
period!— A.  Y"es. 

Q.  Are  yon  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  character  of  the  fishing 
grounds  on  this  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fishing  grounds  are  they  ? — A.  They  are  reckoned 
to  be  the  best  in  the  world. 

Q.  For  what  fish  ?— A.  Cod,  halibut,  mackerel,  herring,  squid,  laiitz, 
and  caplin.    These  are  found  in  abundance. 

Q.  What  is  the  character  of  this  coast  with  regard  to  the  supply  of 
bait?— A.  Cod  bait  is  always  found  there  in  abundance. 

Q.  During  what  periods? — A.  The  bait  generally  strikes  in  there 
aboat  the  middle  of  Maj' ;  aud  it  continues  there  until  navigation  closes. 

Q.  Does  it  ever  fail  ? — A.  I  have  never  known  it  to  fail  up  to  the  lat- 
ter end  of  November. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  sort  of  bait  found  at  the  mouths  and  on  the  bars 
of  the  rivers? — A.  We  have  also  clams  in  abundance.  Salmon  and 
troat  are  also  found  in  these  rivers.  In  fact,  some  of  these  rivers  for 
hhing  purposes  are  considered  to  be  the  best  in  the  Dominion. 

Q.  When  do  the  mackerel  come  on  that  coast  ? — A.  Generally  about 
the  middle  of  July. 

Q.  And  how  long  do  they  remain  ? — A.  Generally  throughout  Sep- 
tember. 


804 


▲WABD  OF  THE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  In  what  qaaotities  do  they  fk«qoent  the  shore! — A.  In  very  Urge 
quantities.  I  have  seen  the  mackerel  there  school  for  miles  aluiig  the 
shore.    They  come  all  along  the  coast  in  great  bodies. 

Q.  You  have  seen  them  school  f — A.  Yes ;  close  inshore.  The  mack- 
erel strike  the  shore  and  keep  in  close  to  it. 

i}.  How  do  you  observe  them  t — A.  They  rise  in  what  is  culled  a 
school. 

Q.  What  appearance  does  this  give  the  water  f — A.  It  looks  as  if  a 
heavy  ;,'.ale  of  wind  were  parsing  over  it. 

Q.  Vv  Len  you  see  the  water  in  that  condition,  what  does  it  indicate  !— 
A.  Thai  H  large  quantity  of  mackerel  are  there  in  a  bo<1y. 

Q.  How  long  does  this  continue  f — A.  They  will  school  lor  a  whole 
week  at  a  time. 

Q.  This  shows  that  the  mackerel  are  schooling  during  that  time  f^ 
A.  Yes;  and  then  they  may  disappear  for  some  days.  I  suppose  tliat 
they  are  sick  during  this  space  of  time;  but  after  a  few  days  have 
passed  they  will  be  seen  in  the  same  way  as  was  previously  the  case. 

Q.  Does  this  extend  over  the  i>erio<l  you  have  mentione<l,  frum  the 
middle  of  July  to  the  Ist  of  October  ! — A.  Yes,  generally.  Tbey  will 
disappear  at  times  for  a  week,  and  then  they  will  all  at  once  a|)i)ear 
again  in  aa  a  great  force  as  ever. 

Q.  By  whom  are  these  mackerel  fished  for  on  that  coast  f — A.  By  the 
Americans  in  their  vessels. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  do  these  vessels  catch  the  mack- 
erel f — A.  From  half  a  mile  to  a  mile  and  a  half,  and  often  quite  close 
inshore  along  the  rocks. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  of  any  instance  whatever  of  American  ves- 
sels carrying  on  the  mackerel  fishery  outside  of  three  miles  from  that 
shore? — A.  No. 

Q.  Is  the  shore  on  the  south  side  of  the  river,  from  Gape  Ghntte  to 
Cape  Gnsp^,  of  the  same  character  as  the  north  shore  f — A.  Yes,  as  far 
as  mackerel  are  concerned. 

Q.  Do  these  American  vessels  ever  fish  there  farther  out  than  three 
miles  from  the  shore  f — A.  No. 

Q.  You  never  knew  them  to  fish  in  any  instance  farther  out  ?— A. 
No. 

Q.  Then,  of  course,  the  mackerel  they  catch  are  caught  within  three 
miles  of  the  shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  nature  of  the  coast,  as  regards  the 
mackerel  fisheries  around  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  are  the  mackerel  caught  along  the  shore  from  Gape  Canso 
to  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs  f — A.  They  are  caught  along  the  coast  and  in 
the  bay. 

Q.  The  same  statement  is  true  with  reference  to  the  Ga8p<^  coast!— 
A.  Yes ;  the  mackerel  along  these  shores  are  caught  inshore,  within 
three  miles  from  the  coast. 

Q.  Are  there  any  mackerel  in  this  relation  caught  outside  of  the  tliree- 
mile  limit  to  your  knowledge  ? — A.  I  am  not  aware  of  any  being  so 
caught.  1  have  repeatedly  seen  American  vessels— especially  when  the 
cruiser  swere  in  the  bay — come  inside  of  the  three-mile  limit,  and  on 
questioning  the  skippers  as  to  their  reason  for  doing  so,  and  thus  ex- 
posing themselves  to  capture  by  their  presence  in  our  waters,  they  ex- 
plained to  me  that  the  only  fish  found  outside  of  these  limits  were  those 
which  are  called  tinkers,  a  very  small,  and,  as  I  suppose,  the  yonug  mack- 
erel, and  that  their  only  chance  of  making  a  faro  was  to  come  and  fish 


▲WARD   OP  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


805 


8tf — A.  By  the 


alonK  the  shore ;  otherwise  they  said  they  wonld  have  to  go  home  with- 
out fare. 

Q.  Are  yon  acquainted  with  the  shores  of  the  Island  of  Antioosti  f— 
A.  I  liave  been  there. 

Q.  Are  tliey  of  the  saine  charnctor  as  those  which  you  have  described  ? 
_A.  Tlie  shores  are  of  the  same  cliaracrer  witli  regard  to  flslilng  hh  our 
Dortli  shore,  esiiecially  the  north  shore  of  Auticosti.  This  \h  a  great 
place  for  halibut. 

Q.  Are  lialibut  caught  on  the  shores  you  have  mentioned  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Halibut  are  caught  along  the  north  slore  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence 
for  the  distance  of  18(»  ujiles,  to  wliich  you  have  referred  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  are  taken  on  the  north  coast  of  Anticosli,  and  along  the 
fionth  coast,  and  along  tlie  oth(^r  coasts  on  the  south  side  of  the  8t.  Law- 
rence, which  you  have  mentioned T— A.  Yes,  sir;  from  Cai>e  Chatte  to 
Cape  Oasp6 ;  this  is  a  celebrated  coast  for  halibat. 

Q.  Are  halibut  caught  on  the  shores  of  Guspu  and  the  Bay  of  Chal- 
eurs? — A.  They  are  or  have  been  caught  there, 

Q.  Uy  whom  is  the  halibut  fishery  carried  on  T — A.  Chiefly  by  the 
Americans. 

Q.  And  how  are  they  caught? — A.  With  trawls. 

Q.  What  effect  has  their  mode  of  fishing  had  on  the  coast  as  a  halibut 
fishery  ground? — A.  With  regard  to  halibut,  it  has  injured  the  fishery. 

Q.  By  what  meaiinf — A.  By  overfishing.  Halibut  is  a  fish  which 
(loeH  nut  reproduce  itself  like  the  cod;  and  of  course  the  fishing  is  thus 
affected  and  injured. 

Q.  By  whom  has  this  overfishing  been  done? — A.  By  the  Americans. 

Q.  During  how  many  years? — A.  It  has  been  the  case  as  long  os  I 
can  remember — that  is  from  1856  to  the  time  when  I  left  the  north  r^hore, 
in  1873.    They  liave  frequented  the  coast  from  year  to  year. 

Q.  Is  the  halibut  fishery  carried  on  now  on  the  south  shore? — A. 
At  present,  halibut  are  very  scarce  there ;  but  formerly  they  were  very 
plentiful  on  this  coast. 

Q.  By  whom  is  the  halibut  fishery  at  present  carried  on  ? — A.  I  could 
not  say  whether  It  is  carried  on  at  present,  but  it  has  been  carried  on 
for  ,>  ears  by  the  Americans,  the  same  as  on  the  north  shore. 

Q.  You  cannot  speak  with  regard  to  the  fishing  on  the  north  shore 
since  you  left  it? — A.  No;  but  when  I  left  it  the  halibut  bad  apparently 
(liminislied  in  number. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  the  fleet  there  ? — A.  Some  30  vessels 
fished  l)etweeu  the  coast  of  Auticosti  and  our  coast. 

Q.  On  the  north  side  of  the  St.  Lawrence  River  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Thirty  vessels  frequented  that  quarter  f — A.  Yes;  for  halibut. 

Q.  Is  this,  for  them,  a  profitable  business?— A.  Yes;  it  must  have 
been,  for  they  have  told  me — and  I  suppose  that  they  wtre  not  boasting — 
tliat  some  of  their  trips  had  been  sold  as  high  as  15  cents  a  pound  iu 
the  American  market. 

Q.  Give  us  some  idea  of  the  quantity  they  catch,  if  you  can. — A.  I 
could  not  do  so. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  could  give  an  approximate  idea  ? — A.  I  could  not. 

Q.  Yon  never  made  any  inquiry  about  it  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  they  trawl  on  your  coast  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  effect  of  this  has  been  to  damage  the  fishery  ? — A.  It  has 
been  detrimental  to  the  halibut  fishery. 

Q>  Do  any  (Canadian  fishermen  now  take  halibut  or  have  they  done 
sot— A.  They  do  not  fish  for  the  special  purpose  of  taking  halibut. 


806 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


There  are  no  halibat  flshermen  there ;  bat  nambers  of  oor  fishermen  fish 
for  cod. 

Q.  What  do  yon  mean  by  saying  that  the  fishery  there  has  been  dam- 
aged f — ^A.  That  the  fish  are  not  now  so  abundant  as  was  formerly  the 
case. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect  if  the  fishermen  desisted  from  fishing  for 
a  period  T — A.  The  Osh  would  then,  of  course,  increase  in  number ;  this 
would  be  the  case  if  they  were  left  alone. 

Q.  You  know  hoir  long  this  would  be  advisable  t — A.  I  should  think 
the  fishery  would  be  restored  ia  six  years'  time. 

Q.  It  would  then  be  as  good  as  ever  ? — A.  Yes.  If  the  fishing  is  con- 
tinued as  it  has  been  carried  on,  I  am  afraid  that  it  will  lead  to  the  com- 
plete destruction  of  the  fishery. 

Q.  This  will  be  the  case  if  it  is  continued  for  some  years  to  come,  to 
as  great  an  extent  as  was  the  fact  whea  you  resided  there? — A.  Tea; 
that  will  ruin  the  fishery  completely  with  regard  to  this  species  of  fish. 

Q.  In  what  kind  of  fishery  have  you  yourself  been  engaged  f— A.  In 
the  cod  fishery. 

Q.  Altogether  f — A.  Of  course,  on  the  north  shore,  when  we  had  a 
chance  to  seine  mackerel,  we  did  so. 

Q.  I  believe  that  you  are  from  Jersey  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  cod-fishing  establishments  are  there  on  north  coast!— 
A.  There  are  a  great  many.  The  const  is  lined  with  these  establish- 
ments. 

Q.  These  are  cod  fishing  establishments? — A.  Yes;  some  are  larger 
and  some  smaller  than  others. 

Q.  How  Id  the  cod-fishing  carried  on  ? — A.  In  boats. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  number  of  boats  engaged  in  this  fishery  ?— A.  I 
should  say  that  on  the  portion  of  the  coast  I  have  mentioned  there 
would  be  1,000  boats. 

Q.  Oan  you  give  us  an  idea  of  the  average  catch  of  such  a  boat  ?— A. 
It  would  be  one  hundred  and  fifty  quintals. 

Q.  How  many  men  are  in  the  boats? — A.  There  are  two  men  per 
boat.  They  generHlly  reckon  three  men  to  each  boat — two  in  the  boat 
and  one  man  on  shore  to  cure  the  fish. 

Q.  And  this  business  of  catching  codfish  is  carried  on  up  to  the  pre- 
sent time  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  in  a  prosperous  condition  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  the  present  moment  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  said  that  this  coast  is  celebrated  for  furnishing  a  supply 
of  bait.  I  take  it  for  granted  that  the  fish  so  procured  is  taiieuou 
shore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  whole  of  it  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  does  the  prosecution  of  the  mackerel-fishing  a£fect  the  sup- 
ply of  bait  for  cod-fishing;  do  you  use  mackerel-bait? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Does  the  prosecution  of  the  mackerel-fishing  interfere  in  any  way 
with  the  supply  of  mackerel-bait? — A.  It  does. 

Q.  The  Americans  catch  large  quantities  of  mackerel  on  the  shore  f— 
A.  Yes.  Of  course,  at  a  certain  time  of  the  year  mackerel  form  the 
only  bait  that  can  be  taken. 

Q.  You  are  intimately  acquainted  with  that  qnestioc  ? — A.  Yes; 
especially  on  the  Oasp^  coast  and  in  the  Bay  of  Ohaleurs,  at  a  certain 
time  of  the  year  the  only  bait  that  oan  be  caught  is  mackerel ;  this  is 
during  times  when  herring  and  other  bait  fail.  Then  the  fishermen  rely 
on  mackerel  for  bait. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FI8HERT  COMMISSION. 


807 


ir  fishermeo  fith 


.  I  shoald  think 


when  we  had  a 


some  are  larger 


ich  a  boat  ?— A. 


u  up  to  the  pre- 


Q.  Then  yon  say  that  there  is  a  season  when  the  cod-fishers  depend 
for  bait  entirely  on  mackerel  t — A.  Tes. 

Q.  And  during  that  period  the  large  catch  of  mackerel  taken  by  the 
American  fishermen  affects  the  supply  of  this  bait  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  the  detriment  of  the  cod  fishery  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  the  number  of  the  American  cod-flshing  fleet  in  the 
bay  f— A.  I  have  heard  from  American  captains  who  come  to  the  bay-^ 
I  have  questioned  them  repeatedly  on  the  subject — that  the  number  of 
the  cod-fishers  was  about  500 — between  400  and  500  in  the  bay. 

Q.  Where  do  they  procure  their  bait  f — A.  The  generality  of  them 
procure  it  on  the  coast. 

Q.  How  do  they  get  itf — A.  In  nets.  They  take  their  herring  in 
nets. 

Q.  And  what  else  f — A.  Squid ;  they  also  seine  caplin  on  our  coast. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  ever  use  mackerel  for  baitf — A.  Of  course; 
that  they  take. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  their  right  to  procure  fresh  bait  on  this  coast 
is  a  necessity  to  insure  the  success  of  the  American  cod-fishing  fleet  t — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  do  yon  consider  this  to  be  the  case  f — A.  It  seems  to  me  that 
it  would  be  impossible  for  them  to  carry  on  the  fishery  if  they  had  not 
the  ri^ht  to  come  on  our  shores  for  bait. 

Q.  Why  do  you  consider  that  they  cannot  get  it  anywhere  else  ? — A. 
Tbey  require  fresh  bait  to  catch  codfish. 

Q.  Wiiy  must  they  get  their  bait  here  in  these  places  on  our  coast  f — 
A.  Because  they  cannot  procure  it  elsev.here. 

Q.  And  during  all  this  period  and  the  number  of  years  of  which  you 
have  spoken,  have  the  Americans  been  in  the  habit  of  getting  it  heref — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  of  catching  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  the  nets  with  which  they  catch  it  ? — A.  The 
bring  them  with  them.  I  have  besides  seen  them  purchasing  nets  from 
merchants  on  our  shore.  When  a  vessel  happens  to  lose  its  nets  out- 
side, tbey  come  in  and  buy  nets  from  our  merchants. 

Q.  Where  did  they  get  their  bait  after  the  abrogation  of  the  Reci- 
procity Treaty  f — A.  They  ran  the  risk  of  capture  to  obtain  it  within 
the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Year  after  year  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  that  f — A.  I  have  seen  them  do  so. 

Q.  Tbey  kept  on  doing  so  notwithstanding  the  abro^^ation  of  that 
treaty,  in  order  to  obtain  fresh  bait  inshore? — A.  Tbey  had  to  get  bait 
whether  they  had  a  right  to  do  so  or  not. 

Q.  Have  yon  had  any  communication  with  the  Americans  on  the  snb« 
jectf— A.  1  have. 

Q.  What  do  they  themselves  state  about  it  ? — A.  That  they  had  no 
alternative,  but  that  they  had  to  procure  bait  or  else  go  without  fish. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  us  what  the  usual  fare  of  their  cod-fishing  vessels 
ist— A.  As  far  as  I  have  been  informed  by  themselves,  I  should  say 
that  it  is  from  700  to  800  quintals. 

Q.  That  is  their  average  fare? — A.  It  was  so  reckoned  by  them. 

Q.  Is  the  cod-fishing  business  a  certain  business  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  not  a  precarious  business  at  all? — A.  No;  one  year  it  will 
diminish,  but  it  will  not  fail  altogether,  and  the  next  year  the  fish  will 
be  more  abundant.  We  generally  have  alternate  good  years— one  year 
will  be  good  and  the  next  indifferent ;  but  this  fishery  never  fails  alto- 
gether. 


./ 


808 


▲WARD  OF  THE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  And,  generally  speaking,  is  it  a  very  profitable  basiness  f— A.  It 
is  a  profitable  business. 

Q.  Have  yon  known  of  any  exportation  of  ood  to  the  United  States 
during  your  experience  in  the  cod  fishery  f — A.  I  am  aware  that  a  couple 
of  assorted  cargoes  were  sent  there  by  one  of  our  principal  firms  on  the 
coast  of  6asp6  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty ;  but  that  is  all  I  am  aware 
of  that  has  been  dispatched  to  that  market  by  our  merchants.  An 
American  firm  was  established  in  Gas|>^  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty— 
in  Gasp6  Basin  and  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs,  but  they  only  remained  there 
for  three  years ;  and  they  used  to  export  fish,  cod  and  herring,  to  the 
States.    Mr.  Miriam  was  the  principal  in  the  firm. 

Q.  They  did  not  f  ud  it  successful  f — A.  They  did  not  succeed,  at  all 
events;  they  only  continued  operations  during  three  years. 

Q.  Wt  understand  that  yon  ship  fish  in  a  dried  and  hard  state  to 
foreign  markets! — ^A.  We  do. 

Q.  And  where  do  you  ship  the  green  and  large  fish  f — A.  To  Quebec 
and  Montreal. 

Q.  Yon  find  this  profitable  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  best  market  for  these  fish  f — ^A.  Yes,  for  that  quality  of 
fish.    We  do  so  year  after  year. 

Q.  You  have  continuously  a  knowledge  of  the  state  of  the  American 
market  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  find  that  the  places  yon  mention  are  the  best  market  for 
your  fish  f — A.  Yes,  for  green  and  pickled  fish.  We  send  the  large 
table  fish  to  Montreal  and  Quebec. 

Q.  These  are  large  and  green  fish  such  as  the  Americans  catch  and 
use! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  a  Canadian  vessel  fishing  in  American  wa- 
ters?— A.  No. 

Q.  Was  the  sending  to  the  States  of  the  two  cargoes  of  which  you 
have  spoken  a  profitable  enterprise  1 — A.  No.  I  have  heard  the  agent 
of  these  firms  say  that  it  did  not  pay,  and  that  for  this  reason  they  did 
not  make  any  further  shipments  to  that  market. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  When  did  you  enter  into  business  on  the  south  side  of  the  River 
St.  Lawrence  f — A.  In  1856. 

Q.  You  entered  into  business  as  a  dealer  in  fish  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  dealt  in  mackerel,  did  you  not  ? — A.  Yes.  When  fish- 
ing we  used  to  seine  for  mackerel  on  the  coast  when  we  had  an  oppor- 
tunity for  doing  so. 

Q.  You  had  an  abundance  of  mackerel  on  your  coast  T — ^A.  Yes;  they 
were  very  abundant. 

Q.  And  you  could  always  catch  all  you  wanted  with  seines? — A.  No; 
we  could  not — not  as  much  as  we  wanted. 

Q.  But  as  much  as  you  could  find  a  market  or  use  for  ? — A.  I  have 
seined  as  much  as  50  barrels  at  one  haul  of  the  seine. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  the  mackerel  which  you  caught  on  the  north 
coast  f — A.  We  sent  them  to  Montreal,  which  was  our  market  for  them. 

Q.  In  what  state  did  you  send  them  there? — A.  In  the  round  state 
and  salted.  They  were  not  split  up  the  back  after  the  manner  of  the 
Americans.  The  belly  of  the  fish  was  left  open  and  they  were  filled 
with  salt  and  packed  in  barrels. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  any  mackerel  for  bait  ? — A.  O,  yes ;  we  used  them 
for  bait  when  we  had  no  other  bait. 

Q.  At  what  season  of  the  year  is  there  no  other  bait?    Yon  have  men- 


▲WABD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


809 


6l.  To  Quebec 


e  of  the  Bivec 


tioned  some  six  kinds  suitable  for  ood-flsbiog  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Dariug  wbat  period  do  yoa  gee  notbiiig  save  mackerel  for  bait  f — 
A.  During  August ;  bait  is  then  scarce.  When  the  mackerel  are  most 
plentiful  it  would  seem  as  if  they  drive  away  all  other  bait. 

Q.  At  all  events  other  bait  does  then  disappearT — ^A.  Tes. 

Q.  And  that  is  the  time  when  you  use  your  seine  most  actively  t — A. 

JOSt  80. 

Q.  Did  it  occur  to  yon  that  by  doing  so,  you  were  diminishing  the 
amount  of  bait  for  the  taking  of  cod  ? — A.  No ;  it  did  not  appear  so  to  ns. 

Q.  You  did  not  think  of  itf — A.  The  quantity  which  we  took  with 
the  means  we  had  did  not  seem  to  have  such  an  effect. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  seining  of  mackerel  does  sensibly  diminish 
the  amount  procurable  for  bait  ? — A.  When  seining  is  carried  on  to  ex- 
cess, of  course  it  would  have  such  an  effect. 

Q.  Has  it  ever,  to  your  knowledge,  been  carried  on  to  excess  on  the 
north  shore  of  the  Bivur  St.  Lawrence  f — A.  I  am  not  aware  that  such  is 
the  case,  to  my  own  personal  knowledge,  but  I  have  heard  that  it  has 
been  <ione. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  the  catch  of  mackerel  had  caused  a 
great  diminution  in  the  supply  of  bait  for  cod,  and  that  the  quantity 
caught  was  an  evil  and  an  injury ;  do  you  mean  to  say  so  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  now  say  that  the  amount  of  mackerel  caught  has  been  suffix 
cient  to  diminish  sensibly  the  supply  of  bait  for  codfish  f — A.  This  is 
the  case,  of  course. 

Q.  In  one  sense  that  is  true.  Every  mackerel  taken  makes  one  less 
in  the  ocean;  do  you  think  much  of  ihat  aspect  of  the  matter! — A. 
Well,  no ;  I  suppose  not. 

Q.  You  said  that  mackerel  were  not  caught  along  the  north  shore  in 
sufficient  quantities  to  cause  any  particular  inconvenience  with  regard 
to  the  finding  of  bait  f — A.  The  fact  that  we  confined  ourselves  to  one 
core  or  two  on  each  side  of  us  makes  that  true. 

Q.  Have  you  been  at  Seven  Islands  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  any  complaints  from  cod-fishermen  thei«3  that  they 
could  not  get  mackerel  for  bait  f — ^A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  it  could  not  be  found  f — A.  They  said  that  they  could  not 
get  it. 

Q.  There  was  enough  mackerel  everywhere ;  there  was  an  abundance 
of  them  ;  and  you  have  seen  them  extending  for  miles  in  the  water  t— ^ 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  could  they  not  be  got ;  you  say  there  are  plenty  of  mackerel  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  trouble  then ;  had  you  not  better  alter  that  state- 
ment ?— A.  Which  part  of  the  statement  f 

Q.  That  there  was  such  a  diminution  of  the  mackerel  as  to  cause  a 
seusiblo  injury  to  the  cod  fishery ;  do  you  not  merely  mean  to  say  that 
there  might/  be  mackerel  enough  seined  in  certain  localities  as  to  create 
such  a  diminution  for  a  time ;  did  you  mean  anything  more  than  that  ? — 
A.  Well,  on  our  coast  of  Gasp4  that  is  the  case. 

Q.  I  am  referring  to  the  north  side  of  the  river.  What  do  yon  mean 
then,  that  there  might  be  such  over-fishing  for  mackerel  as  to  cause  a 
temporary  diminution  in  the  amount  of  bait  obtainable  in  certain  places 
at  certain  times  f — A.  Yes. 

Q>  And  there  are  mackerel  enough  on  that  coast  to  catch  all  the  cod 
on  the  coast  f — A.  That  is  not  exactly  the  case. 

Q.  Did  you  mean  more  than  that  there  might  be  such  over-flshing  for 
and  such  an  over-catch  of  mackerel  as  to  cause  a  diminution  of  the 


810 


AWARD  OF  THE  FI8HEBT  COMUISSION. 


mackerel  bait,whioh  can  be  obtained  at  certain  places  in  certain  times  f-. 
A.  Tes. 

Q.  That  ia  what  yoa  mean  to  say  f — A.  Tea 

Q.  Did  you  ever  sell  clams  to  the  Americans? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  your  people  ever  done  so  f — A.  I  have  heard  of  our  people 
selling  them  clams. 

Q.  When  did  you  change  your  residence  from  the  north  to  the  south 
shore  of  the  Saint  Lawrence  f — A.  In  1873. 

Q.  Since  1873  have  you  had  any  personal  knowledge,  from  personal 
observation,  of  the  state  of  the  fishery  on  the  north  coast  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Since  yon  have  been  on  the  south  shore,  in  Gaspe,  or  in  tliat 
neighborhood,  have  you  found  the  people  there  engaged  in  catching 
cod  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  not  mackerel  f — A.  They  do  catch  mackerel. 

Q.  But  not  to  a  great  extent  T — A.  No. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  having  counted  eighty  American  vessels  in 
one  day  alone,  in  what  year  did  you  do  so  ! — A.  I  am  not  aware  of 
having  said  so. 

Q.  What  did  yon  state  on  the  subject  of  counting  eighty  ? — A.  I  am 
not  aware  of  haviug  said  that. 

Q.  Did  you  at  ukj  time  count  as  many  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  How  long  ago  was  that? — A.  It  was  during  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty,  and  during  the  time  when  the  cruisers  were  out.  That  was  the 
time  when  the  Americans  were  most  numerous  on  our  coast. 

Q.  That  was  before  you  left  the  north  side  of  the  river  Saint  Law- 
rence ? — A.  Yes ;  and  also  before  I  left  the  south  for  the  north  sbore, 
during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  You  left  there  in  1853  ? — A.  It  was  in  1856.  I  then  had  opportu- 
nities of  seeing  the  American  vessels. 

Q.  Then  jour  counting  was  done  before  you  went  to  the  north  side  of 
the  Saint  Lawrence,  and  while  on  the  north  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  were  on  the  south  shore  in  1875  and  1876  ? — A.  I  was  there 
in  1874  and  1875. 

Q.  In  the  report  of  the  Commission  of  Fisheries  it  is  stated,  on  page 
164,  that— 

From  all  acoounts  there  appears  to  have  been  a  large  quantity  of  mackerel  in  Gasp^ 
Bay  abont  the  end  of  July  and  the  beginning  of  August ;  but  owing  to  the  great  liuat, 
they  would  not  bite.  Very  few  were  caught,  and  the  fish  soon  disappeared.  Some 
fishermen  claim  that  the  steamers  passing  along  the  Gasp6  Bay  shores  frighten  the 
mackerel. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  that  the  mackerel  are  so  frightened  ? — A.  I  am 
not  aware  that  it  is  the  case. 

Q.  You  have  heard  of  it,  have  you  not  ? — A.  Yes ;  though  I  do  not 
believe  it.  I  think  that  something  else  besides  the  steamers  frightens 
away  the  mackerel. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  reason  why  so  few  were  caught  that  year 
was  that  they  would  not  bite,  or  was  it  because  there  were  not  enougii 
of  them  ?— A.  Well,  it  is  very  likely  that  they  would  not  bite.  That  is 
the  case  with  codfish,  you  know.  Yery  often  they  are  plentiful  on  the 
fishing  grounds  in  shoal  water.  I  have  seen  them  as  thick  as  two  feet 
in  depth  on  the  bottom,  and  on  trying  to  catch  them  with  the  hook  and 
line  they  would  not  touch  the  bait. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  hot  it  was  down  there?— A.  They  would  not 
touch  the  bait  at  all,  though  they  were  as  plentiful  as  they  could  be 
One  could  not  even  see  the  bottom  in  two  fathoms  of  water  for  them. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


811 


Q,  Do  yoa  think  it  was  the  heat  which  preveDted  them  from  biting?— 
A.  I  coald  not  say.  There  are  oertain  hours  in  the  day  when  they  will 
bite,  and  certain  hoars  when  they  will  not  bite ;'  and  one  thing  they  did 
wtts,  tbe  moment  they  saw  the  bait  coming  down  to  them,  they  woald 
Actaally  smell  it,  and  turning  round  just  give  it  a  clip  with  their  tail, 
and  then  go  down  and  eat  the  bait  after  it  was  off  the  hook.  I  have 
seen  that  with  my  own  eyes,  and  I  would  never  have  believed  such  a 
thing  to  be  possible  if  I  had  not  witnessed  it ;  though  a  few  hours  after- 
wards they  would  bite  ravenously. 

Q.  Tliat  was  not  the  time  sr  hour  when  they  took  their  bite  9 — A.  I 
gnppose  not.  It  was  either  before  or  after  dinner,  I  suspect.  When  the 
codfish  strike  on  the  shore,  it  is  just  like  a  gale  of  wind  on  the  water ; 
yon  see  nothing  but  the  tails  of  the  fish  above  the  water.  Such  was  tbe 
case  in  Sheldrake  Bay.  They  come  there  playing  with  the  lantz,  and 
tbe  water,  as  it  were,  resembles  a  pot  when  boiling. 

Q.  Do  the  people  of  Anticosti  sell  fish  in  the  American  market,  or 
have  they  done  so  f — A.  They  are  generally  dealers  of  the  merchants  on 
the  coast  of  Gasp6. 

Q.  They  sell  to  the  merchants  there  ? — A.  Yes,  and  ship  to  Quebec. 

Q.  There  is  not  capital  or  enterprise  enough  among  the  mercantile 
houses  on  Anticosti  to  undertake  the  foreign  trade? — A.  There  is;  the 
merchants  of  the  Gasp^  coast  have  establishments  there  all  along  the 
north  shore. 

Q.  What  fishery  do  they  mostly  prosecute? — A.  The  cod-fishery. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  them  ? — A.  Dry  them  and  ship  them  to 
Brazil,  Spain,  and  Portugal. 

Q.  In  the  same  way  as  your  houses  do  ? — A.  These  are  our  houses 
wbo  have  these  establishments  on  the  Island  of  Anticosti ;  a  number 
ot  schooners  from  Gasp6  also  fish  for  GaspS  firms  there,  fishing  during 
the  summer  and  bringing  their  fish  over  to  Gasp6  in  the  fall. 

Q.  Do  your  people  catch  halibut  on  the  Anticosti  coast  ? — A.  They 
do  not  especially  fish  there  for  halibut. 

Q.  They  only  do  so  accidentally  ? — A.  Yes,  at  present,  because  they 
are  now  very  scarce. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  the  mackerel  fishing  was  on  the  shores  of  Anti- 
costi (luring  the  seasons  of  1875  and  '76? — A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  it  said  that  no  mackerel  were  seen  near  that 
r>oast  during  the  season  of  1875? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q,  In  order  to  send  your  fish  to  foreign  markets — European  and 
South  American — you  thoroughly  dry  them  and  you  send  them  to  Que- 
bec and  Montreal  in  as  fresh  a  state  as  is  possible? — A.  We  send  them 
to  the  latter  places  in  the  salt  and  pickled  state. 

Q.  And  not  dried  ? — A.  We  do  send  them  dried ;  we  dry  the  large 
table  fish  and  send  them  to  Montreal. 

Q.  But  not  so  hardly  dried  as  for  tropical  voyages  ? — A.  No.  We 
generally  ship  these  large  fish  to  Quebec  and  Montreal  in  the  fall. 

Q.  They  are  not  shipped  there  to  be  sent  to  foreign  markets  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  They  are  for  home  consumption  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  these  markets  are  sufficient  for  the  amount  which 
you  catch  and  prepare,  in  addition  to  what  you  send  to  West  Indies  and 
Europe!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  present  ? — ^Y.  Yes.  Those  fish  go  throughout  the  Dominion  to 
the  westward 

Q.  So  you  have  no  occasion  at  present,  yon  think,  to  find  a  farther 
market  for  the  same  kind  of  fish  ? — A.  If  we  could  find  a  better  market 
of  course  we  would  take  advantage  of  it. 

Q.  But  you  think  that  these  places  furnish  at  present  market  euoagh 


812 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


for  the  amount  of  fish  that  yon  now  catch ;  yon  said  yon  sent  nil  the 
flflh  yoa  cure  in  the  way  you  meutioned  to  Quebec  and  Montret^l  t— a. 
We  send  only  a  certain  portion  of  onr  fish  to  Montreal.  Quebec  and 
Montreal  would  not,  of  course,  be  a  sufficient  market  for  the  whole  of 
our  catch.  The  flsh  we  send  to  Quebec  and  Montreal  are  fish  which  we 
cannot  send  anywhere  else;  for  this  reason,  that  these  are  fish  caught 
late  in  the  fall,  and  consequently  they  cannot  be  cured  properly  for 
foreign  markets. 

Q.  When  do  you  cure  your  codfish  for  the  European,  West  [ndian, 
and  southern  markets  f — A.  We  so  cure  them  until  the  latter  end  of 
September.  Fish  caught  until  then  can  be  cured  for  the  foreign  markets, 
but  after  that  they  cannot  There  is  not  afterwards  sufficient  time  for 
curing  for  such  shipping  purposes. 

Q.  For  the  flsh  caught  afterwards  you  wish  to  find  a  market  nearer 
home  f — A.  Just  so. 

Q.  Ton  say  that  two  merchants  sent  cargoes  of  that  sort  of  fish  to  the 
United  States  f — A.  The  fish  they  sent,  1  think,  were  chiefly  herriug. 

Q.  Did  they  try  cod  ? — A.  1  could  not  say. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  experiment  made  with  regard  to  sendiug  cod 
into  the  American  market  from  your  shores  f — A.  I  know  positively 
that  Mr.  Miriam,  of  the  American  firm,  sent  codfish  there. 

Q.  But  1  mean  by  yourselves  f — A.  I  am  not  aware  that  any  of  oar 
folks  did  so. 

Q.  Mr.  Miriam  was  on  the  coast  for  three  yeara  f — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Was  he  not  dealing  in  the  American  market  f — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Was  it  not  generally  known  among  the  people  of  Oasp^,  and  of 
that  neighborhood,  that  he  was  sending  ^)dttsh  into  the  AmericaQ  mar- 
ket t — A.  It  was. 

Q.  Can  you  account  for  any  well-informe  I  merchant  there  being  un- 
aware of  it  f — A.  They  were  perfectly  aware  of  the  fact. 

Q.  And  they  knew  that  these  fish  were  prepared  in  the  same  way  as 
you  prepare  them  for  Quebec  and  Montreal  T — A.  Just  so. 
By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg: 

Q.  There  was  another  company  in  Bonaventure,  was  there  not  ?~A. 
That  is  the  same  company. 

Q.  Did  they  cure  the  flsh  for  the  Americans  as  they  did  for  the  south- 
ern market  f — A.  They  cured  them  for  the  American  as  we  cure  them 
for  the  Montreal  market.  They  generally  bought  their  flsh  from  the  in- 
habitants of  the  country. 

By  Mr.  Dana: 

Q.  Were  you  personally  acquainted  w  th  the  mode  in  which  the  fish- 
ery in  the  Labrador  regions  is  carried  ra  down  to  Blanc  Sablon  ?— A.  I 
believe  so ;  I  have  carried  on  the  fishery  there  myself. 

Q.  In  the  same  way,  substantially,  as  has  been  described  1 — A.  Yes; 
it  is  onr  flshermen  from  Gasp^  who  go  down  there. 

Q.  And  your  dealers  and  your  merchants  in  the  same  way  as  has  been 
mentioned! — A.  Tes.  They  have  establishments  and  keep  a  number  of 
boats  there,  in  the  same  way  as  at  Gasp6  and  on  the  Bay  of  Cbaleurs. 

Q.  On  page  83  of  the  fisheries  report  for  1876  appears  the  following 
Btatement : 

The  fears  entertained  daring  the  fall  of  1875  regarding  the  provable  trials  to  which 
the  greatest  part  of  the  population  of  the  north  coast  would  be  exposed,  especially  tliat 
of  ^int  des  Monts  and  Mingan,  on  account  of  the  total  failure  of  the  fiithtii-,v  durlDg 
the  season  of  1K75,  were  unfortunately  but  too  well  realized,  aud  no  one  can  form  aa 
idea  of  the  hardships  and  sufferings  which  these  poor  fisheriaen  had  to  bear  from  the 
month  of  November  to  the  15th  of  Jnly  last. 

This  was  in  1876  f— A.  I  suppose  so. 


AWABD  OF  THE  nSHEBT  COMMISfllOH. 


813 


Q.  Is  that  correct  f— A.  I  think  it  is  rather  exagf^erated.  If  that  had 
been  the  case  I  thiDk  that  I  shonld  have  heard  something  alwDt  it. 

Q.  Did  yoa  ever  hear  anything  about  it  1 — A.  I  did  not. 

Q.  You  never  heard  of  there  being  great  want  and  suffering  and  hard- 
Rhip  experienced  as  descriljed  T — A.  "So.  He  speaks  of  Miugan,  but 
that,  you  see,  is  not  a  fishing  station  at  all.  This  misery  and  snflbring 
must  have  taken  place  among  the  Indians  at  Mingan,  because  Mingau 
is  a  station  of  the  honorable  the  Hudson  Bay  Company. 

Q.  How  is  it  at  Point  des  Monts  ? — A.  Point  des  Monts  is  not  a  fish- 
jDg  station  at  all.    Tbis  is  in  the  Province  of  Quebec. 

Q.  Was  there  no  suflering  on  the  north  coast  in  1875  and  1876T — A.  1 
am  not  aware  that  I  ever  heard  anything  about  it  at  all. 

Q.  The  report  continues : 

It  waa  really  a  painfal  sight  to  behold  these  men,  women,  and  children,  with  ghastly 
facet  and  emaciated  bodie*. 

Witness.  I  think  that  Commandant  Lavoie  exaggerates  there. 
Mr.  Dana.  The  report  further  states : 

This  poor  popnlation  received  no  assistance  from  the  provincial  government,  and,  as  I 
utated  in  my  last  report,  there  was  no  locality  which  deserved  it  more.  Several  fami- 
lies from  Moisie,  8te.  Margneritf,  and  Seven  Islands  never  saw  as  much  as  a  thimbleful 
of  fliiur  for  se\  en  weeks,  and  were  eompelled  to  satisfy  their  hnuger  with  boiled  clams, 
painfnlly  torn  trom  the  ice. 

Witness.  That  was  either  in  the  winter  or  spring. 

Mi.  Da  ma.  The  report  states  it  was  from  November  to  July.    It  fur<- 

tber  says : 

These  families  had  therefore  reached  the  last  degree  of  exbanstion  when  the  firsfc 
wbooner  arrived  with  provisions. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  vessel  that  arrived  with  provisions  f — A.  That 
would  refer  to  a  schooner  from  Quebec. 

Q.  Did  she  come  from  there  ? — A.  That  was  likely  the  ease. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  it  was  the  case  ? — A.  1  snppose  it  was.  The 
first  vessels  that  reach  that  coast  in  the  spring  are  from  Quebec. 

Mr.  Dana.  The  report  continues : 

At  this  snpreme  moment,  when  despair,  inrreased  by  hunger,  was  on  tbe  point  of 
taking  hold  of  parents  who  conld  no  longer  procDre  their  own  food  and  that  for 
tiieir  children,  there  were  foand  inhuman  merchants  who  were  still  cruel  enough  to 
tpecnlate  upon  this  distress  and  suffering.  They  were  not  ashamed  to  sell^  by  the  weight 
of  gold,  the  mouthful  of  bread  to  these  poor  people  who  claimed  assistance  in  their 
pressing  need.  One  of  these  merchants  sold  barley  flour  $8  a  barrel ;  another  was  not 
ashamed  to  n'ive  $3  for  the  skin  of  a  silver  fox  worth  fifty.  During  the  nronth  of  July 
the  position  of  that  population  had  not  improved,  owing  to  the  total  failure  of  the 
cod-fishery. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  that  there  was  then  a  total  failure  of  tbe  eod- 
flsbery  ? — A.  No ;  I  do  not  snppose  that  those  people  were  fishermen  at 
all  Tbe  writer  evidently  refers  to  the  people  who  had  been  in  the 
employ  of  the  Moisie  Iron  Company.  Tbis  company  failed,  I  believe, 
in  lf)75,  and  those  people  bad  evidently  been  in  the  service  of  the  eom- 
pany. 

Q.  Tbey  are  all  at  the  service  of  some  large  merchants  T — A.  Bat  this 
was  an  iron  company  and  not  a  Ashing  concern  at  all.  I  think  they 
failed  in  1875. 

Mr.  Dana.  The  report  further  states: 

And  when  I  visited  Seven  Islands  and  Ste.  Margnerite,  there  were  neither  floor, 
meat,  fish,  nor  credit  with  merchants.  I  found  these  poor  people  in  snch  a  state  of 
oeatitution,  that  I  took  open  myself  to  asbist  about  a  dozes  of  them  out  of  onr  own 


814 


▲WARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


•t»ck  of  proviaiona.  As  moat  of  these  families  hailed  from  Magdalen  Islands,  I  advised 
them  to  retarn  amongst  their  people.  I  promised,  on  leaving  them,  to  ent^a^e  their 
friends  to  send  a  vessel  to  fetch  them  back,  which  I  easily  succeeded  in  doinji;;  and  a 
few  weeks  afterward,  most  of  the  colony  which  migrated  to  Seven  Islands  liad  re- 
turned to  Magdalen  Islands,  where  it  will  be  a  standing  lesson  against  any  fntiire 
attempt  at  emigration.  In  the  other  divisions  of  the  north  coast,  such  as  tliose  o{ 
Minganand  Bonne  Esperance,  the  few  barrels  of  flour  which  were  distributed  by  tlie 

{provincial  government  prevented  such  distress  as  that  which  was  noticed  at  Seven 
slands  and  Ste.  Marguerite ;  still  the  arrival  of  the  flrat  traders  was  anxiously  looited 
for.  The  failure  of  the  fishery  during  the  first  months  was  not  very  encnura^iii);,  but 
things  fortunately  improved  toward  the  end  of  the  season,  and  fishing  gave  very  HutiH- 
factory  results. 

Witness.  The  cod-fishery  never  fails. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  such  a  failore  is  at  any  time  likely  ? — A.  No,  it  is 
not  as  long  as  there  is  bait  with  which  to  catch  the  cod.  It  is  a  fish  that 
reproduces  immensely — immensely. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  that  there  is  any  real  danger  arising  from  the 
use  of  the  new  method  for  catching  cod  ? — A.  I  am  not  acquainted  with 
these  new  methods.    To  which  do  you  refer  f 

Q.  I  allude  to  some  other  way  of  catching  them  than  with  the  hook, 
Do  they  fish  for  cod  with  seines  f — A.  They  do  on  the  north  shore  when 
the  fish  come  in  shore  plentifully. 

Q.  Taking  all  the  seining  and  all  the  trawling  which  you  and  the 
Americans  have  done,  do  you  think  that  this  threatens  any  real  peril 
to  the  cod-fishery  of  the  North  American  Ocean  f — A.  No,  I  do  not  think 
that  any  real  peril  is  to  be  apprehended.  Of  course  the  number  of  fish- 
ermen increases  every  year,  and  the  fish  require  to  increase  as  well, 
because  the  population  on  the  fishing  coasts  is  increasing ;  and  then 
from  yoar  to  year  of  course  the  number  of  boats  increases,  while  on  our 
Oasp6  shore  the  fishing  is  beyond  question  the  backbone  of  the  country; 
that  is  to  say,  it  is  to  be  mainly  depended  upon  for  the  support  of  the 
people,  because  agriculture  is  not  very  much  developed  there,  I  am 
sorry  to  say,  and  this  is  a  great  detriment  to  the  country,  though  i^  is 
not,  rightly  speaking,  an  agricultural  country.  The  winter  is  too  long 
and  the  summer  too  short  tor  that. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe: 

Q.  I  understand  yon  to  say  that  the  destitution  referred  to  in  the  re- 
port read  arose  from  the  failure  of  iron  works  ? — A.  Yes,  I  can  prove 
that,  because  this  took  place  at  Moisie  at  the  same  time.  At  the  same 
time  I  think  that  the  report  in  question  is  exaggerated.  This  is  my 
candid  opinion. 

Q.  If  I  understood  Mr.  Dana's  question  it  related  to  destitution  among 
fishermen  ? — A.  I  understood  it  so. 

Q.  And  when  Mr.  Dana  continued  to  read  from  the  report  you  sug- 
gested that  this  destitution  was  among  the  miners? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Owing  to  the  failure  of  the  company  you  mentioned  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  the  Moisie  Iron  Company  an  English  company  ? — A.  No,  it 
was  a  Canadian  company.  Molson,  of  Montreal,  was  promineutly  con- 
nected with  it. 

Q.  Did  this  company  fail  owing  the  men  large  amounts  ? — A.  That  is 
a  question  which  I  cannot  answer. 

Q.  What  did  you  hear  about  it  ?— A.  I  heard  that  the  company  failed, 
and  that  in  consequence  a  great  deal  of  misery  was  entailed,  because 
the  employes  numbered  some  5U0  or  600  men. 

Q.  But  the  cod-fishery  never  fails  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  And  it  never  haA  failed  ?— A.  The  last  sentence  of  the  report  read 


AWABD  OF  THE   FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


815 


will  convince  yon  of  that,  when  he  gays  that  at  a  certain  time  the  fish- 
in]!  bad  improved,  and  that  things  were  or  would  be  all  right  again. 
Mr.  Weathebbe.  The  report  continues : 

There  ma^  be  a  falling  off  in  certain  kinds  of  flshinga,  bnt  those  npon  which  the  flah- 
ermen  of  this  division  mostly  depend,  such  as  cod  and  salmon  fishing,  were  very  satis- 
factory, as  well  with  regard  to  the  yield  as  to  the  valne. 

Mr.  Dana.  That  was  during  the  season  o£  1875 — that  is,  the  next 
year. 
Mr.  Weathebbe.  At  the  outset  this  remark  is  made : 

On  acconnt  of  the  total  failure  of  the  flsbery  daring  the  season  of  1875. 

Witness.  That  never  took  place  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  And  as  ))art8  where  such  total  failure  occurred,  special  reference 
is  made  to  Point  des  Monts  and  Mingan  t — A.  They  are  not  fishing- 
stations. 

Q.  Mingan  is  an  Indian  settlement  1 — A.  Tes,  the  only  residents  of 
the  place  are  Indians  employed  by  the  Hudson  Bay  Company, 

Q.  I  believe  that  the  gentleman  who  writes  this  report  had  not  much 
experience  in  this  business? — A.  That  report  must  contain  a  great  deal 
of  exaggeration.  I  am  not  aware  of  there  ever  having  been  such  dis- 
tress as  is  there  mentioned.  If  this  had  ever  occurred,  I  would  cer^ 
tainly  have  heard  something  about  it. 

No.  41. 

Louis  Bot,  of  Gape  Ghatt^,  Gasp^,  fish  merchant,  formerly  fisher: 
man,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Doutre : 

Question.  What  is  your  age? — Answer.  Sixty-nine. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  fished? — A.  Yes.  I  have  been  a  fisherman  myself 
for  about  fifteen  years. 

Q.  When  you  were  young  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  afterwards  ? — A.  I  traded  with  the  fishermen. 

Q.  What  kind  of  a  trade  ?    Did  you  trade  in  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  part  of  the  coast  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence  are  you  acquainted 
with  ?— A.  From  Cape  Chalte  to  Gape  Gasp4. 

Q.  What  is  the  distance  between  those  points  ? — A.  About  140  miles. 

Q.  That  is  on  the  south  cpast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  the  north  coast? — A.  I  have  some 
knowledge  of  the  north  coast,  but  am  not  so  familiar  with  it  as  with  the 
south  coast. 

Q.  What  extent  of  coast  on  the  north  side  do  you  know  ? — A.  About 
160  miles. 

Q.  That  would  make  a  length  of  three  hundred  miles  of  the  river  coast 
that  you  are  acquainted  with  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  to  your  knowledge  that  the  Americans  have  been  fishing  on 
that  part  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence? — A.  O,  yes.  They  have  fished 
near  my  place  very  often. 

Q.  When  did  taey  begin  to  fish  on  that  part  of  the  river  ?— A.  About 
1854. 

Q.  The  time  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Until  then  you  had  never  seen  much  of  them? — A.  O,  yes.     I 
saw  many  during  the  ten  years  previous  to  that. 
Q.  But  they  came  in  large  numbers  after  that  date? — A.  Yes;  they 


816 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERr  COmilSSIOK. 


oame  in  \Mge  numbers  for  aboat  six  or  seven  years.  Bat  after  that 
tbey  came  in  less  nnml)ers. 

Q.  You  mean  during  the  last  years  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  the  time  tbey  were  frequenting  tbat  part  of  the  river,  liow  many 
sails  bave  you  any  knowledge  of  as  visiting  the  coast  T— A.  From  Cape 
Oasp^  to  Ca|)e  Gbatte  f 

Q.  Yes,  and  on  tbe  north  shore  also. — A.  About  250  or  3()0  sails. 

Q.  Schooners  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  general  tonnage  f — A.  About  70  or  80  tons. 

Q.  That  is  the  average  f — A.  Yes.  There  would  be  some  50  toDs  and 
some  120. 

Q.  You  say  that  many  visited  during  one  season  f — A.  From  spring 
to  fallt    O,  yes. 

Q.  After  the  Treaty  of  Reciprocity  ! — A.  Not  so  much. 

Q.  You  mean  not  so  much  after  the  treaty  was  terminated  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  during  its  existence f — A.  Well,  about  the  number  I  bave 
stated. 

Q.  Were  they  fishing  for  fish  to  trade  with  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  kind  offish  was  it  f— A.  God. 

Q.  Where  was  that  cod  caught  f — A.  Do  yon  mean  what  distance  from 
the  shore  t 

Q.  Yes. — A.  Within  three  miles. 

Q.  Well,  out  of  those  300  miles  you  have  spoken  of  where  could  cod 
be  fished  for  out  off  the  coast  T — A.  Well,  for  about  15  or  20  miles  of  the 
north  shore.  On  the  south  shore  there  are  none  at  all  outside.  You 
can't  catch  them  off  beyond  three  miles  ot'  the  south  shore. 

Q.  Where  are  those  fifteen  or  twenty  miles  t — A.  From  Miugan. 

Q.  Have  yon  any  knowledge  of  the  catch  tbat  one  of  those  schooners 
would  take,  neither  the  largest  nor  the  smallest  f  Take  an  average.— 
A.  About  between  500  and  600  barrels,  each  vessel. 

Q.  For  the  whole  season  f — A.  Yes ;  because  some  of  them  made  tvfo 
trips  and  some  three. 

Q.  Well,  then  they  would  not  take  500  or  600  barrels  each  trip  1— A. 
No,  no ;  1  mean  for  the  whole  season. 

Q.  Is  the  cod  as  abundant  now  as  it  was  thirty  or  forty  years  ago! 
Do  you  get  as  much  f — A.  O,  yes,  as  much  as  thirty  or  forty  years  ago. 
I  am  sure  of  it. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  do  you  use  to  take  cod  f — A.  Well,  we  use  cap- 
lin,  herring,  and  sometimes  mackerel — lauuce. 

Q.  Squid  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  is  that  bait  taken  ? — A.  Very  close  to  the  shore — within  a 
mile. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  is  required  to  fish  for  cod  T — A.  The  kind  I  have 
said. 

Q.  But  can  you  use  salt  bait? — A.  O,  sometimes  we  use  it,  bat  we 
don't  do  much  with  it.    It  is  a  very  poor  bait. 

Q.  Now,  as  to  the  mackerel,  is  that  the  fish  for  which  the  Americans 
were  fishing  on  that  part  of  the  river  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  is  the  mackerel  taken  generally  ? — A.  It  is  within  three 
miles,  because  always  the  fat  mackerel  is  inside  of  a  mile — close  by. 

Q.  Well,  from  the  knowledge  you  have  of  the  locality,  do  you  think 
yon  would  see  many  American  schooners  if  they  were  prevented  from 
fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Would  it  be  profitable  for  them  T— A.  They  cannot  do  it.  They 
ironld  not  come,  because  they  would  not  catch  enough  to  pay  expenses. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


817 


Q.  Are  many  of  your  people  denoted  to  fishing !— A.  Yes ;  every  one 
fishes.    They  must. 
Q,  Is  it  only  for  their  own  use,  or  to  trade  with  f — A.  To  trade  as 

well. 

Q.  Iliive  you  any  idea  what  quantity  of  fish  is  taken  by  the  Canadians 
Id  that  part  of  the  river? — A;  O,  yes;  I  have  a  memorandum  here.  I 
calculate  that  the  catch  of  codfish  from  Cape  Chatte  to  Cape  Gasp^, 
along  the  coast,  is  about  220,000  quintals  of  dry  fish,  valued  at  $4.50  a 
qniutal. 

Q.  Do  you  know  if  much  of  that  is  ei ported  to  the  United  States? — 
A.  Not  nt  all ;  not  anj'. 

Q.  As  to  mackerel,  you  can't  say  f — A.  No.  Do  you  not  want  to  know 
what  (|iiantity  is  sent  to  Quebec  and  Montreal  ? 

Q.  Yes.  Is  that  in  addition  to  what  you  have  already  given  ? — A.  No ; 
that  forms  a  part.  The  quantity  of  green  fish  that  we  send  is  about 
2G,000  barrels  a  year,  and  the  quantity  of  large  green  fish  in  draft  is 
aboat  fourteen  or  fifteen  thousand  quintals.  Tiie  large  table-fish,  dried 
fish,  amounts  to  about  9,000  quintals. 

Q.  Well,  alto/aether,  it  makes,  you  say,  a  quantity  of . — A.  I  have 

not  reckoned. 

Q.  But  then  this  is  exclusive  of  the  quantity  exported  to  other  coun* 
tries !— A.  Yes ;  to  be  sure. 

Q.  Did  3'ou  ever  hear  of  any  Canadian  going  to  fish  in  American 
waters  ? — A.  No ;  I  am  sure  none  go  there. 

No.  42. 


The  Coil  Terence  met. 


Monday,  August  27, 1S77. 


John  P.  Taylor,  of  Isaacs  Harbor,  in  the  county  of  Guysborough, 
N.  S.,  fisherman,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic 
;',  sworn  and  examined. 


By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  What  has  been  your  occupation  ? — Answer.  A  fisherman 
for  the  last  forty  years  nearly,  with  the  exception  of  4  or  5  years,  latterly, 
that  I  have  been  deputy  gold  commissioner. 

Q.  During  these  40  years  you  have  fished  in  vessels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Your  own  ?— A.  Yes ;  I  was  part  owner. 

Q.  Where,  during  the  time  you  were  engaged  in  the  fisheries,  did  you 
chiefly  fish  ? — A.  In  the  Gulf  of  St.  Liiwrence  principally. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fisheries  did  you  prosecute  ? — A.  At  some  seasons 
the  mackerel  and  at  others  the  cod  fishing. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  in  the  same  year,  that  you  prosecuted  these  different 
kinds  of  fishing? — A.  Yes;  in  the  same  year.  Generally  in  the  spring 
voyage  I  would  go  for  codfish. 

Q.  Where  would  you  go  on  your  cod  fishing  voyage  ?  What  part  of 
the  Gulf? — A.  I  would  fish  on  the  north  side  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  on 
Bradley  and  Oliphant  Banks,  and  as  far  down  as  Gasp6  and  Bonaven* 
ture. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  inshore  for  codfish  ? — A.  No ;  I  fished  at  a  distance, 
10  or  15  miles. 

Q.  Oa  the  Banks  chiefly  ? — A.  Yes,  sir.    Oft'  Bonaventure  there  were 
fish  iu  about  43  fathoms  of  water  always.    There  were  no  special  banks 
there.    It  was  a  fishing  ground  in  45  fathoms  of  water.    Besides  that  I 
have  always  fished  on  some  of  the  Banks. 
52  F 


m 


818 


AWABD   OF  THE  FI8UEHY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  time  of  the  vear  would  yoa  get  throagh    your  spriug 
voyage  f — A.  In  June.    About  the  last  of  June  wo  would  get  through. 
Q.  And  then  you  would  commence  mackerel  fishing,  would  you  f— a 
Yen. 

Q.  Where  did  you  prosecute  the  mackerel  fishing  f — A.  On  the  north 
Bide  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  at  the  mouth  of  Bay  ChaleurH,  ubout 
Point  Miscou,  and  on  the  north  aide  of  Cape  Breton,  from  Clieticump  to 
Port  Hood. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  did  you  generally  take  your  maikerel 
catvh  f — A.  From  two  miles  to  as  near  as  we  could  go  to  the  shore, 

Q.  Then,  as  I  understand,  yon  scarcely  ever  caught  mackerel  oiitHuU 
of  two  miles  from  the  shore  T — A.  Very  seldom. 

Q.  The  catch,  you  say,  in  fact  was  from  two  miles  to  within  as  cIoho 
as  >ou  could  get  to  the  shore  f — A.  Yes ;  as  close  as  we  could  g<  t  with 
out  grounding  the  vessel. 

Q.  Was  that  your  experience  during  all  jour  voyages  for  mackerel, 
year  after  year  ? — A.  With  the  exception  of  one  year  that  was  iny  ex- 
perience. 

Q.  What  year  was  the  exceptional  one! — A.  I  could  not  point  (mt 
exactly  the  date.  I  think  it  was  either  1»60  or  1851.  The  macktrel 
that  year  were  on  the  northern  side  of  the  river  Saint  Lawrence,  thr '  is, 
the  principal  part  of  what  was  taken,  except  it  was  very  late  in  th    ,\kX 

Q.  In  which  direction  from  Seven  isles,  cast  and  west  f — A.  Yes ;  iVom 
Seven  Isles  both  east  and  west,  between  0  and  10  miles  ofi*. 

Q.  Was  this  your  own  catch  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  of  the  fleet  that  wi,  with 
me  principally. 

Q.  How  many  were  with  you  ? — A.  About  150  or  200  sail. 

Q.  American  vessels  ? — A.  Not  all.  There  was  about  five  or  six  Xora 
Scotia  vessels,  I  think. 

Q.  All  the  rest  of  the  vessels  were  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  you  say  that  j'ear  was  an  exceptional  one  along  this  sliore; 
you  did  not  take  these  close  inshore? — A.  No;  we  fished  thcni  witbiQ 
9  or  10  miles  of  the  land  on  that  shore. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  within  10  miles  and  beyond  3  miles? — A,  Yks;  it 
was  more  than  three  miles  out,  perhaps  9  or  10  miles.  That  v  irg  ;vliat 
we  used  to  judge  ourselves. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  on  that  trip  ?  Was  it  the  whole  seasui" .'  -A. 
No ;  about  three  weeks,  the  mackerel  lasted  there  that  season. 

Q.  Where  then  did  you  go? — A.  The  next  catch  was  on  the  no!*'i  wle 
of  Cape  Breton,  late  in  the  season — late  in  October.  About  tin  '  <  h  of 
October  they  struck  in  there. 

Q.  Did  they  go  inshore  ? — A.  Close  in.  The  closer  you  couM  got  the 
better. 

Q.  They  came  close  inshore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  how  many  did  you  catch  that  time  you  went  to  t'lvi  nortli 
shore  of  the  St.  Lawrence? — A.  I  think  we  had  1:^0  barrels. 

Q.  You  managed  to  get  that  in  three  weeks  ? — A.  Yes ;  t  here  were 
nine  hands. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  on  the  shores  of  Cape  Breton  inshore  ?— A. 
About  100  barrels ;  just  100  barrels. 

Q.  Then,  I  understand  that  all  the  years  you  have  been  flshiup:  you 
never  succeeded  in  getting  them  outside  with  the  single  exceptiou  of 
these  years,  1850  and  1851  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  your  experience  after  40  years'  fishing  ? — A.  Yes ;  from 
1840  to  1854  that  is  my  experience.    Since  that  I  have  been  in  the  bav 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


819 


several  times,  not  mackerel  fishing  but  cod  fishing.   We  always  have  to 
go  insbore  for  bait,  once  or  twice. 

Q.  Now,  in  all  your  experience,  from  what  you  have  heard  or  from 
your  own  personal  experience,  did  you  ever  know  of  mackerel  being 
taltoii  otherwise  than  inshore,  except  in  those  seasons  yon  have  spoken 
otf—A.  No;  I  never  knew  voyages  made  oflMbore,  except  that  one 
season. 

Q.  During  that  senaon  that  yon  say  you  got  them  offshore,  do  yoa 
knosr  of  your  own  knowledge  whether  there  was  any  caught  inshore  at 
the  same  time  that  you  were  catching  ofl'^hore  ? — A.  There  was  not. 
Tbey  were  scarce.  There  was  a  few  taken  on  the  south  side  of  the  St. 
Lawrence,  about  Fox  River  one  or  two  days,  but  it  was  very  few. 

Q,  In  the  fall  of  the  year  then  they  struck  inshore? — A.  Yes;  they 
struck  inshore  on  the  north  side  of  Cupe  Breton. 

Q.  Such  another  year  as  that  you  never  knew  before  or  since  ? — A. 
No;  not  that  a  vessel  made  a  trip  entirely  offshore — a  lull  trip — I  never 
knev7  it. 

Q.  Will  you  toll  me  would  it  be  possible,  from  your  experience  of 
mackerel  fishing,  for  it  to  be  successfully  carried  on,  either  by  Canadians 
or  Americans,  unless  they  had  the  right  to  flsli  inshore  f — A.  No;  they 
could  not  carry  it  on  successfully.  They  could  not  carry  it  on  at  all, 
that  is  to  make  anything  out  of  it. 

Q.  Now,  with  reference  to  the  cod  iishing,  is  it  possible  that  that  fish- 
ery could  be  carried  on  in  the  ;:'7H'  at  ull,  unless  access  were  had  to  the 
shore  for  fresh  bait  ? — A.  In  the  gulf?  It  might  perhaps  bb  carried  on 
ill  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence.  You  can  get  bait  a  great  deal  of  the  time 
in  nets.  You  can  get  bait  enough  very  often  to  line-fish,  but  not  for 
tr.vwiing,  without  access  to  the  shores. 

Q,  Where  do  you  get  it  in  nets? — A.  They  sink  them  alongside  the 
i:(-s3el.  You  will  sometimes  get  pretty  good  hauls;  sometimes  you  will 
be  a  week  without  getting  any. 

Q.  Now  I  want  to  ask  you  whether  any  man  in  his  senses  would  send 
)  vesisel  out  cod  fishing  upon  the  chance  of  getting  bait  out  in  the  gulf 
f  be  might  have  to  wait  for  a  week  ? — A.  No ;  I  think  the  fishery  is 
not  carried  on  in  that  way. 

Q.  Well,  in  fact,  where  do  the  Americcn  fishermen  get  bait  for  cod 
lishiugin  the  gulf? — A.  They  will  run  inshore. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Sometimes  as  close  as  they  can  get. 
Perhaps  closer  than  they  can  with  the  vessel.  They  will  go  in  boats  to 
get  it. 

Q.  Is  all  the  bait,  as  a  rule,  taken  within  two  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A. 
Piiucii)ally  all. 

Q.  Now,  without  that  privilege  could  the  Americana  successtully 
prosecute  cod  fishing  in  the  gulf? — A.  Not  successfully,  sir.  No;  they 
could  not.  Formerly  it  was  done  when  they  hand-lined  all  their  fish. 
When  they  caught  them  by  hand-lines  it  used  to  be  done.  They  used 
to  get  their  bait  alongside,  but  when  they  fish  in  trawls  they  can't  do  it 
at  all.  They  can't  get  bait  for  trawls  on  the  Banks,  on  any  of  the  Banks 
in  the  gulf. 

Q.  When  they  fished  with  hand-lines  didn't  they  come  inshore? — A. 
^nietimes  they  came  insbore  and  sometimes  they  sunk  nets.  The  nets 
generally  sunk  to  the  bottom,  or  nearly  to  the  bottom. 

Q.  How  far  was  that  from  the  shore  ? — A.  On  the  Banks  where  they 
were  riding. 

Q.  Formerly  they  could  do  that  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  not  that  a  risky  business  ? — A.  Yes. 


820 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  That  is  an  uocertain  basines  1 — A.  Yes.  You  might  stay  a  week 
and  get  none. 

Q.  Now,  I  ask  you  again  whether  any  person  would  prosecute  that 
fishery  if  that  precarious  tueaus  were  the  only  means  of  getting  bait?— 
A.  I  would  not. 

Q.  Do  you  think  any  prudent  man  would  ? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Then,  in  fact,  unless  they  came  close  inshore  for  bait,  they  can  only 
get  a  precarious  supply  on  the  Banks  by  sinking  nets,  and  might  have 
to  wait  a  week  without  gettingbait,  if  they  did  get  it  at  all.  Is  that  so?— 
A.  That  is  so. 

Q.  Then  do  I  understand  that  in  fact  to  a  prudent  man  it  is  abso- 
lutely necessary  for  the  cod  fishing  in  the  gulf  that  he  must  have  access 
inshore  for  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  since  the  Washington  Treaty  they  have  the  privilege,  as  yon 
are  aware,  of  transshipping  their  cargo,  landing  where  they  like,  and 
Eending  them  to  markets,  and  going  back  to  fish  again.  Is  that,  in  your 
judgment,  a  privilege  or  not? — A.  It  is  a  privilege.  I  think,  certainly, 
it  is  a  privilege. 

Q.  A  man  can  make  two  trips,  two  voyages,  where  he  otherwise  could 
make  only  one? — A.  By  landing  and  transshipping  he  can  land  in  24 
hours.  He  can  come  in  and  laud  his  cargo  and  be  ready  to  go  on  the 
fishing-ground  again. 

Q.  It  is  a  valuable  privilege,  you  think  ? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  Does  it  not  enable  a  vessel  to  go  back  at  once  in  the  height  of  the 
fishing  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  time,  if  they  had  to  go  back  to  the  home  port,  would  they 
probably  lose,  if  tbey  had  not  this  privilege  1 — A.  It  takes  about  a  fort- 
night to  go  to  any  of  their  ports  pretty  much.  They  can't  be  there  and 
back  again  in  less  than  that. 

Q.  Then  that  would  be  lost,  and  they  save  it  by  transshipping,  do  they 
not? — A.  They  need  be  away  only  two  or  three  days  by  transshipping. 

Q.  Then  it  is  a  saving  of  ten  days? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  say  it  makes  a  difference  of  at  least  one  trip  in  the  sea- 
son ? — A.  I  think  so,  and  more  too. 

Q.  That  much  at  any  rate,  and  more  too,  you  say  ? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Is  it  two  trips  ? — A.  No  ;  perhaps  not. 

Q.  But  some  years,  I  suppose,  it  would  be  two  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  certainly 
mnkes  a  difference  of  a  trip. 

Q.  During  the  time  you  were  actually  engaged  in  the  fisheries  in  the 
gulf,  about  what  number  of  American  vessels  were  there  at  the  same 
time,  year  by  year,  in  the  gulf,  putting  a  low  average  ?— A.  I  think  400, 
or  perhaps  450. 

Q.  Then  at  a  low  average  you  put  down  450  ? — A.  During  the  years 
from  1840  to  1854  I  put  it  at  that. 

Q.  That,  you  say,  is  a  low  average  ? — A.  I  think  so.  There  were 
some  years — one  year — 1,000  sail,  some  years  700,  some  years  800. 

Q.  Those  are  all  mackerel  fishers? — A.  Yes;  the  mackerel  tleet  alone. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  cod-fishers  at  the  same  time  ? — A.  Per- 
haps 100  sail  would  be  the  average. 

Q.  That  you  think  a  low  average  for  the  cod  fishing  fleet  ? — A.  I  think 
so. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  what  the  cod-fishing  fleet  around  Gaspe, 
Miscou,  and  along  the  North  shore  of  the  Saint  Lawrence  was  during 
that  time  ? — A.  I  used  to  see  them  when  we  would  be  over  there.    D 
on  Bradley  and  Olipbaut  and  Bonaventure  grounds,  that  was  the  range, 
and  along  the  north  side  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


821 


in  tbe  height  of  the 


.  During  the  years 


■  fleet  ?— A.  I  think 


Q.  And  from  your  knowledge  you  fix  the  average  at  100  ? — A.  I  think 
that  was  about  the  average.  While  the  large  fleets  of  mackerel-catchers 
were  in,  the  average  of  cod-fishers  would  be  about  100,  but  the  cod  fishers 
increased  afterward. 

Q.  What  would  bo  the  average  catch  of  each  vessel,  by  the  season, 
during  your  time,  whether  she  made  two  or  three  trips? — A.  The 
average  ? 

Q.  Yes ;  for  the  whole  season ;  some  would  be  more  and  some  less, 
but  strike  an  average? — A.  GOO  barrels,  I  8upi)ose,  would  be  the  aver- 
age. 

Q.  That  is  a  low  average,  perhaps  ? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Are  you  not  quite  sure  that  you  are  within  the  mark,  putting  that 
as  an  average  ? — A.  I  think  I  am. 

Q.  When  you  put  the  average  number  of  vessels  at  the  low  figure  of 
450,  you  don't  mean  to  say  it  may  not  be  more,  but  that  you  want  to  be 
within  the  mark ;  is  that  so? — A.  450  is  a  very  low  average,  I  should 
think.  A  vessel  making  two  trips,  you  see,  would  have  300  barrels  each 
trip.  300  barrels  each  trip  would  not  be  considered  a  heavy  trip  at  all ; 
but  when  they  made  three  trips,  perhaps  there  would  not  be  quite  so 
many  each  trip.    They  would  go  quicker. 

Q.  Does  any  of  them  ever  make  less  than  two  trips  ? — A.  No ;  they 
all  calculated  to  make  two  trips. 

Q,  And  some  more  ? — A.  Yes. 

(}.  Now  put  it  at  two  trips,  would  not  300  barrels  be  rather  a  small 
catch  ? — A.  Perhaps  that  would  be  an  average.  A  good  many  used  to 
miss  the  fish,  you  know.  With  a  large  fleet,  of  500  or  600  sail,  I  would 
not  say  the  average  was  more  than  I  have  named. 

Q.  You  say  you  think  that  it  is  a  low  average  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  the  fleet  averaged  500  or  GOO  sail,  as  it  sometimes  did  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Tlien  you  are  entirely  within  the  mark  as  to  the  number  of  vessels, 
and  of  barrels  caught,  both  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  was  pretty  well  acquainted 
with  all  the  fleet  at  that  time.  I  had  a  brother  myself  in  a  vessel  out 
of  Gloucester,  and  I  was  acquainted  with  a  great  many  of  the  Glouces- 
ter vessels  myself. 

Q.  As  to  the  number  of  cod-fishing  vessels,  can  you  be  positive  upon 
that  ?  You  have  put  it  at  100  ? — A.  I  could  not  be  positive,  except  as 
to  one  year.  I  know  that  from  some  statistics  they  bad  among  them- 
selves when  I  was  aboard  of  them.  That  is  all  the  number  that  was  in 
the  bay.  It  was  about  101  vessels  that  year.  I  do  not  recollect  what 
year  that  was. 

Q.  That  wi*s  one  year  that  you  ascertained  the  number  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  an  exceptional  year  ? — A.  No,  I  think  not. 

Q.  Since  the  Washington  Treaty,  in  1871,  have  the  Americans  come  in 
much  into  Canadian  ports  for  ice,  bait,  &c.,  for  cod-fishing  purposes  ? — 
A.  O  yes,  sir ;  they  get  bait  on  our  shores  principally.  Sometimes  when 
they  come  from  home  they  have  bait,  but  when  they  refit  with  bait  they 
come  to  our  shores  for  it. 

Q.  Then  do  I  understand  that  they  come  with  bait  from  their  own 
ports,  but  oftener  they  do  not  ? — A.  Sometimes  they  get  bait  at  Grand 
Manan  in  the  spring.  Sometimes  they  get  it  at  Prospect,  and  some- 
times farther  down  the  shore. 

Q.  Then  they  frequently  come  into  British  waters  and  get  their  first 
bait  for  the  season  ! — A.  Yes ;  very  often. 

Q.  Do  they  get  ice  at  the  same  time  ? — A.  Where  they  can  get  ice 
they  get  it. 


822 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


I' 


I ; 


I  ! 


Q.  I  believe  cod-fishing  requires  fresh  bait,  to  be  prosecuted  success- 
fully ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  bait  do  they  use  for  cod-fishing  ? — A.  Herring,  mackerel, 
and  squid;  those  are  the  principal  baits  they  get  on  these  coasts. 

Q.  Do  they  get  squid  in  large  quantities  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  haul  her- 
ring sometimes  in  seines  at  Grow  Harbor  and  Cape  Canso.  They  get 
them  in  large  quantitieij!,  quite  sufficient  to  bait. 

Q.  Do  they  chiefly  fish  themselves  for  bait  in  our  waters,  or  do  tUey 
buy  it?— A.  They  buy  it. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  at  all  f — A.  I  have  never  known  them  to  fish  for  it. 

Q.  What  harbors  are  you  speaking  of  when  you  say  you  never  knew 
them  to  fish  f — A.  I  never  knew  them  to  fish  in  any  of  the  harbors  on 
the  Jifova  Scotia  shore  for  it. 

Q.  They  find  it  cheaper  and  more  expeditious  to  buy  it ' — A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  You  never  saw  them  fish  for  it  ? — A.  No ;  I  never  knew  they  did, 
except  in  Newfoundland.  I  have  a  sou  who  is  now  in  the  business,  and 
he  says  they  fish  for  bait  sometimes  there. 

Q.  Your  own  experience  is  that  they  buy  it  in  Nova  Scotia  waters?— 
A.  Yes ;  they  invariably  buy  it. 

Q.  How  old  are  you  ? — A.  62. 

Q.  What  do  you  estimate  the  privilege  to  our  fishermen  of  flsbing 
in  American  waters  within  three  miles  of  the  American  coast  ? — A.  I 
never  knew  any  of  our  people  go  there  to  fish.  I  have  heard  there  was 
one  went  there  last  year. 

Q.  Did  she  make  sneh  a  ruinous  voyage  that  she  never  went  there 
again? — A.  I  never  heard  the  result. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  What  kind  of  fishing  did  you  begin  earliest — cod  or  mackerel  ?— 
A.  The  first  trip  I  went  in  a  vessel  I  fished  for  cod. 

Q.  What  year  was  that,  your  first  vessel  fishing  f — A.  183S,  I  think. 

Q.  Did  you  then  fish  in  company  with  the  American  vessels  ?— A. 
Yes,  sir ;  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  I  did. 

Q.  Were  the  Americans  cod-fishing  vessels? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  at  that  time  did  you  know  of  the  American  cod-flsheriueii 
buying  bait  in  your  waters  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  They  did  not  use  to  then  ? — A.  ±yo. 

Q.  How  long  ago  did  the  American  fishermen  begin  to  buy  bait  in 
your  waters  ? — A.  It  is  about  20  years  ago  since  they  began  to  buy ;  I'l 
or  20  years. 

Q.  That  carries  us  back  to  1857  or  1858? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  where  did  they  first  begin  to  buy  bait  ?— 
Scotian  shore,  I  think. 

Q.  At  what  harbors  ? — A.  Prospect  Harbor,  Cape  Canso,  and  every 
place  where  they  could  get  it  along  the  shore. 

Q.  Then  the  first  twenty  years  of  your  experience  the  cod- fishing  fleet 
of  the  States  bought  no  bait  in  these  waters? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Now  about  the  bait  that  you  had  been  accustomed  to  see  used  for 
the  cod;  you  did  not  mention  caplin  among  the  fish? — A.  No;  well,  tbey 
never  bought  caplin. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  very  necessary  bait  ?— A.  Yes ;  but  the  caplin  are 
«  generally  deep.    They  get  them  without  buying. 

Q.  Did  they  have  to  have  many  caplin  in  those  years'? — A.  Xo; 
there  is  no  caplin  on  these  shores.  In  fact,  they  don't  answer  for  tbe 
Banks. 


A.  On  this  Nova 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


823 


tia  waters  ?- 


er  went  there 


f  mackerel  ?— 


cod- fishermen 


Q.  Then  they  could  contrive  to  get  along  without  caplin  bait  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  never  been  in  the  habit  of  using  it  much  yourself? — 
A.  At  Labrador,  but  not  in  the  Bank  fishery.    I  never  used  it  there. 

Q,  Now  about  squid ;  how  long  can  you  keep  that  fresh  1 — A.  Three 
weeks,  in  ice. 

Q.  Could  not  you  keep  it  a  little  longer  if  it  was  well  frozen  ? — A. 
Xo,  sir ;  it  won't  keep  longer  than  that  well.  I  never  could  keep  it  as 
Ion?  as  that  myself. 

Q.  You  used  to  have  ice  in  your  vessel ;  what  was  the  tonnage  of  the 
vessels  you  fished  in  for  cod  ? — A.  Fifty  or  sixty  tons. 

Q.  Never  any  larger  than  that? — A.  Sixty  tons,  I  tliiuk,  was  the 
largest. 

Q.  How  early  did  the  cod-fishers  begin  to  use  ice? — A.  It  is  eighteen 
or  nineteen  years  since  1  first  knew  them  to  use  ice. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  salted  squid  used  ? — A.  Yes. 

i}.  Is  it  used  a  good  deal  ? — A.  Not  a  great  deal ;  never  except  for 
the  fall  trip.     It  is  used  for  the  fall  trip. 

Q.  They  will  keep  how  long  ? — A.  As  long  as  you  want  it.  They 
have  to  save  it.  It  has  to  be  properly  salted.  Then  it  is  soaked  out 
and  used  for  bait.  It  is  a  good  fall  bait,  but  it  is  not  a  bait  in  summer — 
salt  squid  ;  not  a  good  bait. 

Q.  Do  the  people  use  poor  mackerel  a  good  deal  for  a  cod-fishing 
bait  ? — A.  They  use  it ;  not  a  great  deal.  Uerring  is  the  principal 
thing. 

Q.  They  use  some  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Don't  they  use  the  head  of  mackerel  and  the  refuse  when  they  can 
get  it  ? — A.  For  trawling  they  do. 

Q.  Do  your  boats  use  it  ?— A.  Not  for  hand-lining.  Tiiey  use  it  lor 
trawling.    It  is  no  bait  for  hand-lining. 

Q.  Well,  perhaps  you  will  explain  the  dift'erence,  why  it  is  good  for 
trawling  aiul  not  for  hand-lines. — A.  The  fish  pick  it  off  the  bottom  on 
the  trawls,  but  they  won't  touch  it  on  the  hand-lines.    That  is  the  reason. 

Q.  ^Vhen  you  first  began  to  fish  for  cod,  how  large  was  the  American 
cod-fishing  fieet  ? — A.  About  100  sail. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  it  to  be  much  larger  ? — A.  A  little  larger. 

Q.  When  was  it  largest  ? — A.  I  think  in  the  year  1833  there  was  the 
larjfest  cod-fishing  fieet  I  ever  saw  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Well,  it  was  as  great  20  years  ago  in  the  Gulf  as  now,  quite  .' — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  ]\Iore,  did  you  say  ? — A.  I  don't  know  that  it  was  more ;  perhaps 
there  was  more  then. 

Q.  Then  it  comes  to  this,  that  during  the  first  20  years  of  your  expe- 
rience the  American  cod-fishing  fleet,  being  as  large  as  it  has  ever  been 
since,  did  contrive  to  get  along  without  either  buying  bait  or  procuring 
ice  here  ?    That  is  the  result,  is  it  not  ? — A.  Y'es,' 

Q.  Now,  as  to  mackerel-fishing,  what  year  did  you  first  begin  to  fish 
for  mackerel ;  I  don'*:  mean  in  a  boat,  but  in  a  vessel  ? — A.  Well,  I  think 
nisbedin  1S38. 

Q.  And  did  you  fish  then  in  company  with  the  American  fishermen  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  happen  to  remember  what  bait  you  used  there  ? — A.  We 
used  herring,  pogies,  and  clams.  « 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  pogies? — A.  From  the  Americans.  I  invari- 
ably got  them  from  the  American  fieet.  They  brought  them  up  for  me, 
autl  sometimes  clams. 


:ftit-: 


I3^%X>«,4> 


f  .  K 


3     " 


824 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHEKY    JOMMISSION. 


Q.  But  herring  you  and  they  got  here,  chiefly? — A.  Yes;  although 
they  brought  herring  from  home  part  of  the  time,  I  believe. 

Q.  They  brought  it  from  home  in  the  first  instance,  and  afterwards 
procured  it  here  as  they  wanted  it  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  always  fish  with  the  American  fleet? — A.  I  always  fished 


mackerel  with  them ;  yes. 


Well, 


Q.  What  is  the  reason  that  this  fleet  all  keeps  together  ?— A. 
the  mackerel  keep  together. 

Q.  Does  not  a  vessel  do  better  fishing  singlj  by  itself?  Don't  they 
keep  the  mackerel  together  by  the  bait  they  throw  over  ? — A.  While 
there  is  a  considerable  fleet  fishing  at  anchor,  the  mackerel  will  stay 
better  than  when  there  is  a  large  fleet  fishing  adrift.  When  there  is  a 
large  fleet  fishing  adrift  they  get  scattered  a  good  deal  through  the  day, 
and  the  mackerel  get  scattered  when  there  is  one  hundred  or  two  hun- 
dred sail  of  vessels  fishing  among  them  in  that  way. 

Q.  Then  the  mackerel  fleet  keeps  together  on  purpose,  as  -^  rule, 
doesn't  it  ? — A.  Yes  ;  I  think  so. 

Q.  You  kept  with  them  on  purpose,  didn't  you? — A.  Well,  I  kept 
where  there  was  likely  to  be  the  best  fishing  grounds ;  they,  I  think,  did 
the  same. 

Q.  But  your  experience  was  that  having  the  fleet  together  kept  the 
fish  together  better  ? — A.  Y'es ;  when  at  anchor.  When  they  are  drift- 
ing the  fish  become  scattered. 

Q.  They  have  to  drift  away  from  shore? — A.  Y'es. 

Q,  The  drifting  is  always  from  the  shore? — A.  No;  not  always. 

Q.  But  it  must  be  a  little  risky  drifting  to  the  shore  ? — A.  O,  no ; 
only  you  must  get  under  way  in  time.  When  the  wind  is  on  shore  they 
have  to  drift  to  the  shore. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  How  many  times  ? — A.  I  cannot  tell  you  how  many  times ;  some 
one  hundred  times. 

Q.  Then  you  went  there  every  year  a  number  of  times  1  Every  trip 
you  went  in  the  bay  you  would  be  there  two  or  three  times  ? — A.  Yes ; 
I  hardly  ever  left  without  going  there. 

Q.  Did  you  always  go  to  Oliphant  Bank  and  Bradley  Bank  ? — A.  No ; 
not  for  mackerel.    I  always  went  there  for  cod-fish  though. 

Q.  Your  home  is  in  Guysborough  County,  the  next  county  east  of 
this?—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  did  you  have  a  pretty  uniform  course  that  you  pursued  in 
fishing  when  you  left  for  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes ;  according  to  the  season 
of  the  year.  We  went  to  different  places  at  different  seasons  of  the 
year.  We  always  went  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  for  mackerel. 
Sometimes  we  went  up  the  north  side  of  the  island  (Cape  Breton)  and 
tried  at  Port  Hood,  then  at  Autigonish  Bay  and  Cape  George,  then  up 
the  north  side  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  sometimes  through  the 
Straits  of  Northumberland,  fishing  down  the  north  shore  of  the  island. 
Then  we  went  to  Magdalen  Islands.  Sometimes  we  would  fish  a  day  or 
two  on  the  north  side  of  Prince.  Edward  Island,  and  if  the  mackerel 
would  not  bite  there  we  would  go  to  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  that  you  never  fished  at  Bradley  or  Oliphant 
Banks  for  mackerel? — A.   Never,  except  for  bait  when  cod-flshing. 
When  we  would  wash  down  in  the  evening  we  would  jig  for  bait ;  some- 
4  times  we  would  get  it  and  sometimes  not. 

Q.  Did  yon  say  caplin  was  not  suitable  for  bank-fishing  f — A.  No ;  it 
is  not  a  good  bait  for  bank-fishing ;  they  are  too  i?oft.  They  seldom  or 
ever  use  them  if  they  can  get  anything  else ;  they  use  them  for  shore- 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


825 


''es;  although 

e. 

id  afterwards 

always  fished 

!r?-A.  Well, 

?  Don't  they 
:?— A.  While 
ore!  will  stay 
len  there  is  a 
ough  the  day, 
d  or  two  hull- 

•se,  as  "  rule, 

Well,  I  kept 
y,  I  think,  did 

ther  kept  the 
they  are  drift- 


always. 
?— A.  O,  mo; 
on  shore  they 

8. 

times;  some 

Every  trip 
s?— A/Yes; 

uk?— A.  No; 

I. 

ounty  east  of 

pursued  in 
o  the  seasoa 

iasons  of  the 

or  mackerel. 
Breton)  and 

)rge,  then  up 
through  the 

)f  the  island. 
fish  a  day  or 
he  mackerel 

or  Oliphant 
cod-fishing, 
bait;  some- 

—A.  No ;  it 
ly  seldom  or 
sm  for  shore- 


fishing  while  they  are  fresh,  but  you  can't  keep  them  frosh  for  bauk- 
yiing. 

Q,  JIow  long  can  you  keep  them  fresh  ? — A.  I  don't  think  you  can 
keep  them  fre  h  at  all  for  bank-fishing. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  them  to  be  used  except  fresh  ?— A.  Yes;  the 
French  have  used  them  on  the  Grand  Banks. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  fished  with  the  French? — A.  I  have  been  fishing 
on  the  Banks  where  they  have  been. 

Q.  Do  they  use  fresh  bait? — A.  Yes;  they  do  now;  they  didn't  for- 
merly though.    1  have  known  them  use  salt  bait  altogether. 

Q.  Do  you  approve  of  salting  caplin  for  bait ;  do  you  think  it  is  a  good 
bait?— A.  No. 

Q.  Then,  you  would  not  give  much  for  caplin  for  bait,  any  wjiy  ? — A. 
No;  except  on  the  Labrador  shore,  where  they  get  it  fresh." 

Q.  Or  for  inshore  fishing  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  is  good  for  that,  the  best  they 
can  get. 

Q.  State  how  far  north  the  caplin  is  found,  if  you  know  ? — A.  I  never 
was  farther  north  than  Grosse  Water.  They  are  there  some  years,  not 
all. 

Q.  Where  is  that  ? — A.  It  is  north  of  the  Straits  of  Belle  Isle  some 
distance — 500  miles  north. 

Q.  How  far  south  is  the  farthest  you  ever  fished,  either  in  your  own 
vessel  or  anybody  else's  ? — A.  I  never  fished  south  of  the  Western  Banks 
bere. 

By  Mr.  Thomson  : 

Q.  What  Banks  are  you  speaking  of? — A.  What  is  called  the  West- 
ern Bank. 

Q.  ])o  you  mean  La  Have  Bank  ? — A.  That  is  part  of  it. 

Q.  Now  caplin  is  got  along  the  north  shore  of  the  Saint  Lawrence ; 
it  frequents  that  shore,  does  it  not  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  it  is  used  in  the  spring  altogether  by  the  in- 
shore fishermen? — A.  Yes,  altogether ;  well,  not  altogether;  launce  is 
used  in  the  latter  part  of  the  voyage. 

Q.  But  that  is  after  the  caplin  is  gone  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  while  the  caplin  is  there  it  is  used  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  squid,  herring,  and  launce  ? — A.  There  is  no  squid  there. 

Q.  Are  you  quite  sure  of  that  ? — A.  I  am  quite  sure.  I  never  saw 
any. 

Q.  But  you  do  not  undertake  to  say  it  is  not  there  ? — A.  I  undertake 
to  say  there  is  no  squid  from  Cape  Harrison  to  the  Strait  of  Belle  Isle. 
But  there  is  plenty  on  the  Newfoundland  side. 

Q.  But  not  along  the  north  shore  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  far  down  the  north  shore  is  Cape  Harrison  ? — A.  It  is  about 
350  miles  beyond  Spotted  Island.  It  is  where  the  land  turns  oil"  to  the 
north  on  the  Labrador  shore. 

Q.  Is  it  on  the  River  Saint  Lawrence  or  in  the  Gulf  ? — A.  It  is  1,000 
miles  from  the  River  Saint  Lawrence  nearly. 

Q.  Then  it  is  away  out  in  the  Strait  ? — A.  Away  around.  It  is  Hud- 
son's Bay. 

Q.  From  Cape  Harrison  you  say  to  the  Strait  of  Belie  Isle  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  north  of  Anticosti,  on  the  north  shore,  there  is  squid  and  caplia 
toot— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Along  the  north  shore,  then,  from  the  western  point  of  Anticosti, 
due  north  of  that  and  all  the  way  to  the  westward,  there  is  squid  from 
there  in  along  the  north  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 


826 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Now  wbat  wonld  take  yon  to  Magdalen  Islands  ?  Was  it  on  cod- 
fishing  trips  ? — A.  Ko,  mackerel  trips  principally. 

Q.  Do  yon  take  mackerel  in  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Close  in  shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  not  Pleasant  Bay  there? — A.  That  and  Amherst  Island  was  one 
very  good  fishing  place,  but  there  were  others. 

Q.  How  do  yon  take  them  in  Pleasant  Bay  ?  Do  you  seine  them  from 
the  shore  f — A.  I  never  seined  mackerel  there,  but  I  have  netted  them 
there  inshore  and  I  have  caught  them  with  the  hook. 

Q.  Would  you  have  to  land  to  net  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  the  Americans  do  the  same  thing ;  do  they  land  and  net  them 
as  you  did  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Why  T  In  those  days  were  they  not  allowed  inshore  ? — A.  They 
never  netted  mackerel  there  to  my  knowledge  in  the  years  I  was  there. 
They  would  take  them  with  a  jig. 

Q.  Close  in  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  they  laud  for  the  purpose  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Not  in  your  time  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Speaking  of  the  number  of  cod  fishing  vessels,  you  did  not  speak 
of  the  last  ten  years  with  reference  to  these  cod-tishing  vessels  f— A. 
Not  particularly.    No. 

Q.  For  the  last  ten  years  you  cannot  say  what  nurabpr  frequented  the 
bay? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  don't  know  now  ? — A.  I  was  in  the  bay  six  years  ago.  I  know 
pretty  well  what  was  there.  I  was  all  over  the  bay  myself,  all  through 
the  cod-fishing  grounds,  for  three  or  four  weeks  fishing  there.  That  Mas 
the  last  time  I  was  there.    Tbey  fished  altogether  then  with  trawls. 

Q.  That  was  the  last  time  you  were  there,  ov^er  the  cod-fishing  grounds 
six  years  ago  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  they  first  begin  to  fish  with  trawls? — A.  They  have  been 
in  use  about  ten  years  among  our  people  and  with  the  Americans  on 
these  coasts,  or  on  these  Banks,  Grand  Bank,  Banquero,  and  those 
places. 

Q.  Is  it  a  destructive  mode  of  fishing  ? — A.  It  takes  the  motber-fish 
of  course,  although  I  don't  see  that  it  is  any  more  destructive  killing 
the  old  fish  than  the  half-grown  ones. 

Q.  It  destroys  the  mother-fish  a  great  deal  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  is  the  spawning-ground,  to  your  knowledge  ? — A.  From 
Point  Miscou  west  is  the  spawning  grounds  of  these  schools  that  migrate 
about  these  shores,  from  Point  Miscou  as  far  west  as  Cocaigne. 

Q.  Take  Cbedabucto  Bay,  is  that  a  spawning-ground  ? — A.  I  never 
knew  mackerel  to  spawn  there  but  once,  in  any  quantities. 

Q.  They  spawn  around  the  shores  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  do  tbey  !- 
A.  Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Do  they  spawn  in  the  Bay  of  Cbaleurs  ? — A.  Yes.  Well,  not  in 
the  Bay  of  Cbaleurs,  but  westward  of  the  mouth,  there  is  about  25  or 
30  miles  of  the  coast  which  in  spawning  time  is  all  white.  I  never  knew 
them  spawn  anywhere  in  the  gulf  but  there. 

Q.  If  a  witness  stated  that  they  spawned  in  the  Bay  Cbaleurs  as  far 
up  as  Seven  Isles,  would  you  say  that  was  wrong  ?^A.  No,  I  would  not 
say  that  was  wrong. 

Q,  You  have  not  examined  up  there  to  -tee? — A.  No.  I  never  saw 
them  spawning  in  there ;  I  have  seen  them  nowhere  else  but  where  I 
have  named. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  yourself  away  up  the  coast  ? — A.  Not  a  great 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


827 


Every  trip  I  have  made  I  have  been  aroand  the  galf  once  or 
twice.    I  woald  go  in  one  side  and  oat  the  other. 

Q.  What  side  did  yon  generally  go  up? — A.  New  Brunswick  and 
Quebec.  We  went  in  around  Point  Miscou  and  made  that  the  rendez- 
vous.   Then  we  would  fish  out  to  the  other  side  very  often. 

Q.  In  the  bay  the  mackerel-fishing  is  all  inshore  f— A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  At  what  date  do  the  msekerol  spawn  ? — A.  From  June  10  to  June 
20.   There  are  a  few  perhaps  that  spawn  after  that ;  not  many. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  their  eggs  in  the  water? — A.  Yes;  I  have  brought 
them  up  on  my  hooks. 

Q.  How  large  are  they  ? — A.  There  is  some  diflfereuce  in  the  size.  The 
large  mackerel  spawn  is  the  size  of  small  pease ;  perhaps  not  so  large 
as  that.  About  the  size  of  No.  4  shot.  There  is  a  small  run  of  mack- 
erel that  spawn  which  is  not  so  large  as  that. 

Q.  Compare  the  spawn  of  the  smallest  mackerel  with  the  size  of  shot. 
Is  it  as  large  as  No.  7  shot? — A.  Yes.  About  a  little  larger  tban  the 
shot  on  the  table. 

Q.  What  number  would  you  call  that? — A.  I  should  think  it  was 
No.  6, 1  suppose. 

Q.  The  smallest  is  about  that  size  ? — A.  Yes }  the  largest  would  be 
nearly  twice  as  big  as  that. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  twice  that  diameter  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  brought  mackerel  spawn  up  on  your  line,  how  did  it 
come  up  from  the  bottom,  on  the  hook  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  a  mass. 

Q.  Caught  on  the  hook  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  big  was  the  mass? — A.  Sometimes  the  size  of  that  bottle 
(pointing  to  ink-bottlo  on  the  table  about  4  inches  diameter) ;  sometimes 
less,  sometimes  more. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  How  do  you  judge  it  was  mackerel  spawn  1 — A.  I  know  the  spawn 
of  most  kinds  of  fish. 

Q.  You  have  been  forty  years  a  fisherman  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  spawn  that  came  up  would  be  the  same  as  you  saw  inside  of 
mackerel  you  have  caught? — A.  Yes;  I  have  caught  them  in  the  act  of 
spawning. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  catching  them  in  the  act  of  spawning  ? — A. 
I  mean  that  when  1  hove  them  on  the  deck  they  delivered  their  spawn. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  You  are  quite  sure  it  was  mackerel  spawn  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  have 
caught  them  when  they  would  spawn  on  deck. 


No.  43. 

James  Eisenhaueb,  of  Lunenburg,  in  the  county  of  Lunenburg, 
Nova  Scotia,  member  of  the  local  legislature  ot  Nova  Scotia,  called  on 
behalf  of  the  government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  exam- 
ined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe: 
Question.  You  are  a  member  of  the  local  legislature  far  the  county  o' 
lionenburg! — Answer.  Yes. 


828 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Yon  have  been  in  the  fishing  business  for  the  last  fifteen  years  !— 
A.  Yes ;  fifteen  or  eighteen  years. 

Q.  In  what  fish  do  you  deal  now  ? — A.  I  am  dealing  in  cod,  mackerel 
and  herring,  principally. 

Q.  To  what  extent  do  you  carry  on  the  cod-fishing  business ;  how 
many  quintals  annually  ? — A.  I  ship  20,000  to  30,000  quintals  annually 
of  cod  and  haddock. 

Q.  To  what  parts  do  you  ship? — A.  To  the  West  India  markets, 
chiefiy. 

Q.  Your  fish  are  not  prepared  for  the  Brazilian  trade  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  deal  a  good  deal  with  the  United  States,  I  believe  ?— A.  Yes, 
considerably. 

Q.  Have  you  any  vessels  now  engaged  in  the  mackerel  fishery  ?— A. 
No. 

Q.  You  had  formerly  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  engaged  in  the  mackerel  fishery  are  there  in 
Lunenburg  and  its  vicinity? — A.  Not  many  just  now;  a  few  years  ago 
there  was,  I  suppose,  20  or  25  sail. 

Q.  You,  yourself,  had  some  vessels  engaged ? — A.  Yes ;  some  jears 
ago. 

Q.  Did  they  engage  during  the  season,  or  only  for  a  portion  of  the 
season  ? — A.  Our  vessels  chiefly  went  on  a  cod-fishing  trip  for  the  first 
trip ;  then,  about  September,  they  went  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Not  before  f — A.  Some  did ;  not  many. 

Q.  Those  you  have  been  acquainted  with,  and  yonr  own,  for  how  many 
weeks  wonid  they  engage  in  mackerel-fishing  in  the  year  ? — A.  Probably 
six  weeks  or  two  months. 

Q.  What  tonnage  would  these  vessels  be  ? — A.  They  would  be  vessels 
from  40  to  80  tons,  I  suppose. 

Q.  Now,  where  would  they  fish ;  what  part  of  the  coast ! — A.  Well, 
they  would  fish  the  first  part  of  the  season  on  the  banks.  The  spriug 
trip  they  would  go  on  the  banks  for  codfish. 

Q.  Well,  but  speaking  of  mackerel  ? — A.  Well,  in  the  Gulf  of  St. 
Lawrence,  I  suppose  chiefly  at  Magdalen  Islands  and  around  the  coast 
of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Where  would  they  catch  fish ;  on  what  part  of  the  coast  ?— A. 
They  would  catch  the  bulk  of  the  fish  near  the  shore,  as  I  understand. 

Q.  That  is  what  you  understood  from  those  in  the  vessels f— A.  Yes; 
from  the  Americans  also. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  many  mackerel  being  taken  outside  of  3 
miles  T — A.  I  believe  that  some  seasons  they  did  take  a  few,  bat  it  is 
rather  seldom. 

Q.  Would  you  consider  it  or  do  you  know  whether  the  Americans 
themselves  consider  it  a  business  in  which  they  could  have  profitably 
engaged  if  absolutely  restricted  from  coming  within  three  miles  of  the 
shore  ? — ^A.  Well,  from  what  little  conversation  I  have  had  with  the 
American  fishermen,  the  idea  they  had  was  that  it  would  not  be  worth 
prosecuting  if  deprived  of  that  privilege. 

Q.  Would  yon  spend  a  dollar  on  it  ? — ^A.  Certainly  not. 

Q.  Where  would  these  vessels  of  yours  fish  for  codfish  before  going 
on  the  mackerel  voyage  f — A.  They  would  fish  in  the  spring  on  the 
banks,  and  in  the  summer  trip  they  would  go  to  Bay  Ohaleurs  or  the 
Labrador  coast. 

Q.  How  many  trips  for  codfish  would  they  make  before  going  after 
mackerel  f — A.  Generally  about  two. 

Q.  These  vessels  were  from  40  to  80  tons  t — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


829 


Q.  Wbat  would  be  the  average  tonnage  ! — A.  I  suppose  60  tons  would 
be  a  fair  average,  50  or  60. 

Q.  Wbat  would  be  the  average  catch  of  codfish  for  each  of  those  two 
tfipgf_A.  500  or  600  quintals. 

Q.  Tbeu  what  would  be  the  average  for  each  mackerel  trip  ? — A.  Our 
vessels  would  only  make  one  trip.  I  suppose  they  would  average  from 
200  to  300  barrels. 

Q.  That  is  your  own  vessels  and  other  vessels  from  Lunenburg  having 
an  average  tonnage  of,  what  would  you  say  ? — A.  50  or  00  tons. 

Q.  They  would  make  an  average  catch  of  500  or  600  quintals  the  trip, 
or  1,000  or  1,100  codash  altogether,  and  200  or  300  barrels  of  mackerel 
for  tbe  season  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  that  be  a  profitable  businest:^  ? — A.  Well,  it  would  not  be, 
I  should  say,  very  profitable  that  catch.  Some  seasons  they  would  get 
a  great  deal  more  than  that,  but  I  am  taking  a  low  average. 

Q.  Some  seasons  they  would  catch  a  great  deal  more  ? — A.  I  have 
kDown  some  vessels  land  over  2,000  quintals. 

Q.  These  same  vessels  you  spoke  of? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  mackerel  ? — A.  Perhaps  not  any  mackerel  at  all.  Tbey^ 
would  fish  later  in  the  season,  making  three  trips,  probably,  for  codfish. 

Q.  What  do  you  consider  a  fair  average  per  trip  for  mackerel.  Take 
tbe  American  vessels.  Are  they  better  adapted  than  our  owu  ? — A.  I 
think  they  are. 

Q.  What  do  you  consider  a  fair  average  ? — A.  I  should  say  about  200 
or  300  barrels  a  trip. 

Q.  They  make  how  many  trips,  do  you  know  7 — A.  Those  that  follow 
mackerel  altogether  make,  I  suppose,  at  least  three  trips  ;  some  more,  I 
have  no  doubt.  The  average,  1  should  saj',  would  be  three  or  perhaps 
four. 

Q.  Now  at  presentyou  are  not  engaged  in  catching  mackerel  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  buy  them  ? — A.  I  buy  large  quantities. 

Q.  Do  you  buy  codfish  more  largely  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  do  you  know  yourself  how  many  cod-fishers  there  are  in  our 
British  waters,  how  many  sail  1 — A.  I  should  say  there  must  be  200  or 
300  sail  of  cod-fishers,  I  think. 

Q.  That  is  on  what  coast? — A.  The  bulk  of  them  go  up  toBay  Chaleur, 
1  tbiDk  for  codfish,  or  off  the  Magdalen  Islands,  some  farther  up.  You 
don't  include  tbe  bank  fishers  in  your  question  ? 

Q.  Well,  yes,  1  did. — A.  I  should  say  more  than  that,  if  you  take 
them.    Probably  300  or  400,  if  you  include  those  that  follow  bank  fishing. 

Q.  Well,  now,  where  do  these  vessels  get  their  bait? — A.  Inshore,  I 
think,  tbe  bulk  of  it.  They  get  some  west  of  this,  at  Liverpool  and 
Shelburne.    They  resort  to  those  harbors  for  bait.  / 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  they  get  their  ice  ? — A.  They  get  ice  all  inshore. 

Q.  Oq  our  coasts  ? — A.  I  think  tlie  first  trip  in  the  spring  they  bring 
some  ire  with  them. 

Q.  These  300  or  400  vessels,  do  they  frequent  our  Nova  Scotia  coast  ? — 
•\>  I  think  most  of  them  do. 

Q.  Do  most  of  them  get  bait  and  ice  on  our  coast  ? — A.  I  think  they 
do  in  Nova  Scotia  aud  Newfoundland.  They  get  some  from  Newfound- 
land. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  ice — in  what  ports? — A.  They  get  it  at  Pros- 
P^t,  a  little  west  of  this,  and  some  farther  west,  at  Liverpool  and  Shel- 
burne. 

Q.  Do  they  get  their  ice  from  these  establishments  on  the  coast  where 
ice  is  sold  ?— A.  They  buy  the  bulk  of  it,  but  they  get  some  oflF  the 


830 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


mountains  themselves  where  they  can  find  it  early  in  the  spring,  i 
have  known  them  talce  it  o£f  the  mountains  at  Saint  Margaret's  Bay. 

Q.  Is  it  easily  procurable  there  f — ^A.  I  think  it  is,  in  the  spring  early. 

Q.  How  many  miles  is  that  from  us  ? — A.  About  twenty  or  thirty 
miles. 

Q.  Is  there  a  good  harbor  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  they  get  it  from  the  mountains  f  Is  it  close  to  the  shore  ?~ 
A.  Yes ;  pretty  close  to  the  shore.  The  high  cliffs  are  very  close  to  tbe 
shore,  probably  half  a  mile  or  a  mile  back. 

Q.  That  ice  they  use  for  keeping  tbe  bait  fresh  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  you  must  be  well  acquainted  with  the  business.  I  would  like 
you  to  estimate  whether  you  would  consider  it  profitable  to  carry  on  cod- 
fishing  in  these  waters  if  prevented  from  taking  ice  here  for  their  bait! 
— A.  I  don't  think  they  could  carry  it  on  profitably.  They  would  be 
obliged  to  refit  with  bait  and  ice,  and  it  would  probably  take  them  teD 
days  to  a  fortnight,  to  do  that. 

Q.  Would  it  be  a  paying  business  f — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  use  all  the  codfish  they  catch  ? — A.  No ;  I  think 
they  do  not  cure  a  great  many  of  the  small  fish  they  get.  They  use  the 
large  fish  and  throw  the  small  fish  away. 

Q.  Has  that  been  the  practice  always  ? — A.  I  think  it  has  been  for  a 
considerable  time  past.  I  know  during  the  past  year  or  two  some  of 
them  have  begun  to  save  their  small  fish.  Fish  seem  to  have  been  get- 
ting scarcer  during  the  last  two  years. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  the  small  fish  now  ? — A.  They  bring  them 
into  some  of  the  ports  and  sell  them. 

Q.  In  Halifax,  I  believe  ? — A.  In  Halifax  and  round  tbe  coast.  We 
bought  a  cargo  the  other  day. 

Q.  You  buy  these  small  cod  from  the  Americans? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Not  only  here  but  I  believe  you  buy  them  also  from  the  Americans 
in  the  States?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  any  extent?— A.  To  the  extent  of  8,000  or  10,000  quintals  tbe 
year  before  last,  and  we  have  purchased  for  several  years  past. 

Q.  Those  cod  are  cured  to  the  same  extent  they  cure  their  cod  gener- 
ally ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  those  fish  ? — A.  We  dry  thera  a  little  better 
and  then  export  them  to  the  West  Indies. 

Q.  Where  do  they  dry  those  fish  you  buy  in  the  States?— A.  We 
bring  them  home  and  dry  them. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg: 
Q.  Do  you  speak  of  the  small  fish  entirely? — A.  I  mean  small  nml 
large. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  both  kinds? — A.  Principally  small  fish. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Then  those  American  fishermen  do  not  throw  away  tbe  sDiall 
fish?- A.  No. 

Q.  If  there  were  more  men  like  you,  they  would  find  it  unprofitable 
to  throw  away  the  small  fish  ? — A.  I  don't  see  why  they  could  not  utilize 
them  if  they  would  cure  them  properly.  They  have  the  West  ludia 
market  open  for  them. 

Q.  A  good  many  witnesses  from  Gaspd  and  Bay  Chalenrs  district 
have  been  asked  as  to  why  it  was  that  they  did  not  prepare  their  fish 
for  the  American  market  in  a  green  state,  instead  of  drying  it  bard  and 
shipping  it  to  foreign  markets.  Can  you  state  to  the  Commissior  wby 
it  is  that  Canadians  do  not  enter  more  into  the  exportation  of  odiisb 


▲WARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


831 


to  the  United  States  markets  f — A.  One  reason  I  should  suppose  is, 
that  the  United  States  marlcet  not  being  suitable  for  small  fish  they  dry 
the  small  fish  and  make  them  very  hard  and  ship  them  to  the  Spanish 
market. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  reason  1— A.  Another  reason  is,  that  they  get 
a  larger  price  than  they  would  get  in  the  American  market. 

Q.  They  get  more  money  by  shipping  the  flsh  to  foreign  markets  T — A. 

Yes. 

Q.  Why  don't  you  ship  flsh  to  the  United  States?— A.  I  think  the 
American  people  catch  about  as  many  flsh  as  they  want.  When  they 
offer  us  and  sell  us  flsh,  it  shows  they  cannot  have  a  market  ^or  a  great 
many  more  codflsh  than  they  have. 

Q.  1  believe  they  re-export  flsh  they  get  from  us  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  a  large  extent  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  the  existence  of  the  lleciprocity  Treaty  was  that  the  case! 
—A.  I  don't  think  it  was. 

Q.  But  since  the  Washington  Treaty  they  have  re  exported  Canadian 
codfish?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  re  exported  Canadian  flsh  sent  to  the  United  States  to 
the  West  Indies? — A.  Yes.  Wo  have  done  so  several  times  with 
mackerel. 

Q.  You  found  it  sometimes  to  your  advantage  to  reexport  Canadian 
fish  sent  to  the  United  States  to  the  West  Indies,  as  well  as  buy  flsh  in 
the  United  States  and  bring  it  here  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  know,  perhaps,  whether  that  was  done  iu  bond  ?— A.  I 
think  it  was  to  some  extent. 

Q.  Do  you  everrecollectre-exporting  Canadian  flsh  in  bond? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  business  of  re-exporting  Canadian  flsh 
is  increasing  in  the  United  States? — A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  answer 
that ;  I  am  not  posted  in  regard  to  it. 

Q.  In  what  bottoms  are  the  re-exported  Canadian  fish  carried? — A. 
We  re  export  them  in  our  own  vessels. 

Q.  When  they  reexport,  how  do  they  send  them?— A.  I  fiiucy  in  their 
own  vessels. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  there  are  other  Canadians  or  Nova  Sco- 
tiaus  who  have  re-exported  Canadian  flsh  sent  to  the  United  States? — 
A.  I  have  known  cases  where  il  has  been  done.  I  know  Halifax  mer- 
chants sometimes  do  so  when  they  cannot  get  iu  the  United  States  the 
price  they  want  for  their  flsh. 

Q.  You  have  taken  flsh  to  the  States  and  failed  to  get  the  price,  and 
then  sent  them  on  to  the  West  Indies  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  that  codflsh  ? — A.  No ;  mackerel. 

Q.  You  are,  of  course,  acquainted  with  the  prices  obtained  for  mack- 
erel during  the  existence  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  and  afterwards,  pre- 
•  lous  to  the  Washington  Treaty,  and  since  the  Washington  Treaty  ? — 
Yes. 

Q.  After  the  imposition  of  a  duty  on  mackerel  by  the  United  States, 
did  our  fishermen  obtain  a  less  or  higher  price  for  their  mackerel? — A. 
I  think  mackerel  have  been  lower  since  ihe  treaty  than  they  were  before, 
in  my  experience. 

Q.  That  is  since  the  Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  mean  as  a  whole 
year;  tiiking  an  average,  I  think  they  have  been  lower  than  before. 

Q.  Were  they  higher  on  an  average  during  the  period  of  the  imposi- 
tion of  the  duty  than  under  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  ? — A.  I  think  so. 

Q<  I  don't  know  whether  yon  have  examined  your  books  as  to  that 


832 


AWARD  OF  THE  FI8HERT  COMMISSION. 


point ;  I  understand  that  is  sliown  by  all  the  books  of  fish  dealers  f— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Do  yon  Icnow  whether,  that  appears  from  yoar  books  ? — A.  I  never 
examined,  but  I  remember  it. 

Q.  You  can  substantiate  that  fact  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  theories  set  up  as  to  the  payment  of  tbo  duty, 
who  do  you  consider  pays  the  duty  f  I  am  couflning  mysi i'  entirely  to 
this  question  in  relation  to  duties  imposed  on  Canv^ian  mackerel.— A. 
I  don't  consider  the  duty  affects  the  price  very  materially. 

Q.  You  doa't  think  the  duty  imposed  by  the  United  States  affects  the 
price  paid  to  our  fishermen  for  their  flsh  9 — A.  I  think  not.  I  think  the 
supply,  as  a  general  rule,  regulates  the  price.  When  there  is  a  short 
catch  of  mackerel  the  price  will  be  high,  apart  from  the  duties.  I  think 
the  consumer  pays  the  duty  as  a  general  rule. 

Q.  You  are  now  speaking  of  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  of  mackerel  imported  into  the  United  States  from  Canadian 
waters? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  take  the  fact  that  our  fishermen  obtained  a  larger 
price  when  the  duty  was  imposed  as  an  evidence  in  support  of  your 
view! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  the  remission  of  the  duties  on  fish  entering  the 
United  States  any  advantage  to  Canadians,  and,  if  so,  explain  how  it  is 
an  advantage  ? — A.  I  cannot  see  any  advantage. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  there  is  any  advantage  ! — A.  I  really  do  not. 

Q.  Assuming  the  American  fishermen  were  excluded  from  the  three- 
mile  limit,  do  you  consider  that  would  be  an  advantage  or  disadvantage 
to  Canadians  ? — A.  It  would  certainly  be  an  advantage. 

Q.  How  would  it  be  an  advantage  to  Canadian  fishermen  ? — A.  It 
would  give  us  the  American  market.  Of  course,  the  Americans  would 
not  be  able  to  catch  as  large  a  quantity  of  fish.  It  would  throw  that 
market  open  to  us,  and  it  would  also  preserve  the  fishing-grounds  to  a 
certain  extent. 

Q.  Would  it  give  our  fishermen  higher  prices  for  the>r  fish! — A.  Yes; 
it  would  be  the  natural  consequence  that  the  less  quantity  of  fish  caught 
the  higher  would  be  the  price. 

Q.  But  it  has  been  said  that  might  not  be  so  in  all  cases. — A.  There 
might  be  a  heavy  catch  of  fish  in  the  United  States  a  certain  year,  and 
the  price  might  be  comparatively  low.  I  am  speaking,  generally,  of  an 
average  catch. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  quantity  of  mackerel  is  used  in  the  United 
States?— A.  No. 

Q.  If  there  was  a  very  large  supply  the  case  might  be  different?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  But  you  are  speaking  of  the  supply  as  we  have  it  in  our  waters 
and  the  Americans  have  it  in  their  waters  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  of  a  Lunenburg  vessel  fishing  in  American 
waters? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  the  Canadian  vessel  spoke  of  as  fishing  there  ? 
— A.  I  never  beard  of  her. 

By  Mr.  Dana  : 
Q.  Yon  are  from  the  town  of  Lunenburg? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  And  are  engaged  as  a  fish  merchant  f — A.  Yes. 
Q.  Have  you  ever  been  fishing  yourself? — A.  No. 
Q.  Have  you  kept  any  memoranda  or  documents  from  other  persons, 
or  any  of  your  own,  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  yourself  informed  on  the 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


833 


sabjeot  of  the  fisheries,  or  do  y^^u  depend  od  your  memory  ? — A.  I  never 
kept  any  record. 

Q.  You  never  made  it  a  point  to  study  the  laws  which  govern  the 
flgberies ;  but  you  are  prepared  to  answer  in  regard  to  free  trade :  have 
you  made  that  a  study  1— A.  I  never  made  it  a  special  study,  but  I  have 
watched  a  little  events  as  they  occurred. 

Q.  You  think  in  regard  to  mackerel,  however,  it  may  be  as  to  all  other 
things  that  are  bought  and  sold,  that  it  does  not  make  any  difference 
to  the  people  of  the  provinces  how  high  the  duties  are  ? — A.  If  the  duty 
was  $10  per  barrel  it  would  alter  the  question. 

Q.  Whyl  Would  not  the  consumer  pay  the  $10  per  barrel  dutyt — 
A.  I  have  been  supposing  the  duty  to  be  that  of  $2  per  barrel. 

Q,  Then  you  think  the  Americans  might  levy  a  duty  high  enough  to 
make  it  injurious  to  the  Canadian  people?— A.  I  think  if  the  duty  was 
made  very  extreme  it  might  have  some  effect. 

Q.  How  f  Did  yon  not  lay  it  down  as  a  general  rule  that  the  con- 
Buiuer  pays  the  duty  ? — A.  On  general  principles  the  consumer  is  sup- 
posed to  pay  the  duty. 

Q.  In  regard  to  mackerel  what  do  you  say  ? — A.  I  am  pretty  sure  that 
if  tbey  put  on  a  duty  of  $5  per  barrel  it  would  fall  on  the  consumer  in 
the  eud.  But  people  get  timid  in  shipping  goods  when  the  duties  are 
very  high.  It  affects  people  shipping  to  a  country  where  the  duty  is  very 
high.    They  do  not  understand  that  the  consumer  pays  the  duty  as  a  rule. 

Q.  If  they  found  out  the  fact  that  the  consumer  pays  the  duty,  it 
would  not  make  any  difference  how  high  the  duty  was  ? — A.  I  suppose 

80. 

Q.  Then  the  trouljle  is  owing  to  the  error  and  timidity  of  the  people  1 — 
A.  I  suppose  so,  with  some. 

Q.  There  was  a  duty  of  $2  per  barrel  imposed  on  mackerel  before  the 
Washiugton  Treaty ;  if  the  treaty  were  suspended  there  might  be  such 
a  duty  imposed  as  Congress  might  agree  upon.  Now,  do  you  mean  to 
say  that  the  fact  that  Congress  cannot  impose  a  duty  on  your  fish  under 
the  treaty  does  not  leave  you  in  a  better  position  than  if  Congress  had 
the  power  to  put  on  any  duty  it  pleased,  however  large? — A.  I  think  a 
very  large  duty  would  affect  us  some. 

Q.  It  ought  not,  according  to  your  view  of  the  laws  of  trade,  but  it 
would,  owing  to  the  timidity  of  your  people  ? — A.  People  generally  get 
timid  in  regard  to  the  duty  being  taken  from  the  price  they  got. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  fact  of  paying  a  duty  of  $3  per  barrel 
in  place  of  nothing  is  no  advantage  in  competing  with  American  fisher- 
men?—A.  I  look  at  it  in  this  light:  If  you  are  shipping  a  cargo  to  the 
market  of  the  United  States,  and  there  is  a  duty  levied  of  $2  per  barrel, 
you  argue  that  you  must  get  so  much  money  for  it;  that  there  is  the 
duty  to  come  out  of  the  price,  and  you  must  get  so  much  money  to  bring 
you  out  of  the  transaction.  This  causes  the  mackerel  to  be  a  certain 
value  before  you  ship  there,  and  this  helps  to  drive  the  price  up  for  the 
American  fishermen.  There  are  times  when  the  duty  would  perhaps 
not  affect  it  much  either  way,  but  speaking  generally  of  an  average 
catcb,  the  duty,  to  a  certain  extent,  helps  to  raise  the  price  of  American 
mackerel. 

Q.  You  go  into  the  United  States  market  with  fish  you  have  caught 
and  the  American  fisherman  with  mackerel  he  has  caught,  both  being 
equally  good ;  you  pay  $2  per  barrel  duty  to  the  government  before  you 
can  sell  your  fish,  and  he  pays  nothing.  Now,  as  a  general  rule,  do  you 
mean  to  say  that  it  makes  no  difference  in  your  competing  with  the 
American  ? — A.  I  don't  think  it  makes  much.  If  I  have  mackerel  to 
53  F 


834 


AWAED   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ship,  and  have  duty  to  pay,  I  mast  get  a  certain  price.  If  I  could  not 
get  that  price  I  would  not  ship  them,  and  consequently  it  will  make  tbe 
market  somewhat  more  bare,  and  assist  the  Americans  to  get  a  higher 
price.  If  I  push  the  sale  of  my  mackerel,  it  throws  more  on  tbe  market 
and  makes  the  price  lower  for  your  fishermen. 

Q.  Would  you  put  your  mackerel  on  the  market  and  sell  them  at  a  loss 
for  the  purpose  of  making  the  price  lower  for  the  American  fishermen?— 
A.  No ;  I  say  we  would  keep  our  mackerel  away  until  we  got  a  certain 
price. 

Q.  Then  is  not  the  effect  of  a  duty  to  make  you  hold  your  mackerel 
back  ? — ^A.  Only  for  a  time. 

Q.  Suppose  you  were  not  able  to  send  them  in  for  one,  two,  or  three 
years  ? — A.  We  could  not  keep  them  that  long. 

Q.  You  say  you  would  have  to  keep  them  till  the  price  was  suflBciently 
high  ? — A.  We  could  not  keep  them  two  or  three  years. 

Q.  Tou  would  have  to  keep  them  away  from  the  American  market 
until  the  price  rose  hisfh  enough  for  your  purpose ! — A.  Yes ;  I  suppose ; 
something  of  that  sort. 

Q.  Would  not  that  be  an  injury  ? — A.  W^e  might  resort  to  other 
markets. 

Q.  You  think  you  might  make  it  up  by  sending  them  somewhere;  hut 
would  you  not  lose  the  American  market  for  that  time  ?  Have  you 
thought  of  that  ? — A.  I  see  the  point. 

Q.  I  wish  you  to  think  of  it. — A.  It  has  been  my  experience  that  we 
got  a  larger  price  for  our  mackerel  when  we  had  to  pay  duty  thau  we 
have  got  since. 

Q.  What  did  the  American  fishermen  get  for  their  mackerel ;  did  tbey 
not  get  the  same  price  as  you  did,  if  equally  good  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  do  npt  get  $2  per  barrel  more  in  cash  for  your  fish,  if  not  bet 
ter,  than  do  the  American  fishermen  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  it  is  a  cause  that  operates  on  both.  If  you  get  a  higher 
price  the  American  does  so  also;  is  it  not  so? — A.  My  idea  is  that  we 
must  get  a  higher  price  than  we  now  do  under  tbe  treaty  or  we  caunot 
afford  to  send  the  mackerel  there. 

Q.  Can  you  compel  the  buyer  to  give  you  more  because  there  is  a 
duty  imposed? — A.  Not  at  all. 

Q.  Then  where  are  you  ? — A.  Wo  can  compel  him  to  give  more  if  he 
cannot  get  them  elsewhere. 

Q.  If  there  were  no  American  mackerel  it  would  raise  the  price,  duty 
or  no  duty,  and  the  price  may  go  up  high  enough  to  enable  you,  if  you 
have  no  competition,  to  pay  the  duty  and  make  money.  If  the  pur- 
chaser is  not  willing  to  give  you  enough  to  clear  all  your  expenses  ami 
allow  you  reasonable  profit,  then  you  can  no  longer  carry  on  a  profit- 
able business,  and  it  depends  on  what  the  purchaser  is  willing  to  give 
you  for  the  fish.  He  cannot  give  you  any  more  because  you  have  duty 
to  pay ;  but  if  mackerel  are  scarce  then  the  price  goes  up  in  tbe  ordi- 
nary way  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  it  goes  up  to  tbe  American  as  well  as  the  Canadian,  if  the 
fish  aiC  equally  good,  does  it  not? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  if  tbe  mackerel  are  plentiful  the  price  usually  goes  dowu- 
I  mean  plentiful  in  proportion  to  the  demand— and  tbe  price  falls  to 
you  as  well  as  to  tbe  American  ?— A.  Yes ;  my  opinion  is  we  bad  better 
pay  the  duty  and  have  our  fishery. 

Q.  Then  can  you  obtain  your  own  price  from  the  purchaser  so  as  to 
pay  your  expenses  and  the  duty,  unless  the  Americans  also  get  tbe 
same  price  for  equally  good  fish  ?— A.  My  idea  is  that  the  12  duty  we 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


835 


resort  to  other 


sause  there  is  a 
give  more  if  he 


had  to  pay  helped  the  Americans,  to  a  certain  extent,  to  get  a  better 
price  for  their  fish. 

Q.  If  you  remained  out  of  the  United  States  markets  altogether, 
would  it  not  be  still  better  for  the  Americans  ? — A.  Perhaps  it  would. 

Q.  They  would  gain  more  by  that  than  your  paying  the  duty  ? — A. 
The  American  fishermen  would  gain  by  it,  but  not  the  American  people. 

Q,  After  all,  the  whole  thing  depends  on  the  market  price,  does  it 
not  ?— A.  To  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  Can  you  force  the  market-price  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Then,  when  you  say  you  would  rather  pay  the  duties  and  keep  the 
Americans  out  of  your  three-mile  line,  you  mean  to  assume  that  would 
give  yon,  practically,  a  monopoly  of  the  market  ? — A.  I  think  it  would, 
to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  How  would  it  afiect  codfish,  the  [Americans  being  kept  outside 
the  three-mile  limit ! — A.  It  wonld  not  affect  cod  to  the  same  extent, 
because  the  Americans  have  a  deep-sea  fishery  to  fall  back  upon. 

Q.  Cod-fishery  is  mainly  a  deep-sea  fishery  ? — A.  They  could  get  con- 
siderable codfish  without  coming  i>i;>bore. 

Q.  There  has  always  been  ?ii  abundance  of  cod  in  the  American 
market? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Therefore,  you  confine  yourself  to  mackerel,  and  in  the  case  of  the 
maclferel,  you  assume  that  if  the  Americans  were  not  allowed  to  fish 
within  three  miles  of  your  shores,  there  would  be  practically  none,  or 
very  little,  American  mackerel  on  the  market,  and  you  would  have  a 
monopoly.  Is  that  so  ? — A.  I  think  we  would,  to  a  considerable  extent. 
The  Americans  have  their  own  mackerel-ground,  of  course. 

Q.  What  do  you  know  about  that  ground  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  much 
more  than  what  I  have  heard. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  they  have  seines  and  weirs  along  the  shore 
where  they  catch  mackerel  in  abundance  ? — A.  I  understand  they  have 
lots  of  purse  seines. 

Q.  And  weirs  on  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  Americans  are  a  pretty  enterprising  people,  generally? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  they  would  be  likely  to  find  mackerel  if  they  were  to  be  found  ? 
—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  sure  if  Americans  were  driven  out  of  your  three-mile 
limit  there  would  be  no  competition  in  uifickerel  ? — A.  It  depends  on  the 
season.  The  Americans  may  have  a  very  good  season  some  year  and 
get  a  very  great  many,  and  another  year  very  few. 

Q.  If  they  got  enough  to  8U|)j)ly  the  market  you  would  not  be  able  to 
go  and  compete  with  them  with  the  duty  against  you  ? — A.  Not  if  they 
got  a  very  large  quantity. 

Q.  If  they  had  a  poor  season  yon  would  be  able  to  go  and  compete 
with  them  with  the  duty  on  ?— A.  I  think  so. 

Q  What  is  the  reason  of  the  falling  off  in  the  number  of  mackerel- 
ashing  vessels.  Take  Lunenburg ;  you  have  said  that  20  years  ago,  I 
thinlt,  you  had  a  good  many  vessels  there,  and  now  you  have  scarcely 
any  fishing- vessels ? — A.  I  don't  think  I  said  that.  I  was  alluding  to 
the  mackerel  fleet. 

Q.  Have  you  many  vessels  engaged  in  the  cod-fishery  ? — A.  We  have, 
I  suppose,  from  150  to  200  sail. 

Q<  At  Lunenburg? — A.  In  the  county. 

Q.  That  includes  what  other  ports? — A.  All  the  ports  in  the  county. 

Q.  It  does  not  include  Shelburne  or  Liverpool? — A.  Noj  I  think  I 
would  be  safe  in  saying  150. 


83G 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  large  are  the  vessels  ! — A.  From  40  to  80  tons. 

Q.  Where  do  they  fish  ? — A.  On  the  Banks  the  first  part  of  tlie  season . 

Q.  What  Banks  do  you  mean  ? — A.  Western  and  La  Have  Banks  aud 
Banqnereau ;  sometimes  they  go  to  the  Grand  Banks,  but  tbey  don't  ase 
the  Grand  Banks  much. 

Q.  Do  they  go  into  the  gulf? — A.  Yes,  in  the  summer. 

Q.  For  cod  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  late  are  they  employed  in  catching  cod  ? — A.  Our  vessels  do 
not  fish  later  than  September  for  cod. 

Q.  Then  they  go  into  the  mackerel  fishery  ? — A.  Mackerel  or  herring. 

Q,  The  same  vessels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  number  of  your  vessels  has  increased  or  dimin- 
ished ? — A.  They  have  not,  I  think,  diminished. 

Q.  They  have  not  increased  ? — A.  During  the  last  10  or  12  years  tbey 
have  not  increased  much. 

Q.  Have  they  increased  at  all  ? — A.  I  don't  know  that  they  have. 

Q.  How  about  the  vessels  engaged  in  the  mackerel  fishery !— A.  The 
mackerel  fishery  has  pretty  well  declined  with  our  people.  They  follow 
it  very  little ;  they  follow  the  inshore  fishery  with  boats  and  with  book 
and  line. 

Q.  Is  there  a  great  deal  of  that  done  ? — A.  There  is  not  a  great  deal 
of  it.  About  this  season  of  the  year  there  are  a  good  many  boats  em- 
ployed. Mostly  all  the  boats  fish  cod  in  the  summer,  and  tbey  go  after 
mackerel  when  there  is  any  on  the  coast. 

Q.  It  is  uncertain  when  there  is  any  on  the  coast  ? — A.  It  is  pretty 
uncertain. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  the  mackerel  fishery  all  along  from  the  Bay  of 
Fuudy,  from  Annapolis,  along  the  coast  to  Halifax,  is  quite  uncertain  i 
— A.  I  suppose |it  is  a  good  deal  like  other  localities;  some  years  wo 
have  good  catches,  and  other  years  mackerel  are  scarce. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  laws  which  govern  that  ? — A.  No,  I  don't  pre- 
tend to  be  posted. 

Q.  How  does  your  coast  compare  for  mackerel,  for  instance,  with  the 
northern  part  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  not  such  ii 
good  fishing  ground  as  that  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Y'ou  have  said  you  bought  cod  and  mackerel  from  the  Americans  ? 
— A.  Not  mackerel. 

Q.  You  have  said  you  bought  cod  from  the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  was  because  you  had  not  enough  of  your  own,  I  suppose  ?— 
A.  Codfish  were  pretty  scarce  in  1874-'75  or  1875-'76.  We  knew  the 
Americans  did  not  much  value  their  small  fish,  and  we  were  induced  to 
buy  from  them. 

Q.  You  took  your  chance  with  the  small  and  large? — A.  We  got 
some  large  also. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  did  you  buy  them,  to  dry  and  send  away  .'— 
A.  Y"es. 

Q.  You  put  them  into  the  quantity  of  fish  exported  from  this  region  ? 
— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  the  price  of  fish  was  at  the  Boston  or  Gloii 
cester  market  at  the  time  you  bought  those  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Y'ou  would  not  give  more  than  the  market  price  1 — A.  No. 

Q.  Of  late  years  Americans  have  begun  to  save  their  small  codfisli. 
have  they  not? — A.  I  think  so,  as  far  as  I  can  understard. 

Q.  They  use  them  for  a  good  many  purposes  besides  fool— for  oil, for 
instance  ?— A.  I  am  not  aware  they  get  oil  out  of  them. 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


837 


Q.  They  have  factories  all  along  the  shore  where  they  work  them  up  ? 
—A.  I  am  not  aware. 

Q.  They  extract  the  oil? — A.  Our  fishermen  say  they  throw  tUem 
right  off  the  hooks ;  some  of  them  don't  even  take  the  oil  out  of  them. 

Q.  That  was  the  case  ouce ;  is  it  not  the  fact  now  that  the  Americans 
are  saving  their  small  fish  f — A.  I  think  they  are. 

Q.  They  sell  a  very  considerable  quantity  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  buy  btit  from  the  Americans  1 — A.  We  have  bought 
pogies. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  explain  if  by  saying  you  re-export  Canadian  fish, 
joa  mean  you  export  fish  out  of  the  United  States  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  By  Canadian  fish  do  you  mean  fish  caught  in  these  waters  or  fish 
caught  only  by  Canadian  vessels  ? — A.  We  often  send  mackerel  to  the 
United  States  for  sale.  If  we  cannot  get  what  we  call  a  fair  price,  we 
re-export  it  to  the  West  Indies. 

Q.  Those  are  cases  where  the  consumer  does  not  pay  ? — A.  He  does 
not  pay  if  he  does  not  eat  the  fish. 

Q.  Did  that  happen  before  the  Washington  Treaty  went  into  opera- 
tiou  ?— A.  Not  in  my  experience ;  I  think  it  was  done  to  some  extent 
before  that.    I  was  speaking  of  since  the  treaty. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  you  send  your  mackerel  to  the  Boston  market, 
and  finding  no  market,  you  export  it  to  the  West  Indies? — A.  We  have 
doue  that  several  times.  I  am  speaking  of  mackerel.  We  never  ex- 
ported codfish  from  there;  but  the  cod  we  brought  home  and  then 
exported  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  particular  reason  why  you  could  not  find  a  mar- 
ket for  your  mackerel  in  the  United  States  ? — A.  The  price  was  too  low. 

Q.  Where  did  you  buy  the  other  fish  which  you  exported  ? — A.  At 
Boston  and  Portland  and  brought  them  down  here. 

Q.  The  codfish  have  been  very  cheap  in  the  United  States  to  enable 
you  to  do  that  ? — A.  It  was  not  very  cheap  in  1874  and  1875. 

Q.  Were  those  the  years  you  did  it  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  in  187G  and  some 
of  it  this  year. 

Q.  Was  not  fish  scarce  in  the  States  those  years  ? — A.  They  were 
scarce  with  us.  They  did  not  attach  much  value  to  their  small  fish  and 
(lid  not  appear  to  have  a  market  for  them. 

Q.  Those  were  what  you  brought  down  here  and  prepared  for  ex- 
port f— A.  Yes ;  only  cod. 

Q.  You  have  never  attempted  yourself  to  prepare  cod  for  the  Ameri- 
cau  market  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  have  shipped  there  several  times. 

Q.  How  lately? — A.  Not  within  two  or  three  years  j  five  or  six  years 
ago. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  ?  Did  you  find  a  fair  market  for  your  cod- 
fish! — A.  Yes ;  we  always  shipped  large  and  good  fish. 

(I.  Did  you  dry  them  as  much  as  those  you  send  to  the  West  Indies 
find  the  Mediterranean? — A.  About  the  same  as  those  we  send  to  the 
West  Indies ;  not  so  much  as  those  we  send  to  the  Mediterranean. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  continue  to  send  codfish  to  the  United  States  ? — 
A.  The  fish  are  lower  in  price  there  than  they  were  a  few  years  ago. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  In  Nova  Scotia  are  boats  in  the  habit  of  catching  mackerel  on  our 
own  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  consider  mackerel  as  plentiful  on  your  coast  as  at 
Prince  Edward  Island  and  in  the  other  waters  of  the  gulf? — A.  No. 

Q.  Mr.  Dana  has  persuasively  suggested  that  the  United  States  fish- 


838 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISpiON. 


ermen  might  possibly  catch  enough  mackerel  for  the  whole  United 
States  market.  If  they  could  catch  enough  on  their  own  shores  and 
with  their  own  appliances,  that  would  modify  your  statement?— A.  Yes; 
if  they  could  do  so. 

Q.  We  assume  they  make  the  very  highest  catch  ever  made,  one  and 
a  quarter  mackerel  annually  for  each  of  the  forty-four  millions  of  the 
United  States.  You  don't  know  whether  that  is  anything  like  \vhat 
they  would  consume  if  mackerel  were  much  more  plentiful  than  they 
are  ?  Do  you  understand  that  the  supply  of  mackerel  is  large  or  small 
in  proportion  to  the  population  of  the  United  States  ? — A.  It  would  be 
comparatively  small. 

Q.  That  is,  procuring  all  the  mackerel  that  can  be  obtained,  you  uu 
derstand  the  supply  is  small  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  it  is  on  that  you  base  your  estimate  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  know  what  the  Americans  catch  in  their  waters  ?— A. 
No ;  I  don't  know  exactly  the  quantity.  1  believe  they  are  very  scarce 
on  their  coast  this  year. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  from  the  Americans  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  are  continually  supplied  with  their  prices  of  fish  f — A.  Yes: 
and  I  also  keep  posted  as  to  the  quantities  in  the  market. 

Q.  And  from  that  you  learn  that  their  supply  has  failed  this  year?— 
A.  That  ii  is  very  short  this  year  so  far ;  about  one  third  of  that  of  last 
year ;  that  is  up  to  August. 

No.  44. 

George  Bomeril,  agent  of  the  firm  of  Robin  »&  Co.,  was  called  on 
behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  ex 
amiued. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  Where  are  you  stationed  ! — Answer.  At  Perce,  near  Cape 
Gasp^. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  acted  as  agent  for  Robin  &  Go.  ? — A.  Tweuty- 
one  years. 

Q.  And  you  have  a  pretty  good  knowledge  of  the  fishing  business,  as 
they  carry  it  on  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  one  of  the  largest  Jersey  firms  ? — A.  I  believe  that  they 
are  the  largest  lU  the  bay. 

Q.  State  the  different  stations  which  this  firm  has  along  the  coast  of 
Gasp6  and  other  coasts  of  the  Dominion. — A.  These  are  Pasbebiac, 
Newport;  Pabos,  Grand  River,  Cape  Cove,  Anse  au  Beauflls,  Perce, 
Caraquette,  Shippegan,  Dock,  Magpie,  St.  John's  River,  Natasbquau, 
Gheticamp,  Big  Cheticamp,  and  Arichat. 

Q.  These  are  the  different  stations  where  the  firms  carry  on  busi- 
ness?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  present  you  are  at  Perce  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  that  one  of  their  largest  fishing  establishments  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  boats  have  you  there  f — A.  Some  13U  this  year;  last 
year  we  had  more. 

Q.  These  are  confined  almost  altogether  to  the  prosecution  of  the  cod 
fishery? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  your  boats  fish  ?--A.  With  a  few  exceptions,  witbin 
three  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  They  make  their  catches  generally  witbin  that  distance  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  no  doubt  as  to  the  distance  from  the  shore  at  which  tbey 


▲WABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMII^SION. 


839 


ggli  f— A.  No ;  none  whatever.    I  have  no  doubt  that  it  is  within  the 
three-mile  limit. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  would  you  say  that  they  Amo  ? — A.  It  is 
sometimes  one  mile,  sometimes  two,  and  sometimes  less. 

Q.  It  is  either  one  or  two  miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  men  are  in  the  boats  ? — A.  Two  are  in  each  boat. 

Q.  What  is  their  average  catch  ? — A.  About  125  quintals. 

Q.  At  what  time  of  the  year  do  the  men  in  these  boats  catch  their 
fish  ? — A.  We  have  two  seasons — the  summer  and  the  fall  fishery.  The 
sammer  season  ends  on  the  loth  of  August  and  the  fall  season  on  the 
loth  of  September. 

Q.  These  boats  take  their  catch  for  your  firm  by  the  15tli  of  Sep- 
tember?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  afterward! — A.  We  afterward  give  them  the 
privilege  of  fishing  for  themselves  free  of  all  expense. 

Q.  After  they  have  fished  for  you  the  men  have  the  use  of  the  boats 
free  of  all  expense  for  the  remainder  of  the  season  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  the  fish  which  they  then  catch  for  them- 
selves  ?— A.  They  generally  send  them  to  Quebec. 

Q.  And  do  they  find  a  ready  market  for  them  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Does  this  form  a  very  important  element  in  their  means  of  sub- 
sistence ? — A.  They  get  their  winter  supply  in  most  part  with  it. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  price  that  you  pay  for  these  fish  ? — A.  We 
take  them  by  the  draught.    Last  year  we  paid  $2.80  per  draught. 

Q.  How  much  is  a  draught? — A.  Two  hundred  and  twenty-four 
pouads,  green. 

Q.  And  it  takes  three  draughts  to  make  a  quintal  of  dried  fish  ? — A. 
Xo;  but  1^  draughts,  or  three  quintals  of  green  fish. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  price  per  draught  I — A.  About  $2.50. 

Q.  And  you  have  paid  more  ? — 4«  Yes.  I  now  allude  to  the  average 
price. 

Q.  In  addition  to  the  boats  do  you  employ  vessels  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many! — A.  Eight  or  ten. 

Q.  Where  do  they  catch  fish  ! — A.  On  the  Nova  Scotia  side. 

Q.  They  catch  fish  in  the  gulf !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  On  the  Banks  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  do  not  trawl ! — A.  Yes,  some  boats  do,  but  not  the  schooners. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  their  bait! — A.  In  the  coves  along  the  coast. 

Q.  How  do  you  cure  the  fish  which  you  catch  with  the  boats  ! — A. 
Tliey  are  hard  cured. 

Q.  They  are  dried  in  the  sun  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  fish  caught  in  the  vessels  capable  of  being  cured  in  that 
way ! — A.  They  will  not  stand  the  hot  climates. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  American  fishermen  should  attempt  to  rival  you 
in  the  markets  to  which  you  send  your  fish — Brazil,  Portugal,  and  other 
places — could  they  do  so,  with  what  they  catch  in  their  vessels  ! — A.  No. 

Q.  It  could  not  be  done ! — A.  No.  Their  fish  would  not  be  suitable 
for  these  markets. 

Q.  What  is  the  term  used  for  the  fish  caught  and  salted  on  the  ves- 
sels?—A.  Salt-burned. 

Q.  They  have  to  be  laid  down  in  a  large  quaiitity  of  salt? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  any  difference  between  the  fish  you  get  inshore  and  off 
shore  ? — A.  Yes ;  our  inshore  fishery  always  furnishes  our  prime  fish. 

Q.  Has  the  climate  anything  to  do  with  the  mode  of  the  preparation 
of  the  fish  for  tropical  climates  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  your  climate  is  suitable  for  such  preparation  ? — A.  Yes. 


840 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Is  the  Nova  Scotiaa  climate  suitable  for  it  f— A.  This  is  not  so 
much  the  case  with  the  northwest  side  of  Nova  Scotia ;  the  weather  is 
foggy  and  very  damp  there. 

Q.  You  mean  that  the  climate  is  not  so  favorable  for  it  there  as  on 
the  Gasp4  side  ? — A.  Yes ;  our  principal  establishment  is  situated  in 
Gasp6. 

Q.  Is  the  average  catch  of  the  boats  150  quintals  ? — A.  No ;  but  125. 

Q.  Where  are  your  principal  markets  ? — A.  Brazil  is  our  principal 
market:  then  follow  the  Mediterranean  ports  and  the  West  Indies. 

Q.  What  is  the  general  average  export  of  your  establishment  i—L 
About  80,000  quintals  of  dried  fish  per  year. 

Q.  Does  that  include  the  export  of  the  Nova  Scotian  branch  of  the 
establishment  of  your  house  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  price  which  you  receive  for  your  fish  ?— A. 
The  price  varies  from  $4.50  to  $8. 

O,  Did  you  ever  ship  fish  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  Yes. 

r    \v  ,B  the  venture  a  failure  or  a  success  ? — A.  It  was  a  failure. 

tv  .;  1 — A.  '^^.'he  prices  we  there  received  did  not  at  all  pay. 

Q.  ,^  u.  u  course  you  then  abandoned  that  trade? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  W  iiai  do  your  vessels  catch  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit  ?— A. 
About  300  quintals. 

C  '"''«u  ne.rb'  all  the  fish  which  you  take  and  ship  are  caught  within 
three  juiu  '  of  > ;  .  -jh'  re  ? — A.  I  fancy  three-fourths  of  our  fish  at  least 
are  so  taken. 

Q.  Is  there  much  difference  in  the  results  of  the  cod  fishery  year  after 
year  ? — A.  No;  just  as  much  fish  are  now  caught  as  ever  was  the  case. 

Q.  In  making  this  statement,  you  refer  to  an  experience  of  21 
years'? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  your  evidence  on  this  point  ? — A.  That  the  cod  fishery 
is  not  precarious. 

Q.  You  have  always  an  average  catch  ? — A.  It  is  always  about  the 
same. 

Q.  This  fishery  can  always  be  depended  upon  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  those  who  engage  in  this  fishery  as  a  rule  make  a  living  ?— A. 
A  thriving  fisherman  will  always  make  a  good  living  about  our  coast. 

Q.  But  what  will  a  fair,  average  man  do  ? — A.  He  can  always  make 
a  good  living. 

Q.  Has  this  fishery  failed,  and  has  there  been  a  good  deal  of  distress 
along  the  coast,  as  far  as  you  can  judge  ? — A.  I  have  seen  none  of  it  so 
far. 

Q.  Are  the  stories  which  we  hear  about  marvelous  distress  and 
starvation  there  known  to  you  ? — A.  They  have  been  unknown  to  me 
so  far. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  there  are  thriftless  and  shiftless  men  among  fisher- 
ermen  ? — A.  The  stories  in  question  must  have  been  exaggerated  very 
much. 

Q.  You  also  ship  cod-oil  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  in  large  quantities. 

Q.  Where  do  you  send  it  ? — A.  To  England. 

Q.  The  cod-fishing  business  requires  good  bait  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  you  get  it  ? — A.  Along  our  shore. 

Q.  What  baits  do  you  use  ? — A.  Herring,  caplin,  lantz,  squid,  and 
mackerel. 

Q.  Are  these  baits  plentiful  ? — A.  Yes,  in  their  season. 

Q.  As  their  season  consecutively  comes  round? — A.  Yes;  they  are 
always  then  plentiful. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


841 


Q.  Do  yoa  use  a  good  deal  of  mackerel  for  baitf — A.  Yes,  daring 
this  seasoD. 

Q.  In  what  nnmbers  are  the  mackerel  found  this  year  on  your  coast? — 
A.  They  are  plentiful,  and  more  so  than  they  have  been  daring  other 
years. 

Q.  Would  you  say  that  this  is  a  very  plentiful  season  for  mackerel  ? — 
A.  Yes.    Some  years  we  have  seen  none  of  them  at  all. 

Q.  Has  the  American  mackerel-fishing  fleet  much  frequented  the 
coast  where  you  have  been  as  agent  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  largely. 

Q.  What  used  to  be  their  number  ? — A.  Some  years  ago  their  vessels 
on  our  coast  numbered  from  300  to  400,  if  not  more. 

Q.  In  what  immediate  locality  ? — A.  Between  Perce  and  Paspebiac. 

Q.  They  fished  every  year  along  this  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  saw  them  doing  so  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Your  business  requires  you  to  travel  from  station  to  station  along 
the  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  they  were  under  your  eye  all  the  time  ? — A.  In  Paspebiac 
harbor  there  would  be  something  like  200  or  300. 

Q.  Where  were  these  300  and  400  American  fishing- vessels  taking 
mackerel  ? — A.  Mostly  within  three  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  as  to  the  distance  they  were  from  the  shore  ? — 
A.  Xo ;  none  at  all. 

Q.  Could  you  have  been  mistaken  touching  this  point  ?— A.  No.  I 
have  seen  some  of  their  vessels  within  half  a  mite  of  the  shore  and 
seining  among  the  moorings  of  our  boats. 

Q.  But  were  any  of  them  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit?— A.  No; 
and  many  of  them  were  within  a  mile  of  the  shore.  Indeed,  they  were 
actually  in  the  harbor. 

Q.  They  were  generally  within  your  view,  taking  fish  within  the  three- 
mile  limit? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  your  opportunities  for  seeing  them  were  especially  good  t — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  been  brought  into  contact  with  these  American  cap- 
tains?— A.  Yes;  frequently. 

Q.  And  you  have,  of  course,  conversed  with  them  about  their  fares 
and  chances? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  form  from  what  they  said  any  estimate  as  to  the  average 
catch  of  their  vessels  ? — A.  Not  exactly ;  but  I  fancy  from  the  conver- 
sations which  I  had  with  them  that  their  catches  varied  from  250  to  400 
barrels  per  trip. 

Q.  How  many  trips  would  they  make  a  season  ? — A.  Sometimes  two, 
and  sometimes  three. 

Q.  Then  they  would  average  300  barrels  a  trip  ? — A.  Yes.  I  think 
that  700  barrels  a  season  would  be  a  fair  average  with  them. 

Q.  And  these  fish  are  all  taken  from  half  a  mile  to  2^  and  3  miles  from 
ihe  shore  ? — A.  The  great  part  of  them  are. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  their  vessels  fishing  and  drifting  ofl' shore  ? — A. 
Yes ;  that  is  their  custom. 

Q.  Did  you  know  anything  about  the  American  cod-fishing  fleet  ? — 
A.  We  only  see  them  when  they  come  in  for  bait.  Often  no  bait  is  to 
be  bad  on  the  Banks. 

Q.  And  most  of  them  come  in  for  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  they  carry  on  the  cod  fishing  here  if  they  could  not  so  come 
in  ?— A.  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  How  do  they  get  it  ? — A.  With  nets  and  by  purchase. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  do  they  use  ? — A.  Herring  mostly. 


842 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


ii 


! 


Q.  Without  this  privilege  I  nnderstaud  yoa  to  say  they  could  not 
carry  on  the  cod  fishery  at  all  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  that  they  could  do 
so  if  they  were  deprived  of  it. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  on  that  point  at  all,  in  view  of  your  long  ex- 
perience as  an  agent  of  the  firm  mentioned  ? — A .  No. 

Q.  Do  they  bring  herring-nets  with  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  catch  the  fish  themselves  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Within  what  distance  from  the  shore  ? — A.  The  nets  are  all  set 
within  two.miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  They  also  get  ice  from  you  ? — A.  Yes ;  often. 

Q.  And  preserve  their  bait  with  it? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  known  any  fishermen  go  from  your  neighborhood  to  the 
American  markets  f — A.  No ;  never. 

Q.  Is  the  American  market  of  any  advantage  to  you,  and  your  large 
firm,  or  to  any  other  fishermen? — A.  It  is  of  no  advantage  whatever 
to  us. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  Our  fish  are  not  adapted  to  their  market,  and  the  prices 
which  we  can  obtain  there  are  not  sufiicient. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  You  said  that  you  sent  a  cargo  of  fish  to  the  United  States  market, 
and  that  the  venture  proved  a  failure? — A.  We  seut  more  than  cue 
cargo  there. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  so  ? — A.  This  was  10  or  12  years  ago,  I  suppose. 

Q.  How  were  the  fish  prepared? — A.  We  sent  pickled  herring. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  try  the  American  market  with  codfish  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  A  nd  you  have  never  prepared  cod  in  the  way  in  which  they  are 
prepared  for  the  American  market  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  do  you  give  the  fishermen  besides  the  free  use  of  the  boats 
after  the  15th  of  September?— A.  They  have  the  rigging  and  boats  free 
of  charge. 

Q.  How  long  can  they  use  them  ? — A.  For  a  month  and  a  half. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  their  catch  taken  during  this  time?— A. 
They  export  it  to  the  Canadian  market. 

Q.  Do  they  send  it  direct  to  their  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  what  firm  are  they  sent  ? — A.  They  are  sent  to  different  firms. 
Two  or  three  fishermen  club  their  catches  together,  and  one  goes  up 
with  the  lot. 

Q.  How  much  would  they  catch  on  the  average  during  the  period  first 
mentioned? — A.  Some  have  been  known  to  take  as  much  as  40  or  50 
draughts. 

Q.  What  would  be  their  average  catch  ? — A.  I  suppose  35  draughts. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  the  Gasp4  climate  as  being  excellent  for  the 
drying  of  fish  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  While  the  climate  on  the  Nova  Scotia  shore  is  poor  for  that  pur- 
pose ? — A.  Yes ;  it  is  damper,  and  foggy. 

Q.  Would  you  be  surprised  to  hear  that  the  climate  of  Newfoundland 
is  remarkably  good  for  that  purpose  ? — A.  I  could  not  speak  on  this 
point  regarding  the  northern  coast  of  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Yon  say  that  a  thriving  fisherman  on  your  coast  always  makes  a 
good  living  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Has  the  principal  of  your  firm  bought  up  a  great  deal  of  laud  in 
your  neighborhood  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  He  owns  a  large  part  of  the  land  along  the  coast  of  th^  Bay  of 
Ghaleurs  ? — A.  He  has  a  large  tract  there. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


H43 


ets  are  all  set 


borbood  to  the 


,  and  the  prices 


ar  for  that  pur- 


Q.  The  following  extract  is  to  be  found  on  page  48  of  the  report  of 
the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries  for  1876 : 

In  my  last  report  I  explained  bow  the  fonnder  of  a  firm,  which  has  since  become 
moat  powerful,  had  instinctively  found  the  means  of  keeping  these  fishermen  under  its 
power,  in  divertiuff  them  from  agricultural  pursuits,  and  in  securing  to  his  own  ac- 
count most  of  the  lands  bordering  on  Bay  des  Chalenrs.  The  poesession  of  land  in- 
snres  independence ;  whoever  is  a  proprietor  is  free.  Mr.  Robin  was  aware  of  the 
msdom  of  this  truth  inscribed  in  the  history  of  every  people;  and  he  began  his  oper- 
ations by  monopolizing  the  labor  of  each  individual  wlio  was  doomed  to  come  in  con- 
tact with  him.  Thus  it  is  that  fishermen  from  Gasp<^  and  Bunaventure  remained  poor 
and  in  a  state  of  dependency,  while  these  firms  grew  richer  every  day. 

Is  that  true? — A.  That  is  Captain  Lavoic's  statement.  It  is  quite  in- 
correct. 

Q.  Have  you  recently  seen  any  American  cod  fisheries  on  your 
shores  !— A.  We  have  not  seen  many  of  them  there  of  late  years.  We 
have  seen  a  few  latterly,  but  not  many. 

Q.  From  what  part  of  the  States  do  they  come  ? — A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  How  long  has  it  been  since  you  have  seen  an  American  mackerel 
fleet  ott  Gasp6  ? — A.  Some  American  vessels  are  there  every  year.  A 
fleet  of  them  was  there  before  I  came  down. 

Q.  How  many  were  there  ? — A.  Seventy  or  eighty. 

Q.  That  is  this  year  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  the  Bay  of  Cbaleurs. 

Q.  How  many  of  them  did  you  see  last  year  ? — A.  I  could  not  say  ; 
probably  about  100. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  And  how  many  did  you  see  there  the  year  before  ? — A.  I  then  saw 
about  the  same  number. 

Q.  I  have  heard  it  stated  by  a  previous  witness  that  you  paid  the 
fishermen  last  year  too  much  for  their  fish  ? — A.  We  are  blamed  for 
having  done  so. 

Q.  Did  you,  at  the  time,  look  at  the  market  price  which  you  re- 
ceived ? — A,  I  think  so. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  Then  you  did  a  losing  business  last  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  balanced  your  profit  and  loss  account  at  the  end  of  tie 
year,  were  the  results  for  1876  worse  than  those  for  1875  ? — A.  Yes ;  and 
mach  more  so. 

Q.  You  made  no  profit  for  the  year  1876? — A.  No;  none  at  all. 

Q.  And  you  actually  lost  money  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  were  poorer  men  at  the  end  than  at  the  beginning  of  the 
year? — A.  Certainly. 


No.  45. 


The  Conference  met. 


Tuesday,  August  28. 


William  Magdonnell,  trader  and  formerly  fisherman,  Argyle, 
Yarmouth  County,  Nova  Scotia,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of 
Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  Have  you  been  many  years  engaged  in  fishing  ? — Answer. 
I  have. 

Q.  How  many  years  ? — A.  I  went  fishing  from  the  time  I  was  14  years 
ofageuntill  was  32. 


844 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Are  you  now  eugaged  in  flshiDgf— A.  No,  I  traffic  in  fish  some- 
what. 

Q.  You  are  not  now  actively  engaged  in  the  fishing  business  i—A.  I 
have  not  caught  any  fish  for  8, 10,  or  11  years. 

Q.  When  you  were  actively  engaged  in  fishing,  in  what  part  of  tbe 
world  did  you  fish  ? — A.  I  sailed  out  of  Gloucester,  Mass. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  fish  T — A.  Chiefly  in  Bay  Chaleurs  after  mack- 
erel, and  in  North  Bay,  as  they  call  it. 

Q.  In  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  ?--A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  in  American  vessels  all  the  time? — A.  AH  but  the  three 
last  years. 

Q.  You  went  fishing  as  a  hand  when  yon  were  about  14  years  of  age ! 
— A.  From  14  until  I  was  19  years,  when  I  became  a  master. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  what  vessel  you  first  sailed  ? — A.  I  went  when 
14  years  of  age  in  the  Bridget  Ann,  Captain  Charles  Macdonuell,  aod 
shipped  from  Port  Hood,  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  In  what  part  of  the  gulf  did  you  fish  ? — A.  The  first  fare  we  caught 
on  Bank  Bradley,  and  some  in  Bay  Chaleurs ;  I  cannot  remember  the 
quantity. 

Q.  That  was  spring  mackerel  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  that  season  ? — A.  Three  successful 
trips. 

Q-  Where  did  you  take  your  next  fare  ? — A.  We  caught  330  barrels 
at  anchor,  with  our  vessel  sprung  up  close  in  to  the  Bird  Bocks,  Mag- 
dalen Islands. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  the  third  trip? — A.  At  Margaree  Island  and 
Cheticamp,  close  inshore.  All  mackerel  caught  at  Margaree  Island 
and  Cheticamp  are  caught  close  in. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore? — A.  Two  miles;  sometimes  so  close  that 
you  are  afraid  the  vessel  will  strike  the  shore. 

Q.  They  are  taken  within  two  miles,  half  a  mile,  or  a  quarter  of  a 
mile  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes,  that  is  as  a  general  thing.  Probably 
there  may  be  some  mackerel  outside,  but  generally  American  vessels  go 
inside  to  catch  them.  We  caught  the  whole  of  our  third  trip  there ;  it 
was  very  late  in  the  season,  15th  September. 

Q.  Was  the  quantity  you  caught  about  the  average  catch  of  the 
fleet  ? — A.  We  got  more  than  the  average  catch ;  we  made  three  trips, 
and  I  don't  know  but  one  other  vessel  that  made  three. 

Q.  That  was  the  year  of  tbe  American  gale  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  was  the 
year  of  the  great  Yankee  gale. 

Q.  In  1852,  what  vessel  were  you  in  ? — A.  The  schooner  Charles 
Bubin,  the  same  captain ;  my  brother  was  master. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  ? — A.  We  made  one  trip  that  year. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  how  many  barrels  you  caught  ? — A.  We  got 
one  fare,  some  300  barrels,  I  think. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  them,  in  relation  to  the  shoreline  ? — A.  We 
caught  the  greatest  part  of  them  in  the  fall ;  we  did  nothing  the  first 
part  of  the  season  ;  we  caught  the  biggest  part  at  Margaree  Island, 
inshore. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  were  you  the  next  year  ? — A.  The  schooner  Sun- 
beam. 

Q.  Were  you  in  the  bay  all  summer  ? — A.  Not  all  summer ;  we  came 
some  time  in  August,  and  we  made  but  one  trip. 

Q.  Where  had  you  been  before  that  ? — A.  On  the  Western  Banks 
and  Sable  Island  Bank. 

Q.  Then  you  went  into  the  bay  only  for  the  fall  trip  ?— A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


S45 


Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  get  ? — A.  We  got  one  fare,  about  30O 
barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  that  fall  trip  ? — A.  I  think  we  caught  the 
greatest  part  of  them  between  Gheticamp  and  Margaree.    All  vessels 
in  the  fall  of  the  year  generally  catch  mackerel  there ;  it  is  near  a  har- 
bor, and  they  generally  flsh  there  so  that  they  can  make  a  harbor  when 
it  blows.    Ihat  was  the  case  when  I  went  fishing. 

Q.  You  caught  your  fare  there  T — A.  The  biggest  part ;  we  may  have 
caogbt  some  few  elsewhere,  but  I  well  remember  we  got  the  biggest 
part  of  our  fare  in  the  fa'  there.  The  first  part  of  the  season  we  got 
iiotbiDg.  AH  mackerel  ^ut  at  the  Margaree  Island  are  obtained  within 
three  miles  of  shore ;  some  people  have  made  calculations  and  said  they 
are  caught  five  miles  out,  but  there  are  none  caught  Ave  miles  from 
shore.    The  mackerel  come  inshore  there. 

Q.  Is  there  very  great  diflftculty  in  telling  the  distance  you  are  from 
the  shore  f — A.  I  never  had  much  difficulty ;  I  could  generally  tell 
vrhetber  I  was  one,  two,  or  three  miles  out.    It  is  a  matter  of  opinion. 

Q.  You  have  not  much  doubt  you  could  tell  correctly? — A.  1  think  I 
could  tell  within  100  yards.  I  generally  knew  whether  1  was  three  miles 
out  or  not. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  you  sail  after  the  Sunbeam  ? — A.  In  the  Quick- 
step. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make? — A.  Two. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch  each  trip  ? — A.  The  first  trip  we  did  not  do 
much,  and  were  not  very  successful ;  we  secured  150  barrels.  On  our 
last  trip  we  got  250  barrels  off  Cheticamp  Island,  Gape  Breton  shore, 
about  20  miles  east  of  Margaree;  they  were  taken  close  inshore. 

Q.  On  the  first  trip  did  you  seine  them  inshore? — A.  We  seined  them 
ou  Bank  Bradley. 

Q.  Was  all  the  second  trip  taken  off  Cheticamp? — A.  Yes;  in  fact 
we  caught  half  of  the  trip  close  in  the  mouth  of  Cheticamp  harbor,  an 
nnusual  place  to  catch  mackerel. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  you  sail  next  year? — A.  The  Arbutus. 

Q.  How  many,  trips  did  you  make  in  her? — A.  Two. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch? — A.  Two  fares,  300  and  350  barrels. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  did  you  take  them  ? — A.  The  last  trip  we 
caught  off  Margaree  Island  and  Cheticamp. 

Q.  Close  inshore? — A.  The  first  trip  we  caught  round  perhaps  some 
at  the  ]\[agdalen  Islands  and  East  Point. 

Q.  During  those  five  years  you  were  a  hand,  did  the  rest  of  the  Amer- 
ican iieet  fish  in  the  same  places  as  you  did  ?  —A.  Yes ;  sometimes  there 
would  be  100  sail  of  American  vessels  in  sight;  at  Margaree  Island  I 
have  counted  200  vessels. 

Q.  Where  were  the  200  vessels  ? — A.  Right  round  on  the  same  ground 
as  we  were  in. 

Q.  Bight  close  to  the  shore  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  tbem  yourself? — A.  Ye». 

Q.  You  have  no  doubt  they  got  fares  there  ? — A.  I  could  not  say  they 
took  all  their  fares  there,  but  I  have  seen  them  there ;  they  u:.ay  have 
caught  some  fish  in  other  places. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  were  you  next  year? — A.  In  the  James  Seward. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her? — A.  Two  trips. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  each  trip? — A.  We  got  two  fares. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  take? — A.  It  was  a  300-barrel  vessel, 
and  we  got  two  full  fares ;  the  last  fare  we  caught  oft'  Cheticamp  and 


846 


AWABD   OF  THE  F18HEUY  COMMISSION. 


Marsaree;  fur  the  first  fare  we  fished  some  in  the  bend  of  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island  and  at  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Cheticamp  and  Margaree  formed  a  very  favorite  fishing-ground 
with  you  f — A.  Yes.  I  always  made  a  point  of  getting  my  last  fare 
there. 

Q.  You  afterward  became  captain  of  a  vessel  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  vessel  f — A.  The  Mohenia. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  the  vessel? — A.  About  seventy-five  tons,  I 
think. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  f — A.  Two. 

Q.  What  fares  did  yon  take  f — A.  I  think  about  250  barrels  the  first 
trip,  and  perhaps  300  barrels  the  second  trip.  It  wc^^  a  300barrel  ves- 
sel, and  we  generally  got  fares. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  the  mackerel  ? — A.  The  last  fare  we  caagbt 
off  Margaree.  I  don't  know  exactly  where  we  took  the  first  fare.  I 
think  I  caught  some  of  the  first  fare  off  East  Point,  Prince  Edward 
Island ;  I  might  have  caught  a  few  off  Bank  Bradley ;  we  got  them  at 
different  points. 

Q.  The  next  year  I  believe  you  went  again  in  the  Mohenia  ? — A.  Yes ; 
we  made  two  trips. 

Q.  With  similar  results  to  those  of  the  previous  year  ? — A.  About 
the  same. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  the  mackerel  in  the  same  places  ! — A.  On  about  the 
same  ground. 

Q.  What  vessel  did  you  next  go  in  ? — A.  The  Shooting  Star. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  f — A.  Two. 

Q.  Where  do  you  get  your  catch  ? — A.  Some  at  bend  of  the 

island,  some  off  Point  Miscou,  and  some  perhaps  ^  c*nk  Bradley. 
For  my  last  fare  I  sprung  up  off  Port  Hood  Island  and  caught  the 
largest  part  of  the  fare  there.  I  caught  some  mackerel  off'  Margaree 
Island  where  I  sprung  up;  it  was  on  the  1st  of  August;  we  fished  halt 
a  mile  from  the  land. 

Q.  What  was  the  next  vessel  in  which  you  sailed  ? — A.  The  Charles 
Macdonnell. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  1 — A.  Two. 

Q.  What  did  you  take  ?— A.  One  fare  of  200  and  another  of  300  bar- 
rels. The  last  fare  was  taken  inshore.  Some  of  the  first  fare  were  taken 
at  the  bend  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  some  oft'  Pictou  and  along 
that  shore. 

Q.  What  was  the  next  vessel  in  which  you  sailed  ? — A.  The  Allan 
Forester;  I  chartered  her. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  ?— -A.  750  or  775  barrels  of  fat  mackerel.  We 
only  made  one  trip.  The  biggest  part  of  the  trip  was  made  at  3Iarga- 
ree  Island. 

Q.  Out  of  the  750  barrels,  what  proportion  was  taken  within  tbree 
miles  of  the  shore? — A.  About  three-fourths.  I  caught  the  biggest  part 
late  in  the  fall  off  Margaree  Island. 

Q.  What  did  you  pay  for  the  charter  of  the  vessel  ?— A.  One  thou- 
sand dollars. 

Q.  How  were  the  crew  paid  ? — A.  The  men  went  on  half  line,  receiv- 
ing half  of  the  fish  they  caught  after  they  paid  for  the  barrels  and 
packing. 

Q.  How  many  weeks  were  you  away  getting  y»ur  fare?— A.  Eleven 
or  twelve  weeks. 

Q.  For  how  long  did  you  charter  the  vessel? — A.  For  the  trip. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  of  the  speculation  *o  yourself?— A.  After 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


847 


paying  $1,000  for  the  charter — four  of  us  chartered  the  vessel — aud  pay- 
ing nie  as  captain  5  per  cent,  commission,  which  came  out  of  the  ves- 
sel's half,  there  was  f  1,05U  for  the  four  who  chartered  her. 

Q.  Then  she  cleared  $2,050  f— A.  Yes;  that  is  what  slio  would  have 
paid  the  owner  if  we  had  not  chartered  her. 

Q.  Did  you  go  in  the  Allan  Forester  more  than  one  yearf — A.  I  went 
to  Newfoundland  that  winter. 

Q.  What  for  t — A,  For  frozen  herring.  I  got  a  cargo  of  frozen  her- 
ring and  took  them  home. 

Q.  Did  you  lose  on  the  herring  ? — A.  No,  I  made. 

Q.  What  did  you  make  on  the  herring  that  year? — A.  I  cannot  re- 
member what  we  made  that  year.  My  brother  had  a  vessel  chartered 
the  previous  winter  and  I  think  he  cleared  about  $3,000  on  one  fare  of 
frozen  herring.  I  had  about  800  barrels  of  herring  which  we  sold  in 
New  York  at  5  cents  per  pound. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  How  much  is  that  per  barrel  ? — A.  Ten  dollars  per  barrel,  but  we 
sold  them  by  the  pound. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q,  On  what  vessel  did  you  go  after  the  Allan  Forester? — A.  I  went 
on  the  George  B.  Loring ;  that  was  the  last  year  I  fished  in  au  American 
ressel. 

Q.  How  many  trips  ? — A.  Three  successful  trips. 

Q.  What  quantity  did  you  take  each  trip  ? — A.  I  could  not  exactly 
say  what  quantity  each  trip.    I  landed  900  barrels. 

Q.  What  portion  of  those  did  you  take  within  three  miles  of  the 
ijhore? — A.  I  suppose  three- fourths  of  them. 

Q.  You  made  three  trips  in  that  vessel  ? — A.  The  first  faro  I  caught 
ail  in  Bay  Gbalenrs,  the  whole  of  the  second  fare  I  think  I  caught  at 
the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  the  third  trip  off  Margarce  Island. 

Q.  That  would  make  two-thirds  of  the  whole  caught  within  the  pre- 
scribed limits  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  make  the  three  trips  without  transshipping? — A.  No;  I 
transshipped. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  transship  ? — A.  Two,  my  first  and  second 
fares.    I  took  the  last  fare  home  myself. 

Q.  Was  the  privilege  of  transshipment  a  benefit  ? — A.  I  suppose  it 
was. 

Q.  Could  you  otherwise  have  made  three  trips?— A.  No. 

Q.  How  many  trips  could  you  have  made  if  you  had  not  possessed 
that  privilege  ? — A.  Two.  At  ^  ie  time  when  I  would  have  been  at  homo 
discharging  my  cargo  I  was  catching  another  fare. 

Q.  So  the  privilege  of  transshipping  gave  you  an  extra  trip  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  pecuniary  result  of  the  trip  of  the  George  B.  Lor- 
ing?—A.  I  only  heard  from  what  the  owner  said.  I  was  running  the 
vessel  on  commission.  The  owner  told  me  it  cleared  him  $5,000  on  those 
three  trips. 

Q.  Were  the  900  barrels  you  got  a  fair  average  catch  ? — A.  My  vessel 
was  small.  Some  vessels  that  year  got  1,600  barrels  of  mackerel.  I 
think  the  Battler,  Gaptain  Andrew  Lay  ton,  got  that  quantity. 

Q.  Were  there  other  vessels  which  obtained  as  many  barrels  as  you 
did  ?— A.  Some  got  1,000  barrels,  and  some  1,100.  Others,  of  course,  got 
500  barrels,  and  some  400  barrels. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  Commission  an  idea  of  the  profits  of  the  Glouces- 


848 


▲WABD   OF  THE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


ter  fishing- vessels  ?  Do  they  make  profits  or  not  f — A.  I  woald  not  dare 
to  say  what  the  profits  are,  becaqse  I  never  owned  a  vessel  there.  I 
have  never  seen  accounts,  bat  I  jndge  they  mast  make  some  moDey. 
How  else  coald  they  baild  fishing-vessels  costing  $12,009  if  they  did 
not  make  money  ?  When  I  went  to  Gloucester  as  a  boy  it  was  only  a 
small  village,  and  now  it  is  an  incorporated  city.  What  has  done  it  ? 
Nothing  but  fishing.  Ko  other  business  whatever  is  carried  on  there 
except  fishing. 

Q.  That  was  the  last  American  fishing- vessel  yon  were  in  ? — A.  Yes, 

Q.  Did  yon -afterward  fish  in  a  British  vessel! — A.  Yes ;  I  had  a  ves 
sel  built  in  Yarmouth  for  myself. 

Q.  How  many  years  did  you  go  in  her  ? — A.  Two  years. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  each  year  !— A.  I  caught  600  barrels  the  first 
year,  I  think.    It  was  late  when  I  went  into  the  bay,  the  15th  September. 

Q.  And  what  did  you  get  the  other  year? — A.  Seven  hundred  and 
eighty  barrels,  I  think. 

Q.  Then  what  vessel  were  you  in  next  year  ? — A.  In  a  schooner  from 
the  Strait  of  Canso,  called  the  Vincent  J.  Wallace. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  take! — A.  Four  hundred  and  flft; 
barrels ;  it  was  late  when  I  went  into  the  bay. 

Q.  lu  those  five  years  where  did  you  take  those  fish  ! — A.  I  caught 
the  biggest  part  of  those  fish  off  Margaree  Island. 

Q.  What  proportion  was  caught  inside  the  three  miles,  and  what  pro- 
portion outside?  Did  you  take  any  outside! — A.  I  don't  think  I  did; 
I  might  have  picked  up  a  few  mackerel  probably  running  down  from 
Port  Hood  to  the  fishing-ground.  I  might  have  caught,  perhaps,  tea 
wash  barrels. 

Q.  Then  the  proportion  you  caught  outside  was  very,  very  small  ?- 
A.  It  would  not  amount  to  anything. 

Q.  The  remaining  fish  were  caught  close  inshore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  fish  you  took  off  Margaree  were  taken  from  half  a  mile  to  a 
mile  and  two  miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  those  years  when  you  were  fishing  In  the  summer  along 
the  shores  of  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence,  where  did  you  go  in  winter  ?~ 
A.  To  Newfoundland,  for  frozen  herring. 

Q.  How  many  winters  did  you  go  there! — A.  I  think  I  was  there  ten 
winters. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  go  to  Fortune  Bay  ? — A.  I  was  there  all  of  those  ten 
winters  except  one. 

Q.  Did  you  find  the  people  there  wretched  and  miserable  ?— A.  No: 
the  people  are  very  well  oft"  with  the  exception  of  a  few.  There  may  be 
some  poor  people  there  as  everywhere  else ;  but,  as  a  general  thing,  the 
people  are  very  well  off.  If  you  see  them  on  board  their  little  jacks 
they  do  not  seem  to  be  worth  anything ;  but  if  you  go  to  their  house 
you  find  the  case  very  different. 

Q.  What  do  you  find  there! — A.  Plenty  of  money  in  the  houses. 
Sometimes  when  they  would  be  trading  with  me  they  would  not  have 
enough  fish  to  pay  me  and  they  would  take  me  to  their  houses  and  open 
a  chest  where  there  were  piles  of  money,  which  would  surprise  you. 

Q.  Instead  of  being  a  wretched  people  they  are  very  comfortable  iu 
deed,  far  above  the  average? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  they  are  far  above  the  average  ?— A.  Tbey 
are  generally  well  off,  although  they  often  look  miserable  and  vrorl: 
hard.  In  fact  some  of  the  people  live  very  poorly,  while  they  have 
plenty  of  money.  They  don't  know  how  to  take  comfort  with  their 
money. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


849 


ry,  very  small  !- 


k  I  was  tbere  ten 
re  all  of  those  ten 


Q.  Do  yoa  think  they  would  starve  if  the  Americans  did  not  go  to 
boj  their  fish  f — A.  I  do  not  think  they  wonld. 

Q.  What  did  you  give  for  the  frozen  herring  ? — A.  One  dollar  per 
barrel ;  I  never  give  more  and  never  less ;  I  have  heard  of  some  vessels 
giving  $3  per  barrel. 

Q.  On  a  pinch  you  would  have  given  more  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  on  the  Newfoundland  Banks? — A.  No;  I  never 
caught  any  fish  there;  I  purchased  the  hsh  I  obtained  there. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  on  the  Grand  Banks? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  for  cod  on  the  banks  off  Nova  Scotia? — A.  Yes. 
I  have  fished  on  Western,  La  Have,  and  Brown  Banks. 

Q.  For  cod  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  did  you  catch  the  cod  ? — A.  We  caught  them  with  trawls. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  did  you  use  ? — ^A.  Fresh  bait.    Herring. 

Q.  Cannot  you  catch  cod  equally  well  with  salt  bait? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  do  yon  know  ? — A.  I  have  tried  it. 

Q.  Tell  us  the  result  of  your  experience  ? — A.  I  have  been  on  the  Banks 
with  nothing  but  porgies  for  bait — we  generally  took  a  few  barrels  with 
ns  to  start  upon — and  ran  out  our  trawls,  having  the  salt  bait,  and 
tbere  appeared  to  be  not  one  fish  around,  for  we  would  not  feel  a  bite 
or  get  a  fish.  I  ^ave  then  ran  to  land,  got  herring  and  gone  out  to  the 
same  ground  as  near  as  possible  and  put  out  the  trawls  and  had  an  abun- 
dance of  fish.  Where  previously  with  salt  bait  we  got  not  a  fish.  Even 
if  yon  bait  your  hook  with  a  piece  of  salt  porgy  and  put  a  small  piece 
of  fresh  herring  on  the  point  of  the  book,  you  will  have  a  fish  on  it. 

Q.  Your  evidence  amounts  to  this,  that  fresh  bait  is  absolutely  neces- 
sary to  catch  codfish  ? — A.  Most  undoubtedly. 

Q.  And  without  fresh  bait  Bank  codfishing  cannot  be  successfully 
carried  on  ? — A.  I  am  quite  sure  of  it. 

Q.  You  are  quite  sure  of  it  ? — A.  I  am  quite  certain  of  it  from  prac- 
tical experience ;  I  have  tried  it. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  ? — A.  Four  or  five  years.  It  is  some  time 
ago,  but  I  believe  from  what  American  captains  say  that  it  is  worse 
now.    They  have  to  get  fresh  bait  or  they  cannot  get  any  fish,  they  say. 

Q.  Do  the  bankers  ever  transship  their  cargoesof  cod  ? — A.  Yes.  There 
were  two  smacks  from  Newfoundland  came  into  the  harbor  bound  home, 
bnt  when  the  captains  laid  their  heads  together  they  came  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  trips  were  too  small  to  go  home  with,  and  one  of  the 
captains  arranged  to  take  them  home,  and  the  other  captain  refitted  and 
went  back  again.    One  of  the  captains  is  in  here. 

Q.  Both  vessels  belong  to  the  same  owner? — A.  I  could  not  say  that; 
bnt  they  belong  to  the  same  port,  New  London. 

Q.  If  the  American  vessels  were  not  allowed  to  enter  Newfoundland, 
Nova  Scotia,  and  Cape  Breton  for  fresh  bait,  they  could  not  carry  on  the 
codflshery? — A.  No:  it  would  be  impossible.  Any  man  with  common 
sense  knows  that.  They  might  carry  it  on  to  a  certain  extent,  but  not 
successfully. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  conversed  with  American  captains ;  do  you  know 
whether  that  is  their  opinion  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  have  so  expressed  themselves  to  you  I — A.  Yes,  a  number  of 
times.    There  is  not  a  year  goes  by  but  I  talk  with  fifty  of  them. 

Q.  That  is  the  general  opinion  of  those  acquainted  with  the  fisheries? — 
^.  Yes,  it  is  the  general  opinion. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  a  man  hold  a  di£ferent  opinion  ? — A.  I  don't 
tiiiDk  I  ever  knew  any  man  who  held  a  different  opinion. 

54  F 


850 


AWABD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  If  witnesses  came  here  and  told  a  different  story,  what  would  yoa 
say? — A.  I  don't  know  how  they  could. 

Q.  Did  yon  ever  know  a  British  vessel  go  to  American  waters  to  catch 
fish  f — A.  I  never  knew  bat  one,  the  Lettie,  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 
She  went  on  that  coast  seining. 

Q.  Did  she  go  for  porgies  ? — A.  She  went  seining  porgies  and  mackerel, 
but  I  think  she  did  not  get  anything. 

Q.  Did  she  ever  try  it  again  f — A.  No ;  I  think  not. 

Q.  Do  you  know,  from  what  American  captains  have  told  you,  where 
they  caught  their  mackerel  f — A.  I  have  not  known  of  late  years  where 
they  caught  them. 

Q.  When  you  were  fishing ! — ^A.  I  did  not  require  to  be  told,  for  I 
have  seen  them  fishing. 

Q.  Is  there  any  doubt  as  to  where  the  fish  are  taken  ? — A.  Not  a  parti- 
cle of  doubt. 

Q.  Do  you  say  they  are  taken  inshore  ? — A.  I  don't  say  all  the  fish 
are  caught  inshore.  There  are  fish  caught  off  shore  as  well  as  inshore; 
but  three-fourths  of  those  taken  are  caught  inshore. 

Q.  Is  it  known  by  the  American  captains  to  be  so  ? — A.  GertaiDly. 
You  may  find  some  Am(  rican  captains — one  or  two — who  don't  come 
inshore  a  great  deal.  The  old  captains  of  Cape  God  vessels  are  fright- 
ened of  the  land,  and  they,  as  a  general  thing,  will  fisfi  on  Bank  Brad- 
ley.   There  are,  perhaps,  half  a  dozen  or  a  dozen  of  them. 

Q.  What  was  the  result  of  their  trips  ? — A.  I  never  heard  of  one  get- 
ting a  fare.  There  might  have  been  some  who  did  so,  but  I  never  heard 
of  one. 

Q.  Have  they  old  vessels  I — A.  No ;  I  don't  think  it  is  anything  more 
than  that  they  don't  care  about  fishing  near  the  land. 

Q.  What  bait  do  the  mackerel  feed  on  ? — A.  It  is  pretty  hard  to  tell 
exactly  all  the  bait.  When  we  were  in  the  bay  following  the  mackerel 
we  found  there  was  a  little  fish  called  the  shrimp — some  call  it  brit— 
which  the  mackerel  generally  chase.  The  brit  generally  frequents  along 
the  shore ;  that  is  what  brings  the  mackerel  in  to  the  shore.  I  have 
seen  the  whole  fleet  haul  to  and  not  raise  a  fish ;  but  after  going  live  or 
ten  yards  farther,  they  would  get  right  into  the  school  of  mackerel  which 
were  after  the  brit.  They  would  attract  the  mackerel  out,  but  very  soon 
the  fish  would  go  right  back  t(^  the  brit,  and  the  vessels  would  have  to  | 
follow  them  in  and  entice  them  out. 

Q.  Do  you  find  the  brit,  which  the  mackerel  chase,  out  at  sea  ?— A.  I  j 
never  saw  any,  though  it  may  be  there. 
}l^,  Q.  Although  you  saw  it  along  the  shore  If — A.  Yes.    I  have  no  doubt  I 
there  is  a  small  quantity  out  at  sea,  but  it  generally  frequents  alougthe  j 
shore. 

Q.  Suppose  you  were  prohibited  from  coming  within  three  miles  of  the  I 
shore,  ^^ould  you  go  down  to  fish  in  the  gulf  for  mackerel  ? — A.  I  don't 
know;  Wrt  do  a  good  many  things.  I  think  if  I  was  prohibited  from 
taking  mackerel  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  I  would  not  come.  The 
first  fare  1  might  possibly  obtain  my  fishing  outside  j  but  the  last  fare, 
which  is  most  valuable,  I  could  not  get  except  close  inshore.  I 

Q.  The  last  fare  is  worth  twice  as  much  as  the  first  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  is  fat| 
mackerel. 

Q.  The  first  fare  is  not  a  paying  one  f — A.  No.    A  great  many  vesl 
sels  go  after  the  first  fare  because  they  are  fitted  for  a  season's  maclirel 
fishing.    I  have  known  vessels  go  oat  and  bring  in  a  fare  of  maciterel,| 
and  lost  money  because  they  were  poor  fish. 

Q.  You  caught  mackerel  off  shore  as  well  as  inshore  f — A.  Yes. 


» '■ 


AWARD   OF  TH£   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


851 


what  would  yoa 


ies  and  mackerel, 


to  be  told,  for  I 
— A.  Not  a  parti- 


out  at  sea  ?— A.  I 


is  anything  more  H    Q 


Q.  But  the  fat  fish  were  all  taken  inshore  f — A.  Yes,  inshore.  As  a 
general  thing,  American  vessels  in  the  fall  o!  the  year  fish  near  a  harbor, 
80  that  they  can  make  the  harbor  in  storms.  This  is  a  reason  why  they 
fish  inshore. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  Do  you  own  vessels  at  Yarmouth  ? — A.  Yes,  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  You  have  not  been  yourself  to  sea  for  how  many  years  f — A.  It  is 
about  ten  years  since  I  have  been  fishing. 

Q.  In  what  trade  are  the  vessels  in  which  you  are  interested  en- 
gaged ?— A.  They  fish  oft'  Cape  Sable ;  I  have  only  got  a  small  interest 
in  three  vessels. 

Q.  Do  you  do  any  business  in  buying  and  selling  fish  ? — A.  To  a  cer- 
tain extent  I  do. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fish  do  you  buy  f — A.  I  buy  mackerel  and  herring ; 
I  have  not  bought  codfish.    _ 

Q.  From  whom  do  you  buy  your  fish  ? — A.  From  the  inhabitants  of 
the  place  where  I  live. 

Q.  Are  they  engaged  in  day  fishing  with  boats  ? — A.  Very  little. 

Q.  Mostly  with  vessels  ? — A.  Yes,  except  net  fishermen. 

Q.  Do  you  buy  from  them  to  sell  again  or  to  cure  I — A.  To  sell  again. 

Q.  To  sell  again  as  you  buy  them  or  after  being  cured  1 — A.  I  buy 
thein  all  barreled  and  inspected. 

Q.  Where  do  yon  send  them  when  you  sell  them  ? — A.  Sometimes  to 
the  States ;  sometimes  I  sell  them  at  Yarmouth.  I  sell  them  wherever 
I  can  make  the  best  trade. 

What  kind  of  fish  do  you  send  to  the  States  ? — A.  Mackerel  and 
herring. 

Q.  Not  cod? — A.  I  don't  think  I  ever  sent  any  cod  to  the  States. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  pretty  fair  market  in  the  States  now  1 — A.  I  recently 
sent  200  barrels  to  New  York,  but  I  have  not  received  the  returns. 

Q.  What  kind  of  market  has  there  been  in  the  States  for  the  last  four 
or  five  years? — A.  I  think  for  mackerel  the  United  States  is  the  best, 
bat  I  have  found  our  own  market  here  the  best  for  codfish  and  for 
haddock  and  scaled  fish  for  the  last  three  or  four  years. 

Q.  You  don't  prepare  cod  for  the  United  States  market ;  you  dry 
them  thoroughly,  so  as  to  send  them  to  foreign  markets  ? — A.  We  dry 
them  more  than  they  are  dried  in  the  United  States,  but  not  so  hard  as 
in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Do  you  buy  bait,  pogies,  from  the  Americans  ? — A.  No.  We  don't 
Qse  pogies  except  for  catching  mackerel,  and  few  of  our  vessels  engaged 
in  the  mackerel  fishery. 

Q.  Do  not  the  fishermen  of  the  provinces  use  pogies  as  bait  for 
mackerel  ? — A.  That  bait  comes  from  the  United  States,  but  they  don't 
buy  them  direct.  Halifax  merchants  send  to  the  States  and  get  that 
bait  and  the  fishermen  buy  it  from  them. 

Q.  If  you  could  have  the  bait  brought  to  you  from  the  United  States 
it  would  be  cheaper  for  you  to  buy  it  than  to  send  your  vessels  to  the 
States  to  procure  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q<  You  say  that  there  is  mackerel  fishing  outside  the  three-mile 
limit!— A.  Yes. 

Q-  You  say  you  have  known  American  vessels  to  fish  for  mackerel 
ociside  of  the  three  miles? — A.  Yes.  I  have  seen  Americans  and  our 
own  vessels  fishing  outside,  and  I  have  fished  outside  myself. 

Q.  How  do  you  distinguish  Gape  Cod  vessels  from  other  vessels  f— 
A,  We  can  generally  tell  a  Cape  Cod  vessel  from  a  Oloacester  vessel,  for 
it  is  differently  built. 


852 


AWABD   OF  THE    FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Are  they  dififerently  rigged  f — A.  Yes,  and  the  hull  is  different. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  who  the  commander  is,  whether  he  is  a  Cape  Cod 
man,  by  the  rig  of  the  ship  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  yon  cannot  tell  whether  the  commander  is  afraid  of  the  land 
or  not? — A.  Cape  Cod  men  have  the  reputation  of  being  afraid  of  the 
land  in  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  You  cannot  tell  whether  the  commander  is  a  Cape  Cod  man ;  might 
he  not  be  a  brave  Gloucester  man  t — A.  Yes,  or  he  might  be  a  DomlD- 
ion  man. 

Q.  Now,  is  not  this  about  the  commanders  of  Cape  Cod  vessels  being 
afraid  of  the  land  all  nonsense  f — A.  No,  I  am  candid  about  it.  They 
have  the  reputation  of  being  afraid  of  the  land  in  Bay  Chaleurs,  and  so 
some  of  them  will  fish  off  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan. 

Q.  When  you  found  the  Cape  Cod  men  fish  outside  of  Bay  Chaleurs, 
did  it  not  occur  to  you  that  they  did  so  because  they  believed  they 
could  get  more  fish  there  ? — A.  No ;  I  have  no  reason  to  think  so.  It 
may  have  been  their  idea  that  they  could  catch  more  fish  outshore ;  I 
cannot  speak  to  that. 

Q.  You  have  said  they  kepit  inshore  because  they  were  afraid  of  the 
land  ? — A.  I  say  they  have  that  reputation. 

Q.  Do  you  think  they  caught  more  fish  outside? — A.  I  could  not  tell 
you  that. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  if  Cape  Cod  fishermen  understood  they  could 
get  more  fish  inside  than  outside  they  would  not  go  inside ;  do  yoa 
think  they  are  more  afraid  than  other  people? — A.  I  think  8o. 

Q.  You  are  candid  about  that? — A.  I  think  they  are  not  used  to  flsh 
near  the  land  in  Bay  Chaleurs,  though  they  may  be  on  their  own  shores. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  they  might  get  over  that  fear  in  course  of  time! 
— A.  Probably  they  might. 

Q.  A  calculation  was  proposed  to  you  about  a  vessel  in  which  you 
went,  where,  after  paying  you  a  commission  of  5  per  cent.,  the  expenses 
of  the  charter,  $1,000,  there  were  $1,050  left?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  if  you  had  not  chartered  the  vessel,  the 
surplus  would  have  been  $2,050  to  the  owner  ? — A.  Most  undoubtedly 

80. 

Q.  Does  not  the  ship  cost  anything  to  the  owner  ? — A.  All  expenses 
were  paid. 

Q.  Take  the  case  where  the  owner  does  not  get  any  charter-money; 
does  not  the  ship  deteriorate  in  value  ? — A.  I  did  not  look  at  that. 

Q.  And  there  are  repairs  and  painting  ? — A.  I  think  we  had  to  paint 
the  vessel. 

Q.  That  was  under  your  bargain  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  the  vessel  had  not  been  chartered  the  owner  would  have  had  to 
paint  her? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  have  to  insure  the  vessel  or  be  their  own  insurers  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  to  allow  a  large  amount  for  repairs,  and  because  of  the  short- 
ness ot  the  lives  of  the  vessels  ? — A.  Undoubtedly  a  vessel  somewhat 
depreciates. 

Q.  Fishing- vessels  are  not  a  long-lived  race  ? — A.  American  fishing- 
vessels  are ;  they  run  a  long  time.  It  is  pretty  hard  to  wear  an  Ameri 
can  vessel  out. 

Q.  Are  the  American  vessels  stronger  as  well  as  better  vessels  ?— A. 
They  are  more  durable  than  our  class  of  vessels. 

Q.  Are  they  built  of  better  materials  ? — A.  Yes ;  of  white  oak  with 
oopper  fastenings. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


853 


■A.  All  expenses 


Q.  So  while  it  is  very  easy  to  say  the  owner  would  have  made  $2,000, 
yet  when  yon  reckon  the  charges,  you  have  to  allow  a  large  sum  f — A. 
It  is  very  true.  If  you  have  got  to  put  in  a  new  suit  of  sails,  yon  could 
not  see  your  way  clear  out  of  a  large  expense.  I  was,  however,  speak- 
ing of  one  case,  that  of  the  Allan  Forester. 

Q.  If  there  was  no  charter,  would  not  a  prudent  owner  charge  himself 
sometbiug  for  repairs,  whether  repairs  were  made  that  year  or  not,  and 
also  for  insurance  ? — A.  All  these  things  have  to  come  in. 

Q.  How  many  years  have  you  transshipped  cargoes  ? — A.  Only  one 
year ;  but  I  have  known  vessels  which  did  it  several  years  when  mack- 
erel was  plentiful ;  I  mean  American  vessels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  transship  ? — A.  In  the  Strait  of  Canso. 

Q.  What  cargo  did  you  transship  ! — A.  630  barrels. 

Q.  Two  trips  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  did  you  do  when  you  transshipped  ? — A.  We  went  alongside 
a  wharf,  took  the  barrels  of  fish  out,  stored  them,  and  took  in  a  fresh 
supply  of  barrels. 

Q.  What  class  of  persons  sold  barrels  ? — A.  The  fitters. 

Q.  And  you  obtained  salt  ? — A.  Tes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  the  barrels  of  fish  1 — A.  We  shipped  them 
home.  That  year  there  was  an  American  vessel,  a  large  coaster,  which 
carried  mine  with  others ;  she  was  a  Boston  vessel. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  they  charged  for  freight  by  steamer  !— A.  I 
conld  not  tell  yon.    I  think  we  paid  30  cents  per  barrel. 

Q.  Have  you  been  sufiBciently  interested  in  this  matter  of  transship- 
ping as  to  ascertain  the  cost  of  handling  the  barrels,  the  wharfage, 
&c.f — A.  The  crew  generally  move  the  barrels,  and  there  is  nothing 
paid  for  the  storage  of  the  mackerel. 

Q.  Why  not  ? — A.  Because  they  do  not  ever  charge  for  storage,  be- 
cause they  fit  the  vessels. 

Q.  The  expense  t;irns  up  somewhere  in  the  bill  ? — A.  Tes.  However 
I  never  paid  any  wharfage  or  storage. 

Q.  You  say  the  people  down  at  Fortune  Bay  are  well  off? — A.  There 
are  some  poor  people  there,  but,  as  a  general  thing,  the  people  are  all 
comfortable. 

Q.  You  say  they  have  piles  of  money  stored  in  their  bouses  ? — A, 
Some  of  them  have.  I  know  men  who  went  from  La  Have  down  there, 
hiio  were  so  well  off  they  retired  from  the  fishing  business.  The  largest 
part  of  the  money  they  made  was  in  supplying  bait  to  those  French 
vessels  which  come  from  France  to  fish. 

Q.  Where  did  you  find  them  ^— A.  At  St.  Peter's.  The  men  of  Fortune 
Bay  seine  herring,  caplin,  and  squid,  and  run  them  across  to  St.  Peter's, 
and  sell  them  to  the  French  vessels  which  are  lying  waiting  for  them. 

Q.  That  is  their  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  also  sell  to  the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes.  They  go  in  and  obtain 
a  great  deal  of  bait  in  Newfoundland ;  not  so  much  at  Fortune  Bay  as  at 
St.  John's. 

Q.  The  men  with  piles  of  money,  where  do  they  live  f — A.  They  may 
liave  plenty  of  money  and  yet  live  in  a  hovel.  They  are  not  sensible 
enough  to  enjoy  the  money  after  they  have  made  it 

Q.  We  have  been  told, on  the  contrary,  that  they  is^  end  all  their  money 
as  fast  as  they  get  it  on  rum  and  tobacco ;  did  you  find  that  to  be 
true !— A.  I  doubt  that.  For  the  last  two  or  three  years  in  Newfound- 
land I  found  very  few  men  who  drank  rum,  but  when  I  first  went  there 
I  found  many  rum-drinkers.  I  think  they  must  have  had  a  reform  dub 
there. 


854 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  You  think  they  have  improved  ? — A.  Yes.  They  are  comfortable 
in  their  homes. 

Q.  They  are  saving  people  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  send  your  frozen  herring  ?— A.  To  New  York. 

Q.  Any  to  Boston  ! — A.  Very  few  to  Boston ;  I  sent  the  largest 
quantity  to  New  York,  and  sold  a  good  many  at  Gloucester  for  bait  for 
George's  Bank  fishermen. 

Q.  There  is  a  pretty  good  market  in  New  York  for  frozen  herring?— 
A.  Sometimes  a  vessel  makes  a  very  successful  trip,  and  sometimes  it 
doesn't  make  anything. 

Q.  Have  the  people  of  Fortune  Bay  any  other  market  of  any  conse- 
quence for  what  they  draw  from  the  sea  except  the  French  and  Ameri- 
cans  ? — A.  Their  codfish,  I  think,  is  sent  to  Brazil  and  sold  to  the  mer- 
chants there. 

Q.  I  mean  those  people  who  catch  bait,  who  are  paid  in  cash  on  the 
spot ;  have  they  any  market  for  that  except  the  French  and  Ameri- 
cans 1 — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  In  regard  to  fresh  bait,  I  suppose  the  fish,  if  they  have  the  choice 
between  fresh  and  salt  bait,  prefer  fresh  bait  ? — A.  Most  undoubtedly. 

Q.  Suppose  there  was  no  fresh  bait  ? — A.  You  could  not  get  the  fish, 

Q.  Are  you  sure  of  that  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  was  it  twenty  years  ago,  when  fresh  bait  was  not  used  I— A. 
I  am  speaking  from  the  practical  experience  I  have  had. 

Q.  But  you  never  saw  a  time  when  there  was  only  salt  bait?— A.  I 
have  said  I  have  been  on  the  Banks  when  we  have  had  nothing  but  salt 
bait,  and  we  could  not  get  a  fish. 

Q.  Witnesses  have  told  us  that,  before  that  time,  when  there  was  no 
fresh  bait  used,  they  caught  full  fares  with  salted  bait  ? — A.  There  never 
were  such  quantities  of  fish  caught  years  ago  as  there  have  been  of  late 
years,  because  they  never  used  fresh  bait. 

Q.  Is  not  trawling  a  new  thing  ? — ^A.  Trawling  has  been  practiced 
ever  since  I  went  fishing. 

Q.  It  has  not  u  long  history  ?— A.  25  or  30  years. 

Q.  Ho  V  many  years  have  you  been  in  Fortune  Bay  on  fishing  busi- 
ness?— A.  Nine  winters,  I  think. 

Q.  Do  you  kijow  anything  of  the  number  of  American  vessels  which 
go  there  after  .*tozen  herring  ? — A.  I  have  seen  between  30  and  50  sail 
there  at  one  time. 

Q.  Hove  long  did  you  lay  there  usually? — A.  I  laid  there  one  whole 
I  had  three  vessels  to  load. 

Q.  At  other  timeu  how  long  did  you  stay  ? — A.  I  have  been  there  and 
loaded  in  a  7'*»ek. 

Q.  In  the  course  of  the  winter,  the  American  vessels  must  be  very 
numerous  there  ? — /  .  The  number  I  have  stated  would  be  all  that  would 
be  there  one  *:.  inter.  They  never  made  two  trips.  They  have  to  be 
there  w^'Cu  the  cold  weather  sets  in,  and  they  freeze  the  herring.  They 
arr  ail  there  at  one  time,  but  some  vessels  get  away  earlier  than  others. 

Q.  Suppose  a  vessel  comes  late,  will  it  not  find  the  herring  already 
frozen  ? — A.  The  vessel  could  not  get  them. 

Q.  They  would  have  all  been  sold  I — A.  Yes ;  possibly  there  might  be 
a  few  sometimes. 

Q.  Then  they  sell  all  they  can  catch  ? — A.  Yes.  The  vessels  need  to 
be  there  at  the  first  frost,  and  they  generally  get  away  at  the  end  of  Jan- 
uary. 

Q.  The  American  market  for  frozen  herring  and  bait,  in  addition  to 


wJ.^ter ; 


AWABD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


855 


re  comfortable 


not  used  f— A. 


been  practiced 


on  fishing  busi- 


ly there  might  be 


the  French  market,  is  a  very  great  benefit  to  those  Newfoundland  peo- 
ple; has  it  not  built  them  upf — A.  They  sell  that  quantity  of  herring. 

Q.  And  get  money  for  it  ? — A.  They  get  very  little  money  from  the 
Americans,  bnt  they  fetch  trade  goods  there. 

Q.  Something  equivalent  to  money  ? — A.  But  they  make  their  profit 
on  them.  I  don't  think  I  ever  paid  there  $100  in  cash.  I  have  taken 
down  pork  that  cost  $15  per  barrel  and  sold  it  for  $30. 

Q.  The  people  would  have  been  obliged  to  have  paid  that  price  where* 
ever  they  had  bought  it  f — A.  That  was  the  price  at  which  pork  was 
gelling  there,  and  I  got  the  same  as  the  rest. 

Q.  And  the  market  there  for  pork  was  regulated  by  the  large  mer- 
chants?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  Americans  who  go  there  with  goods  cannot  get  more  than  the 
market  price  there  1 — A.  Well,  they  don't ;  they  could,  I  suppose,  if  they 
practiced  extortion.  The  people  want  to  sell  their  fish  and  the  Ameri- 
can's can  say,  *'  There  are  the  goods,  take  them  or  leave  them." 

Q.  The  result  is  that  the  fishermen  become  themselves  somewhat  of 
merchants,  and  buy  a  good  deal  from  the  vessels,  instead  of  depending 
entirely  on  the  large  houses? — A.  Yes.  I  have  sold  pork  and  flour  to 
people  who  did  not  really  want  them ;  they  had  to  take  it  in  return  for 
their  fish,  for  I  did  not  intend  to  pay  money,  but  intended  to  make  a 
profit  on  the  goods. 

Q.  Sometimes  they  are  paid  so  many  dollars  per  barrel  ? — A.  I  never 
paid  any.    Very  little  cash  is  ever  paid  by  Americans. 

Q.  If  they  do  not  pay  cash,  where  do  the  piles  of  money  come  from  ? 
—A.  They  accumulate  it  in  some  way.  It  is  said  a  constant  dropping 
will  wear  away  stone. 

By  Mr.  Da  vies: 

Q.  The  trade  in  frozen  herring  is  one  which  has  been  carried  on  for 
many  years  ? — A.  Yes.  I  was  the  first  fisherman  who  ever  carried  a 
cargo  of  frozen  herring  from  Newfoundland. 

Q.  That  was  carried  on  as  a  matter  of  trade  before  the  Washington 
Treaty?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  were  never  prevented  from  going  there  and  buying  herring  ? 
-A.  No. 

Q.  It  was  always  carried  on  as  a  matter  of  trade? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  winter  alone? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  has  no  connection  with  the  bait-fishing  ? — A.  None  whatever. 

Q.  I  understand  that  the  fishing  for  bait  is  carried  on  more  on  the 
eastern  coast  of  Newfoundland  than  in  Fortune  Bay? — A.  Yes;  by 
American  vessels. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  there  were  not  nearly  so  many  fish 
Cttught  by  bankers  in  former  years  as  of  late? — A.  I  should  suppose  not 
half  as  many. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  length  of  time  that  an  American  vessel  will 
last? — A.  There  are  vessels  in  the  business  forty  years  old.  Some  of 
those  Marblehead  vessels  can  never  wear  out. 

Q.  They  won't  all  last  forty  years,  I  suppose? — A.  Well,  they  consider 
an  American  vessel  good  when  she  is  eighteen  years  old. 

Q.  And  twenty-five  years  I — A.  Yes ;  they  generally  new  top  them 
then. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  Do  you  mean  that  candidly  ?- 
the  bottom  of  an  American  vessel. 


-A.  Yes.    You  never  can  wear  out 


856 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


^0.  46. 


John  Holliday,  of  the  city  of  Quebec,  fish  merchant,  called  on  be- 
half of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  You  live  in  Quebec  ? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  engaged  in  the  fishing  trade  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  have  you  been  in  the  business  ?— A.  Eight- 
een years. 

Q.  Where  do  you  carry  on  the  fish  business  ? — A.  In  Canada. 

Q.  But  where  do  you  carry  on  your  fisheries  I — A.  In  the  neighbor- 
hood of  Moisic. 

Q.  That  is  near  Seven  Islands  on  the  north  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  what  extent  do  you  carry  it  on  ?  How  many  establishments 
have  you  ? — A.  i  )ne. 

Q.  Is  that  at  Moisic  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  fish  do  your  people  take  T — A.  Salmon  and  codfish. 

Q.  Well,  the  salmon,  I  presume,  is  a  river  fishery  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  the  Moisic  is  a  large  river  and  there  are  good  salmon  in  it  * 
— ^A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  you  take  your  cod  ? — A.  Off  the  mouth  of  the  river  in 
Moisic  Bay. 

Q.  How  are  they  taken  ? — A.  In  boats  with  hand-lines. 

Q.  How  many  boats  do  you  employ  ? — A.  From  15  to  20. 

Q.  Do  you  belong  to  a  firm  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  name  of  the  firm  ? — A.  A.  Fraser  &  Go. 

Q.  Their  special  business,  then,  is  the  fish  business  ? — A.  Yes.  Fresh 
fish  and  cured  fish. 

Q.  These  fresh  fish  I  presume  are  salmon  1 — A.  Yes ;  codfish  and  all 
other  fish. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  your  fresh  fish  ? — A.  We  sell  them  iu  Can- 
ada.   We  send  them  up  to  Quebec  and  dispose  of  them  there. 

Q.  You  send  <  liem  up  there  from  the  north  coast  of  the  Saint  Law- 
rence?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  you  send  them  ;  by  a  steamer,  I  suppose  ? — A.  In  a  small 
steamer  that  calls  there. 

Q.  Is  it  your  own,  or  are  there  steamers  that  call  there  ? — A.  It  is  our 
own. 

Q.  It  was  built  for  the  purpose,  I  suppose  ? — A.  It  was  built  for  the 
purpose  of  carrying  fish. 

Q.  What  is  the  distance  from  Moisic  to  Quebec  ? — A.  350  miles. 

Q.  How  long  does  it  take  them  to  run  it  ? — A.  About  40  hours. 

Q.  Do  you  send  the  fresh  fish  up  in  ice  ? — A.  In  snow. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  How  near  the  Seven  Isles  is  Moisic  ? — A.  It  is  about  18  miles  to 
the  eastward.    It  depends  on  what  part  of  the  Seven  Islands  you  take. 
jt  might  be  15  miles,  if  you  take  the  nearest  island. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  How  many  boats  does  your  firm  employ  f — A.  From  15  to  20  this 
year 

Q.  Are  they  owned  by  the  firm,  or  do  you  employ  the  persons  who 
own  them  ?— A.  Partly  each  way.  Part  of  the  boats  belong  to  the  firm 
and  part  we  engage. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


857 


of  the  river  in 


m  15  to  20  this 


Q.  What  is  the  number,  including  those  yon  own  and  those  yon  en^ 

gage?— A.  20. 

Q.  How  many  men  do  you  employ  to  each  boat  f — A.  Two  men. 

Q.  Well,  now,  what  fish  do  tbey  take  with  bait  off  the  coast,  what 
kind!— A.  Codfish. 

Q.  Altogether? — A.  Yes;  I  was  speaking  of  codfish  just  now,  alto- 
gether. 

Q.  The  20  boats  you  spoke  of  Just  now  are  engaged  cod-fishing  ? — A. 
Yes.    I  did  not  speak  of  salmon  fishing. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  take  no  halibut  or  hake  ? — A.  We  take  a  few  halibut, 
not  of  any  great  moment,  this  year  past. 

Q.  Why  is  that?  It  used  to  be  plenty. — A.  They  used  to  be,  but 
since  18G8  or  1869  the  coast  is  nearly  cleaned  of  halibut  by  the  Ameri- 
can fishermen  coming  there.  Two  of  them  were  taken  in  my  neighbor- 
hood ;  that  is,  two  of  their  vessels  were  taken  by  the  cruisers. 

Q.  What  became  of  them  ? — A.  I  think  they  were  both  condemned. 

Q.  Well,  were  those  halibut  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — 
A.  0,  yes ;  within  about  a  mile  and  a  half  of  the  shore. 

Q.  There  was  no  doubt,  then,  about  the  fact  of  the  infriagement  of  the 
law,  for  which  those  vessels  were  taken  ? — A.  I  think  not.  I  have  seen 
several  of  them  leave  the  coast  and  leave  their  lines.  When  they  saw 
the  cruisers  come  they  stood  out  to  sea  and  came  back  a  day  or  two 
afterward  and  picked  up  their  lines. 

Q.  That  was  within  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  near  ? — A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half. 

Q.  I  do  not  know  whether  the  atmosphere  there  is  of  that  peculiar 
character  that  a  vessel  within  half  a  mile  will  think  she  is  three  miles 
out  ?— A.  They  could  not  well  think  that. 

Q.  You  can  generally  tell  when  you  are  within  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes ; 
at  all  events,  within  a  mile  and  a  half. 

Q.  Well,  you  say  that  in  1868  and  1869,  the  American  schooners  came 
there  and  fished  out  the  halibut? — A.  Yes,  they  cleaned  them  out. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fishing  was  it  ? — A.  With  long  lines  or  trawls. 

Q.  There  were  a  great  many  hooks  upon  them  ? — A.  A  great  number ; 
there  were  several  miles  of  lines. 

Q.  What  was  the  effect  of  that,  either  to  your  own  knowledge  or  from 
what  you  have  heard  ?— A.  The  whole  of  our  inshore  fishermen  fished 
codfish  and  halibut.    We  get  none  now  or  next  to  none. 

Q.  No  halibut,  you  mean  ? — A.  No  halibut. 

Q.  Are  they  a  fish  that  keep  pretty  close  to  the  bottom  as  a  rule  T — ■ 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Therefore  they  are  the  more  liable  to  be  taken  up  by  the  trawl  ? — 
A.  That  is  the  method  adopted  in  this  country  of  catching  them  alto- 
gether. 

Q.  Before  the  Americans  came  with  a  trawl,  how  did  your  people  take 
them  ?— A.  With  hand-lines. 

Q.  Were  they  reasonably  plenty  in  those  days  ? — A.  Yes ;  a  boat  has 
got  from  eight  to  ten.    Now,  tb'^y  very  seldom  get  any. 

Q.  Well,  had  the  hand-line  fishing  been  continued  and  those  trawls 
not  introduced,  is  it  or  is  it  not  your  opinion  that  the  halibut  would  be 
DOW  there  just  as  it  used  to  be  ? — A.  I  think  it  would  be  as  good  as 
previously. 

Q.  In  your  opinion,  then,  this  trawl  fishing  is  simply  destructive  ? — 
A.  To  halibut. 

Q.  Well,  what  do  you  do  now  with  your  fish,  the  codfish  that  you  get 
there  that  is  cured ;  you  have  already  stated  that  you  send  your  fresh 


858 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


cod  into  Qaebec,  with  yonr  salmon  and  other  fresh  fish.  What  do  yoa 
do  with  the  fish  that  you  cure  ?— A.  For  the  past  forty  years  we  have 
sent  them  to  Qaebec  also.    We  have  cared  them  for  the  Qoebec  market. 

Q.  All  f— A.  Yes ;  the  whole  fish. 

Q.  Previoasly  to  that  what  did  you  do  with  them  T — A.  We  used  to 
dry  them  and  export  them  to  Europe. 

Q.  Where  did  you  seud  them  f — A.  We  generally  seut  them  to  Cadiz 
for  orders. 

Q.  From  that  they  went  to  ports  on  the  Mediterranean  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  up  the  Adriatic  ? — A.  We  seldom  required  to  send  them  up 
there.    They  generally  sold  in  the  lower  ports. 

Q.  Do  you  find  it  more  profitable  to  cure  them  for  Quebec  ?— A.  We 
have  them  under  our  own  control  in  that  way.  If  we  ship  them  wc  have 
to  consign  them  to  a  house,  and  they  are  out  of  control  in  a  measure, 
although  liable  to  advice.  But  in  Qaebec  we  have  them  completely 
under  our  control. 

Q.  Well,  are  they  actually  consumed  in  Quebec,  or  are  they  8old  by 
yon  and  transshipped  elsewhere  by  them  ? — A.  They  are  consumed  in 
the  proviiii.e  of  Quebec. 

Q.  Well,  what  are  these  fish  worth,  cured,  on  the  north  shore?— A. 
What  description  of  fish  ! 

Q.  I  take  codfish  that  you  cure  for  the  Quebec  market. — A.  They  are 
worth  from  $4.50  to  $5.50  a  barrel.     We  dry-salt  them  in  barrels. 

Q.  Then  you  don't  measure  them  by  quintals  1 — A.  No :  they  are  sold 
by  the  200  pounds. 

Q.  The  barrel  contains  that  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  would  a  barrel  be  about  a  quintal  if  it  was  dry  ?— A.  It 
weighs  about  200  pounds.  You  want  the  equivalent  for  that  in  dried 
fish ;  well,  a  barrel  of  fish  in  dry  salt  would  be  very  nearly  equivalent  to 
a  quintal  of  dried  codfish. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  That  is  not  cured  by  the  sun  at  all  ? — A.  No. 
By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  pays  as  well  in  the  Quebec  market  as  your  former 
course  of  trade  up  the  Mediterranean  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  saves  me  a  great 
deal  of  labor. 

Q.  And  it  pays  as  well  ? — A.  We  consider  it  pays  equally  well. 

Q.  When  you  say  you  have  it  under  your  control  at  Quebec,  I  suppose 
the  headquarters  of  your  firm  are  in  that  city? — A.  The  headquarters 
are  there  for  the  distribution  of  our  fish  and  the  sale. 

Q.  Do  you  sell  all  your  fish,  the  salmon,  there,  as  well  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  All  your  fresh  fish  1 — A.  Yes ;  that  is,  we  don't  sell  the  whole  of 
the  fresh  salmon  in  the  immediate  locality.  It  is  dispersed  over  tlie 
whole  country,  and  in  Ontario  as  well. 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  the  Americans  compete  with  you  at  all  ?— A.  A 
good  deal. 

Q.  I  mean  in  the  markets ;  I  don't  mean  on  the  shores  of  the  St.  Law- 
rence ? — A.  They  compete  a  good  deal  in  the  Ontario  and  Quebec  mar- 
kets. The  Americans  supply  largely  the  markets  of  Quebec  and  Oata- 
rio  with  fresh  fish. 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  they  have  supplied  these  markets  in  increased 
quantities  since  1871  ? — A.  I  cannot  say  that  they  have. 

Q.  Well,  how  about  the  salted  and  cured  fish  ?— A.  They  have  done 
very  much  of  that  since  1871. 


AWARD  OF  THE  FI8HEBY  COMMISSION. 


85» 


Q.  The  salted  and  oared  fish  of  the  Americans  have  oome  in  very 
macbT — A.  Yes;  in  mach  larger  quantities  than  previoasly. 

Q.  They  cat  down  your  prices  ? — A.  They  compete  with  us  very  largely. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  must  lower  the  price  f — A.  Generally  speaking. 

Q.  Did  they  or  did  they  not? — A.  They  displace  a  quantity  of  oar 
fisb,  and  consequently  make  it  more  difficult  to  sell. 

Q.  And  when  you  do,  you  sell  at  a  lower  price? — A.  I  should  judge; 
yes. 

Q.  Well,  then,  in  fact  they  do  seriously  compete  with  you  in  the  Do- 
miuion  markets  in  cured  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fish  do  you  find  them  compete  with  yoa  in  ? — A.  In 
dry  cod  and  what  is  called  boneless  tish ;  that  will  be  hake  principally. 

Q.  Well,  will  you  explain  as  to  these  boneless  fish ;  they  do  not  catch 
it  witbour.  bones,  I  suppose? — A.  It  is  dried  fish;  some  is  dry  codfish 
sliced  up  and  put  in  boxes,  and  made  into  a  much  more  convenient  state 
for  consumption. 

Q.  Are  all  the  bones  extracted  ? — A.  Most  of  them  are  extracted ; 
you  cannot  extract  the  whole  of  them. 

'  Q.  Well,  is  this  trade  in  boneless  fish  purely  American,  or  is  it  carried 
CD  in  the  Dominion  ? — A.  I  think  it  is  purely  American. 

Q.  Well,  that  fish  you  find  meeting  you  constantly  ? — A.  It  comes  in 
large  quantities. 

Q.  What  about  the  herring;  do  you  find  them  come  in? — A.  Not  in 
very  great  quantities ;  they  do  occasionally. 

Q.  Do  you  yourself  deal  in  salt  herring? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  you  take  them? — A.  We  get  them  a  little  farther  down 
the  coast  than  where  I  am  situated. 

Q.  Down  farther  beyond  Anticosti  ? — A.  Yes ;  a  little  beyond  Anti* 
costi.  It  is  within  the  Canadian  boundary  on  the  Labrador  coast.  It  is 
counted  the  Labrador  coast. 

Q.  Would  it  be  westward  of  Mount  Joli  ? — A.  No ;  eastward. 

Q.  How  far  eastward  would  it  be? — A.  I  can  scarcely  tell  you. 

Q.  Do  you  take  any  large  quantities? — A.  There  are  large  quantities 
caught  there  this  year. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  in  reference  to  them  ?  You  send  regular  fishing- 
vessels  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  deal  in  frozen  herring? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  you  get  you  get  purely  for  pickling  ? — A.  It  is  put  up  in 
pickle. 

Q.  Do  you  pickle  them  yourself,  or  your  people? — A.  They  are  put 
np  in  barrels,  and  they  make  their  own  pickle. 

Q.  You  send  your  own  vessels  and  crews  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  pickle  them  at  the  time  they  are  taken  on  board  ? — A. 
Yes;  tbey  are  salted  down  and  make  their  own  pickle. 

Q.  You  just  put  the  salt  on  them  and  they  make  their  own  pickle  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  cured  on  board  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  now,  in  reference  to  the  cod-flsbing  at  Moisic  and  where  you 
prosecute  it,  is  it  all  an  inshore  fishery  ? — A.  Altogether. 

Q.  You  don't  do  any  outshore  fishing  at  all? — A.  No;  there  are  no 
banks  there. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  that  there  is  no  fishing  for  cod  outside  of  three 
miles  from  the  shore  unless  there  is  a  bank  ? — A.  There  is  none  on  our 
shores. 

Q.  What  brings  the  codfish  in  there  ? — A.  The  small  fish — the  bait 
that  brings  them  in  on  the  coast. 


860 


AWARD  OF  THE  FI8HEHT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  bait  do  yon  Due  for  ood  T — A.  Sand-eels,  oaplin. 

Q.  Sand-eels  is  another  name  for  launoe  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Herring  f — A.  Oaplin  and  squid. 

Q.  Do  yon  nse  herriug  at  all  f — A.  Not  for  cod. 

Q.  Have  you  lart^e  quantities  of  squid  T — A.  No  very  great  qaanti- 
ties.    There  are  only  squid  there  for  a  short  time,  eight  or  ten  days. 

Q.  Tou  say  squid  only  come  in  for  a  short  time.  What  time  does 
it  come  in  T — A.  It  comes  in  at  the  end  of  July  or  the  begiuniug  of 
August. 

Q.  And  previous  to  that  the  caplin  come  f — A.  Oaplin  and  launce. 

Q.  The  best  bait,  I  believe,  is  squid,  is  it  not  f — A.  When  we  can  get 
them. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  fish  for  cod  with  salted  bait  ? — A.  Never. 

Q.  Would  it  be  possible,  in  your  judgment,  to  carry  on  the  cod-flshlDg 
with  salt  bait  at  all  T — A.  It  depends  on  the  kind  of  salted  bait. 

Q.  What  kinds  would  be  good  ? — A.  Salted  clams  it  could  be  carried 
on  with,  but  not  advantageously. 

Q.  Then  I  presume  it  would  not  be  carried  on.  I  understand  that  the 
only  salt  bait  that  could  be  used  is  clam  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  with  that  it  could  not  be  carried  on  advantageously  ? — A.  Not 
that  1  know  of. 

Q.  On  the  Banks  is  there  any  bait  to  be  found,  as  a  rule,  witii  cer- 
tainty t  I  refer  to  those  that  fish  for  cod  in  the  gulf.  I  do  not  refer  to 
other  places. — A.  Not  that  I  am  aware  of. 

Q.  All  the  bait  taken  for  the  Bank  outshore  fishery  is  taken  inshore?— 
A.  It  is  caught  inshore. 

Q.  Have  the  government  of  late  not  taken  any  steps  to  protect  the 
fisheries  along  the  shores  on  the  north  shore  of  St.  Lawrence  aud  other 
parts  of  Quebec? — A.  There  are  officers  appointed  along  the  whole 
coast  to  enforce  the  fishery  laws  and  and  report  to  the  cruisers. 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  the  enforcement  of  the  regulations  has  had  a 
beneficial  effect  upon  the  bait-fishing? — ^A.  Well,  we  have  always  had 
an  abundance,  and  we  still  have. 

Q.  What  about  the  increased  salmon  fisheries?  Does  it  protect  them! 
— ^A.  Yes ;  they  have  been  increased  very  considerably. 

Q.  What  effect  has  the  increase  of  the  fish  in  the  rivers  upon  the  sea 
fishing  outside  ?  Does  it  increase  it  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  it  has  any 
effect  on  the  sea  fishing  at  all. 

Q.  Well,  what  do  you  get  in  the  Quebec  market  for  your  codfish  that 
you  send  up  ? — A.  Fresh  or  cured  ? 

Q.  Take  the  fresh. — A.  I  get  from  three  to  four  conts  a  pound  for 
them  fresh. 

Q.  Halibut  ? — A.  From  five  to  eight  cents 

Q.  For  the  dry  fish  that  you  send  up,  "■  "  '  .ed  in  barrels  ? — A.  We 
get  from  $4.50  to  $5.50  a  barrel. 

Q.  Do  you  send  up  any  dried  in  the  n  of  quintals  t— A.  Notia 
these  past  years. 

Q.  Is  the  supply  of  codfish  increasing  or  dimini  liing  to  your  experi- 
ence for  the  number  of  years  you  have  had  experience  in  this  businesst 
— A.  That  is  a  difficult  question  to  answer. 

Q.  Is  the  supply  of  codfish  on  your  coast  where  you  carry  on  yoar 
fishing  operations  increasing  or  diminishing,  or  is  it  about  the  same  1— 
A.  Much  about  the  same,  I  should  think.  It  fluctuates  a  good  deal,  as 
every  other  fishery  does.  But  upon  the  whole,  taking  it  over  a  term  of 
years,  it  seems  much  about  the  same. 

Q.  As  when  you  commenced  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWABD  OF  THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


861 


Q.  Well,  is  not  the  ood-fishery,  as  a  rule,  a  pretty  certain  fishery  t — A. 
As  a  rale  it  is. 

Q.  Some  seasons  it  fluctuates  a  little.  How  do  you  account  for  that 
■-do  tbey  not  come  in  or  do  they  refuse  to  bitef — A.  It  is  owing  to  the 
scarcity  of  fish  in  the  locality. 

Q.  And  these  fluctuations  seldom  occur  f — A.  They  are  not  a  common 
occnrrence. 

Q.  Now  in  reterenoe  to  the  coast  along  there,  do  the  people  that  fish 
on  tbat  coast  stay  as  a  rulef — A.  The  great  bulk  of  the  fishing  popula- 
tion is  a  fluctuating  population  coming  from  Bay  Gbaleur  and  the  coast 
of  the  river  St.  Lawrence,  the  parishes  along  the  river  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  From  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  Very  few  comparatively. 

Q,  Is  the  coast  about  Moisic  and  eastwards  towards  Belleisle  a  farm- 
log  country  at  all  Y — A.  Not  at  all. 

Q.  Is  it  wooded  ? — A.  The  climate  is  such  that  it  could  not  be  an  agri- 
coltural  country.  The  frost  is  there  late  in  the  spring  and  early  in  the 
autumn.  Where  the  people  try  to  raise  potatoes  on  the  coast  tbey  get 
all  black  generally  about  the  middle  of  September,  before  they  come  to 
maturity. 

Q.  It  is  not  fit  for  farming  purposes  at  all  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  your  establishments  on  the  shore? — A.  They  are  on  the 
banks  of  the  Moisic  Biver. 

Q.  How  far  are  they  from  the  shore? — A.  They  are  built  immediately 
on  tbe  bank  of  the  river. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  of  the  river  Saint  Lawrence  ? — A.  About 
half  a  mile. 

Q.  Is  it  wooded  in  there  at  all  ? — A.  Back  from  the  establishments  it 
is.   Not  immediately  on  tbe  coast. 

Q.  What  is  the  size  of  this  Moisic  Biver  ? — A.  Huw  do  you  mean ;  the 
volume  of  water  ? 

Q.  Tbe  width. — A.  It  is  about  two  miles  wide  in  tbe  estuary  at  the 
mouth.    Farther  up  it  is  300  or  400  yards. 

Q.  Does  it  discharge  a  large  volume  of  water  in  the  gulf  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  navigable  far  up  ? — A.  Boats  can  go  up  14  miles. 

Q.  There  are  no  settlements  along  it  at  all  ? — A.  No.  We  had  frost 
this  year  in  July. 

Q.  Well,  this  Moisic  really  is  a  fine  salmon  fishing  river  ? — A.  Yes  ^ 
very  fine. 

Q.  Do  you  lease  it? — A.  Yes;  I  lease  it  from  the  government. 

Q.  May  I  ask  you,  since  tbe  Washington  Treaty,  have  you  availed 
yourself  of  tbe  privilege  of  sending  any  of  your  fish  into  the  American 
markets,  your  cured  fish  ? — A.  Not  cured  fish ;  I  can  do  better  at  home. 
As  to  the  fresh  fish,  we  have  always  previous  to  tbe  Treaty  of  Washing- 
ton sent  some  there — fresh  salmon. 

Q.  Do  you  still  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  treaty  has  in  no  way,  in  regard  to  fresh  fish,  altered  the  com  se 
of  trade?— A.  Not  at  all. 

Q.  In  reference  to  cured  fish  or  salted  fish,  you  send  none  into  the 
American  markets  at  all? — A.  None  at  all. 

Q.  And,  as  far  as  yon  know,  that  is  tbe  case  along  tbe  whole  coast  of 
Labrador  and  the  north  shore  ? — A.  Yes,  altogether. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  any  trade  between  any  portion  of  the'  province 
of  Quebec  and  the  United  States  in  cured  fish  ? — A.  None  that  I  am 
aware  of. 

Q.  So  that  in  fact,  while  you  send  from  Quebec  no  cured  fish  what- 


8B2 


AWARD   OF  THK   FISHERT  COMMISSION. 


ever  to  the  United  States,  you  find  that  in  your  markets  you  are  met 
with  cared  flsh  from  the  States  ? — A.  We  are. 

Q.  In  reference  to  the  other  fish,  take  cod  and  other  fish,  don't  yon 
think  the  protection  of  the  fisheries  gives  an  increased  quantity  of  bait 
in  the  estuaries  of  the  rivers,  inducing  them  to  come  inshore,  or  have 
you  ever  turned  your  attention  to  it  at  all  ? — A.  I  could  not  say  that  it 
does. 

Q.  Can  you  say  that  it  does  not  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  xou  don't  know,  in  other  words  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Now  we  had  some  evidence  here,  or  some  questions  rather— not 
evidence — put  by  the  counsel  for  the  United  States,  about  some  wonder- 
ful starvation  along  that  shore  some  years  ago.  It  was  stated  to  have 
taken  place  in  the  neighborhood  of  Moisic.  The  inhabitants  were  said 
to  be  in  a  dreadful  state. — A.  The  cause  of  that  starvation,  if  1  may  so 
term  it,  was  this :  there  was  a  party  of  people  that  came  in  partly  with 
the  expectation  of  fishing,  partly  with  the  expectation  of  employment 
from  the  Moisic  Iron  Company. 

Q.  What  was  the  Moisic  Iron  Company  ? — A.  It  was  a  company 
formed  of  Montreal  persons,  represented  by  Martin  Molson.  They  com- 
menced to  make  iron  in  the  neighborhood  out  of  black  sand — magnetic 
iron  sand.  They  established  forges  for  the  purpose,  and  gave  a  great 
deal  of  employment  in  cutting  timber  to  make  chi.rcoal.  These  people 
expected  to  get  employment  for  the  first  year  in  catting  timber,  at  so 
much  a  cord,  for  the  making  of  this  charcoal.  The  Moisic  Iron  Com- 
pany stopped  opeiatious  suddenly  in  the  autumn  of  1875,  and  these  peo- 
ple were  altogether  left  without  the  employment  that  they  expected. 

Q.  Well,  then,  in  fact  it  veas  the  failure  of  this  company  to  carry  on 
operations,  and  not  the  failure  of  the  fishery,  that  led  to  the  distress?— 
A.  Altogether;  because  our  population  is  a  floating  population,  and 
leaves  the  coast,  generally,  during  the  winter. 

Q.  No  fisherman,  in  his  senses,  would  remain  during  the  winter?— A. 
Very  few ;  there  are  a  few,  but  very  few. 

Q.  How  do  those  few  that  remain  get  on  ? — A.  They  provide  out  of 
their  fishing  during  the  summer.  They  have  a  sufliciency  provided  to 
keep  them  during  the  winter. 

Q.  Well,  then,  I  understand  that  along  the  coast  you  speak  of,  the 
whole  north  shore,  of  the  coast  as  far  as  the  strait! — A.  No;  not  as  far 
as  the  Strait  of  Belleisle — to  Natashquan. 

Q.  That  is  opposite  the  north  end  of  Anticosti  ? — A,  Tes. 

Q.  From  all  along  there  there  is  good  fishing  along  the  shore,  is  there 
not  ? — A.  Yes ;  all  along. 

Q.  As  far  as  you  are  aware,  this  is  practically  inexhaustible  ?— A.  1 
would  JOt  say  that,  but  that  the  codfish  resort  to  the  coast  in  great 
numbers  during  the  season. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  don't  know  what  process  might  be  invented  by  our 
ingenious  American  friends  to  kill  them  oflFf — A.  No. 

Q.  But  if  the  present  line  fishing  is  carried  on  they  are  practically  in- 
exhaustible f — A.  It  would  depend  on  the  number  of  people  employed 
to  catch  them.    I  would  not  say  they  are  inexhaustible. 

Q.  You  have  not  found  then  diminishing? — A.  Not  with  the  number 
of  people  heretofore  employed. 

Q.  Has  not  the  number  increased  t'uat  is  engaged  in  the  cod  fishery  t 
— A.  Considerably  daring  the  last  few  years. 

Q.  But  the  fisheries  have  not  decreased? — A.  No;  the  quantity 
caught  has  increased. 

Q.  And  the  supply  has  not  decreased  !— A.  No. 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHEST   COMMISSION. 


863 


s  you  are  met 


he  winter  U— A. 


ivented  by  our 


Q.  It  is  opeu  to  the  AmericaDS,  if  they  choose,  to  set  up  establish- 
ments and  go  into  the  same  business  you  are  in  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  understand 
that  to  be  the  case. 

Q.  They  can  send  to  the  same  markets  you  do  and  compete  with  those 
that  sent  to  Brazil  and  the  Mediterranean  as  well  as  they  do  now  with 
yon  in  Canada  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  think  you  fix  upon  the  year  when  the  American  vessels  cleaned 
oat  the  halibut  and  were  themselves  cleaned  out  by  the  cutters  as  being 
1868  or  1869,  didn't  you  f — A.  I  would  not  place  the  year  decidedly.  It 
was  the  year  that  the  cu^cers  were  preventing  them  from  fishing  in  there. 

Q.  The  halibut  disappeared  from  that  time? — A.  Y^es. 

Q.  Then  the  Americans  didn't  foolishly  come  in  any  more  for  it  ? — A. 
No. 

Q.  Your  cod  fisheries  and  supplies  of  bait  for  them  have  continued  to 
be  in  a  prosperous  condition.  They  did  not  fail  ? — A.  Not  since  I  have 
been  on  the  coast. 

Q.  Formerly  you  sent  dried  fish  to  Spain,  and  dried  it  hard,  I  suppose, 
in  the  way  described  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  you  send  it,  dry  salted,  to  Quebec  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  will  it  keep,  dry  salted  ? — A.  Nine  mouths.  Until  the 
hot  weather  of  the  succeeding  summer  comes  on.  It  does  not  make 
brine  at  all. 

Q.  Just  dry  salt  ? — A.  The  barrels  are  left  porous  to  allow  the  pickle 
to  escape.    They  have  holes  in  them. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  send  to  the  Canadian  markets  any  codfish  of 
that  description  ? — A.  Not  exactly  that  description  ;  they  partially  dry 
them. 

Q.  The  American  mode  is  not  to  cure  them  hard,  but  to  cure  them  in 
the  sun  a  few  days  ? — A.  Yes,  those  that  come  to  our  market. 

Q.  Those  will  keep  a  year  or  so  1 — A.  No,  not  very  long. 

Q.  Do  the  Canadians  cure  them  at  all  in  that  method  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  The  Americans  do  not  cure  it  hard  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  So  the  amount  of  it  seems  to  be  that  there  is  a  different  mode  of 
curing  codfish  in  the  two  couutries.  Your  people  prefer  the  codfish 
either  dry  salted,  or  cured  in  the  American  fashion  ? — A.  O,  a  good 
number  of  hard  cured  fish  is  used  as  well. 

Q.  Cured  as  you  cure  them  for  Brazil  ? — A.  The  same. 

Q.  I  thought  that  where  the  other  was  obtainable  it  was  generally 
preferred? — A.  No. 

Q.  The  hard-cured  fish  keep  much  longer  than  the  fish  you  speak  of, 
but  1  thought  that  where  the  people  were  near  enough  to  have  a  con- 
stant supply  of  fish  not  cured  hard,  they  usually  preferred  it  ? — A.  Well, 
the  market  has  been  supplied  for  a  number  of  years  previous,  and  still 
there  is  a  considerable  consumption  of  large  fish  that  comes  from  our 
own  fisheries. 

Q.  Now,  the  boneless  fish  are  cut-up  codfish  and  hake  (I  suppose  they 
don't  take  pains  to  have  the  best  quality  of  fish).  That  is  got  piinci- 
pally  in  the  States  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  comes  entirely  from  the  States,  as  I 
understand. 

Q.  Is  not  that  the  use  to  which  the  fishermen  put  the  small  fish,  less 
than  twenty-two  inches  long  ? — A.  They  do  cut  up  a  good  deal  of  that 
of  fish. 
Before  they  had  the  habit  of  cutting  up  the  fish,  there  was  not 


k^r    ,,'    «■ 


^^r  # 


>-:f -'^;^^- 


864 


▲WABD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


much  of  a  market  in  the  States  for  small  codfish,  twenty-two  ioches 
long? — A.  There  was  not  much  home  market. 

Q.  So  they  had  to  be  dried  bard  and  exported  ? — A.  Tes. 

Q.  Is  your  salmon  trade  with  the  States  a  pretty  extensive  one  ?— A. 
It  has  been. 

Q.  It  does  not  grow  any  worse,  does  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  From  our  railway  facilities,  which  are  increased,  and 
bring  a  large  supply  into  the  market  from  other  places. 

Q.  Then  the  people  further  off  than  Moisic  now  compete  with  you  ?— 
A.  The  people,  such  as  those  in  the  Bay  Ghaleurs,  who  were  shut  out 
altogether  from  the  fresh-fish  markets,  can  now  come  in. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  me  where  the  salted  herring  go? — A.  They  are  prin- 
cipally sold  in  Canada  altogether. 

Q.  Do  any  of  those  go  to  the  States  ? — A.  None  of  ours. 

Q.  Those  are  not  in  brine,  are  they  ? — A.  They  are. 

Q.  Do  you  happen  to  know  whether  there  is  much  of  a  market  in  the 
States  for  that  kind  of  herring? — A.  There  is  a  large  market  for  her- 
ring.   Still,  we  find  we  can  lo  better  at  home. 

Q.  You  expressed  an  opinion  that  the  cod  fishery  could  not  be  ad- 
vantageously carried  on  with  any  salted  bait,  except  salt  clama,  and 
not  so  well  with  ibat  as  with  fresh  bait.  Do  you  happen  to  know  how 
many  years  it  is  since  they  began  to  use  anything  but  salt  fish  on 
the  Newfoundland  Banks  ? — A.  No ;  am  not  acquainted. 

Q.  Now,  I  do  not  know  that  I  care  anything  about  this  starving  pop- 
ulation at  Moisic,  but  did  you  read  Captain 's  report  ? — A.  I  did 

not. 

Q.  Do  you  know  him  ? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  Is  he  in  good  health  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  He  is  where  the  British  Government  or  their  agents  could  get  him 
and  have  him  here  ? — A.  He  was  performing  his  duties ;  going  around 
as  a  fishery  oflflcer. 

Q.  He  has  been  around  getting  evidence  for  this  case,  has  he  not  ?— 
A.  Not  in  my  neighborhood. 

No.  47. 


The  Conference  met. 


Wednesday,  August  29, 1877. 


James  A.  Tory,  custom-house  officer,  and  formerly  a  fisherman,  of 
Guysborough,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic 
Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  How  long  have  you  acted  as  a  custom-house  officer?— 
Answer.  During  the  last  four  years,  I  think.  Previously  I  was  a  mas- 
ter of  a  vessel  for,  perhaps,  thirty  years.  During  a  large  portion  of 
this  time  I  was  trading  and  fishing  on  the  coast.  I  was  master  of  my 
own  vessel.  I  have  been  during  that  period  partially  acquainted  with 
the  fisheries  along  the  eastern  portion  of  this  province  and  around  the 
Island  of  Cape  Breton.  I  have  also  been  slightly  acquainted  with  the 
fisheries  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs.  I  am  acquainted  with  the  mackerel 
fishery,  so  far  as  the  shore  fishing  is  concerned,  but  I  have  never  prose- 
cuted vessel  fishing.    The  shore  fishery  I  have,  however,  prosecuted. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  American  mackerel-fishing  fleet  on  our 
coasts  f — ^A.  Yes ;  I  have  seen  portions  of  that  fleet  on  several  occa- 
sions. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISnEBT  COMMISSION. 


865 


Q.  I  believe  that  you  were  master  of  a  cutter  charged  with  the  pro- 
tection of  our  fisheries  T — A.  Yes ;  I  so  acted  on  four  different  vessels 
for  three  years.  Their  names  were  the  Ida  E.,  the  Sweepstakes,  the  S. 
G.  Marshall,  and  the  J.  B.  Dnnscomb. 

Q.  During  what  years  did  you  so  act  f — A.  During  1870,  1871,  and 
1872, 1  thinlt. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  do  the  Americans  usually  fish? — A.  That 
(^  ijuid  on  circumstances;  they  come  iu  as  close  as  they  can,  where 
[hey  can  find  water  in  which  to  float  their  vessels,  when  they  are  not 
prevented  from  fishing  inshore.  They  come  in  close  to  the  shore  in 
order  to  raise  the  mackerel  and  take  them  out  into  deep  water.  I  have 
beea  acquainted  with  their  mode  of:'  raising  the  mackerel  during  the 
whole  period  I  have  fished  on  our  coast.  I  have  been  in  the  habit  of 
seeiu^  tbem  fishing  along  shore.  There  are  places  where  they  come  within 
a  cable's  length  of  the  shore.  Where  the  water  is  shoaler,  they,  of 
course,  keep  farther  off;  more  than  that,  1  have  even  seen  American 
vessels  come  to  anchor  and  spring  up  to  their  cables,  \7here  tbere  was 
hardly  water  enough  to  float  their  vessels  along  the  shore. 

Q.  Generally  speaking,  how  far  from  the  shore  are  they  in  the  habit 
of  catching  mackerel? — A.  They  commence  to  fish  as  close  inshore  as 
they  can,  and  then  they  drift  oif.  This  depends  upon  the  winds ;  when 
the  wind  is  off  shore,  they  drift  off,  and  when  the  wind  is  inshore,  they 
can  only  fish  by  coming  to  an  anchor. 

Q.  When  the  wind  is  off  shore,  how  far  do  they  drift  off? — A.  Until 
they  get  into  deep  water  and  lose  the  fish.  I  would  not  attempt  to  de- 
fine the  distance.  They  may  drift  off  half  a  mile,  or  three  or  five  miles, 
before  they  lose  the  fish. 

Q.  How  do  they  raise  the  fish  ? — A.  By  throwing  out  bait;  and  then 
they  drift  oft'  until  they  lose  the  fish.  Afterwards  they  run  in  and  try 
again,  drifting  off  shore  once  more  and  then  running  in  again  ;  they  lose 
the  fish  in  deep  water.  It  is  possible  to  lose  a  school  of  fish  in  ten 
miuutes  after  raising  them,  and  they  may  drift  off  five  miles  before 
doing  so. 

Q.  You  say  that  this  is  generally  their  mode  of  taking  mackerel  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  had  conversations  with  American  skippers  on  the  sub- 
ject from  time  to  time  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  have  they  invariably  said  with  regard  to  taking  the  fish  in- 
shore?— A.  Their  general  expression  was,  that  if  they  were  prevented 
taking  the  fish  inshore,  they  would  have  to  quit  fishing  here.  I  only 
now  repeat  what  they  have  told  me.  The  same  thing  was  stated  by 
every  one  of  them  with  whom  I  ever  conversed  on  the  subject. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  from  any  of  them  a  contrary  opinion  ? — A.  No ; 
never. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  American  skippers  who  were  prosecuting  the 
cod  fishery  express  an  opinion  with  reference  to  the  value  of  the  privi- 
lege they  enjoy,  in  being  able  to  procure  bait  on  our  coasts  ? — A.  Well, 
they  said  that  if  they  could  not  get  the  bait  here,  they  would  have  to 
give  up  their  voyages. 

Q.  Is  that  the  general  opinion  ? — A.  That  was  the  opinion  of  every 
KiAQ  to  whom  I  spoke  on  the  subject.  They  said  that  if  they  could  not 
procure  bait  on  our  coast,  it  would  not  pay  them  to  come  here  to  fish. 

Q.  VVbile  you  were  cruising  to  protect  the  fisheries,  did  you  ever  find 

Any  American  vessels  fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

^bile  the  cutters  wore  present  they  would  not  come  inshore,  but  as  soon 

^  the  former  were  out  of  sight,  they  would  slip  in  ;  and  then  if  a  cutter 

55  F 


866 


Jlwasd  of  the  fishert  commission. 


hove  in  sigbt,  they  woild  fall  oflF  beyond  the  limits.  This  was  so  in  all 
cases.  I  have  known  them  to  be  so  brazen-faced  as  to  spring  up  to  tbeir 
cables  and  fish  in  the  harbor  of  Port  Hood ;  this  was  while  I  was  cruis- 
ing in  a  Canadian  revenne-vessel.  On  that  occasion  I  ran  from  the 
Strait  of  Ganso  to  Port  Hood,  and  unfortunately  it  so  happened  that 
there  was  a  patch  in  my  topgallant-sail ;  they  knew  it,  and  as  soon  as 
they  saw  it  they  went  oat  beyond  the  limits.  I  saw  the  vessels— they 
were  two  in  number — going  out,  and  with  a  glass  I  saw  them  springing 
np  to  their  cables  while  lying  in  the  harbor.  I  followed  them  until  they 
were  out  of  the  limits,  and  they  shortly  afterward  went  home.  They 
knew  \:*hat  their  doom  would  be  if  they  remained.  I  would  not  attempt 
to  say  thh:;  A  merican  mackerel-fishing  vessels  would  not  come  into  the 
bay  at  all  unless  they  had  the  privilege  of  fishing  with  n  three  miles  of 
the  shore,  not  knowing  what  they  would  really  do  under  such  circum- 
stances; but  I  do  not  think  they  would  do  so.  If  they  are  confined  to 
the  provisions  of  the  Treaty  of  1818,  they  cannot  fish  in  our  waters  with- 
out violating  that  treaty. 

Q.  Do  you  say  this  from  your  own  knowledge  of  the  subject  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q,  And  from  the  opinion  you  have  universally  derived  from  the  Ameri- 
cans themselves  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  have  you  seen  in  a  fleet  at  one  time  !— 
A.  I  think  that  the  greatest  number  I  ever  so  saw  was  about  300  sail  in 
Port  Hood  Harbor.  I  also  on  another  occasion  saw  about  300  sail  in 
Cape  Canso  Harbor.  In  this  case,  but  not  in  the  former,  so  far  as  I  am 
aware,  tbe  vessels  were  counted,  and  their  number  was  estimated  at 
300.  I  consider  that  at  the  time  this  was  not  one-half  of  the  American 
fleet  which  was  then  in  the  bay.  It  would  be  very  strange  to  see  their 
whole  fleet  at  once  in  one  place. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  that  they  ever  have  had  a  large  number  of  vessels 
in  the  bay  atone  time? — A.  I  have  understood  that  they  have  had  over 
1,000  vessels  there  some  years.  During  other  years  there  were  not  so 
many. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  of  the  American  fleet  ever  attempting  to 
raise  mackerel  save  by  coming  inshore,  as  you  have  stated? — A.  Xo. 
They  have  followed  this  practice  about  Cape  Breton  and  Prince  Edward 
Island,  in  tbe  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  and  about  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  For  30  ye-'.rs,  you  have  for  the  most  of  the  time  traded  and  fished 
as  master  of  a  vessel  along  the  coast  during  the  summer  season,  I  be- 
lieve?— A.  Yes;  and  for  a  longer  period. 

Q.  And  during  this  time  you  have  never  known  of  their  attempting  \ 
to  raise  the  fish  except  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  No ;  but  | 
still  I  do  not  say  that  they  have  not  done  otherwise. 

Q.  Is  the  boat  m  ukerel-fishing  on  the  parts  of  the  coasts  with  whicli  I 
you  are  acquainted,  increasing  or  decreasing? — A.  I  think  that  it  is  in 
creasing.    This  fishery  is  pursued  by  two  classes  of  men,  those  who  use  j 
the  hook  and  line  and  those  who  use  nets.    The  former  are,  I  tbiult,  in 
creasing,  and  the  latter  decreasing.    As  far  as  my  experience  goeslj 
have  remarked  that  when  the  American  vessels  keep  off  our  coast,  our  I 
net  fishermen  have  done  better  than  when  there  was  a  large  fleet  tisli  | 
ing  inshore.    I  only  speak  of  places  where  I  have  fished  myself— Chad 
abncto  Bay,  for  instance. 

Q.  In  what  year  was  this  the  case  f — A.  It  was  so  every  year.  I  re  i 
marked  that  every  year  when  the  cutters  which  were  in  the  bay  Ijeptj 
the  American  fleet  off  the  coast,  those  fishermen  always  made  betterl 
voyages,  taking  a  large  catch  of  fish.    My  idea  in  this  respect  is  tbis:! 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERT  COMMISSION. 


867 


tbnt  when  there  is  a  large  fleet  on  the  coast,  bait  is  thrown  ont  by  them, 
and  the  fish  are  tbue  detained  eating  that  food  antil  it  is  too  late  in  the 
season  for  the  shore  fishers  to  do  anything,  and  that  when  the  fish  leave 
this  food,  they  are  in  a  hnrry,  and  the  weather  being  rough  in  the  fall 
of  the  year,  they  make  a  straight  run  of  it  to  the  westward.  When  the 
fleet  was  not  along  shore,  the  fishermen  I  have  mentioned  did  better, 
liecaase  the  fish  came  on  earlier  in  the  season,  and  accordingly  were 
foand  in  greater  nnmbers  along  the  coast. 

Q.  How  did  yon  catch  the  fish  ? — A.  With  nets  and  seines.  I  think 
that  the  year  when  the  Devastation  was  in  the  bay  I  took  with  one  seine 
at  different  times  4,000  barrels  ot  fish.  Several  seines  were  drawn  on 
the  same  beach. 

Q.  Was  the  American  fleet  effectually  keptoflF  that  place! — A.  These 
vessels  did  not  come  there,  to  Cbedabucto  Bay.  There  is  only  the  Strait 
ofCanao  between  it  and  North  Bay,  and  when  the  American  fleet  was 
kept  off  the  coast  the  fish  came  on  and  came  into  our  bay.  The  fleet 
vas  kept  off  the  coast  that  year  and  other  years,  but  I  speak  of  that 
year  particularly. 

Q.  Did  yon  also  buy  mackerel  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  the  duty  formerly  imposed  by  the  Americans  at  the  time  affect 
the  prices  paid  to  the  fishermen  for  the  mackerel  ? — A.  When  the  duty 
was  t»ken  off,  after  the  negotiation  of  the  Washington  Treaty,  I  could 
not  see  that  it  cansed  the  price  of  our  fish  to  raise  at  all,  or  that  this 
affected  the  price  at  all.  My  opinion  is  that  the  duty  only  affected  the 
American  fishermen  by  giving  them  the  privilege  of  obtaining  more  than 
onr  fishermen  for  their  fish,  by  the  amount  of  the  duty. 

Q.  That  is,  when  a  duty  is  imposed  and  the  Americans  are  allowed  to 
fish  on  our  shores  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  difference  between  the  prices  paid  for  mackerel  pre- 
Yious  to  and  after  the  imposition  of  the  duty,  and  since  1 — A.  I  do  not 
know  that  I  can  answer  this  question.  I  have  not  been  in  the  habit  of 
exporting  fish. 

Q.  Did  onr  fishermen  get  more  or  leas  for  their  fish  on  account  of  the 
esisteiice  of  the  duty  ? — A.  I  saw  no  difference  in  the  prices,  whether  the 
doty  was  on  or  off. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  the  imposition  of  a  duty  upon  our  fish  enter- 
ing tlie  United  States  would  reduce  the  price  of  our  fish  ? — A.  It  might 
lessen  the  price  to  the  exporter  from  here,  because  he  would  have  to 
pay  the  duty ;  but  I  believe  that  it  would  affect  the  price  of  the  fish  as 
regards  the  Americans  themselves,  by  giving  them  a  bounty  of  $2,  or 
whatever  the  duty  might  be,  over  our  fishermen. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  American  vessels  were  entirely  and  rigidly  excluded 
from  taking  fish  on  our  coast,  and  from  transshipping  and  procuring 
bait  here,  do  you  think  that  this  would  be  in  the  interest  of  our  fisher- 
men T  Would  it  enrich  and  make  them  more  prosperous  1 — A.  I  think 
that  it  would. 

Q.  And  is  this  the  general  opinion  among  our  people  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  think  that  it  would  be  to  our  advantage  to  protect  thor- 
oughly our  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes  j  that  is  the  general  expression  of  opin- 
ion among  our  fishermen. 

Q.  Of  course  you  know  the  opinion  of  our  people  on  the  subject  t — A. 
lam  pretty  well  acquainted  with  it  as  far  as  the  fishermen  themselves 
are  coucerned. 

Q>  I  believe  that  you  have  made  a  great  number  of  inquiries  in  this 
Illation  of  late  years  1 — A.  I  have  spent  a  good  deal  of  time  in  doing  so. 

Q.  And  that  is  the  general  opinion? — A.  Yes ;  among  our  fishermen. 


868 


▲WARD   OF  THE   FI8HEBT   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  oar  people  consider  that  it  is  a  great  advantage  to  them  to 
have  the  duty  the  Americans  formerly  imposed  on  oar  fish  remitted f— 
A.  I  have  heard  them  say  that  they  would  willingly  pay  the  duty  if  the 
Americans  were  prevented  from  fishing  on  our  shores. 

Q.  To  what  part  of  the  coast  were  you  assigned  for  the  protection  of 
the  fisheries  ? — A.  I  was  stationed  between  Cape  Oanso  and  Cape  North 
on  the  southern  side  of  Cape  Breton,  with  the  privilege  of  going  arouud 
the  island  of  Cape  Breton  when  I  had  time. 

Q.  I  believe  that;  this  part  of  the  coast  is  not  so  well  adapted  f)r 
mackerel-fishing  a»  other  parts? — A.  No.  It  is  less  resorted  to  than 
other  parts  by  the  American  vessels. 

Q.  Did  you  capture  any  American  vessels  t — A.  Yes ;  three  or  four,  I 
think,  for  fishing  within  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  And  you  are  satisfied  that  a  great  many  other  American  vessels 
run  great  risks  by  so  fishing? — A.  Yes  ;  I  followed  several  of  them  tor 
doing  so.  Of  course  I  did  not  allow  the  patch  in  the  sail  I  mentioued 
to  betray  me  another  time.    I  sent  to  Halifax  and  procured  a  new  sail. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  any  of  our  vessels  go  to  fish  in  Americau 
waters  ? — A.  I  never  heard  of  any  save  one.  I  was  on  board  of  her, 
and  the  captain  told  me  that  she  had  been  fishing  there  this  spring. 

Q.  Where  is  that  vessel  now  ? — A.  She  went  to  the  North  Bay,  sein- 
ing. 7l  saw  her  seining  there.  I  cannot  tell  where  she  is  now.  I  for- 
get hex  name,  though  I  made  a  record  of  it.  I  have  not  the  paper  by 
me. 

Q.  How  long  was  she  there  ? — A.  A  short  time. 

Q.  Did  she  catch  anything? — A.  The  captain  tcld  me  that  be  took 
about  110  barrels  fifteen  miles  off  the  American  shore.  I  also  took  the 
captain's  name,  but  1  forget  it. 

Q.  Are  there  a  large  number  of  light-houses  on  the  coasts  of  New 
Brunswick,  and  Nova  Scotia,  and  Quebec  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  their  number  being  increased  ? — A.  Yes ;  this  has  been  the  case. 
of  late  years. 

Q.  Is  that  an  advantage;  and  if  so,  what  advantage  is  it  to  the  Ameri 
canvessels? — A.  It  is  a  very  great  advantage  to  all  vessels,  and  to 
American  vessels  as  well  as  others.  Formerly  American  vessels  paid 
light  dues,  but  of  late  years  up  to  four  years  ago,  as  far  as  I  am  aware, 
they  have  not  done  so.  I  think  that  they  paid  light-dues  during  the 
existence  of  the  Eeciprocity  Treaty,  these  being  collected  at  various 
points. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  coast  of  Machias,  Seal  Island  ?— A. 
No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  number  of  lights  that  are  in  the  gulf? — A.  No;{ 
but  I  know  that  their  number  is  very  considerable. 

Q.  Have  the  nnmber  of  fog-whistles  on  the  coast  been  increased  ?— I 
A.  Yes;  but  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  give  their  exact  number.  There] 
are  quite  a  number  of  them. 

Q.  These  are  useful  to  the  fishing-fleet  ? — A.  Most  assuredly  they  are  j 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  have  had  no  actual  experience  as  a  fisherman  in  sea-goinirj 
vessels  ? — A.  I  have  never  fished  in  vessels ;  I  have  done  what  we  c " 
shore  fishing. 

Q.  Yon  would  go  out  and  return  the  same  day  ?~A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  all  yon  have  to  say  about  the  deep-sea  mackerel-fishery  is  I 
derived  from  other  persons? — A.  No.  What  I  have  stated  has  ^H 
derived  from  my  own  observation,  because  I  have  fished  in  harbors,  a 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


869 


Ameri- 

and  to 
iels  paiil 

aware, 
ring  the 

various 


iased  ?- 
There 

they  are 

lea-goin?! 
,t  we  ca" 


BsheryiM 
las  beenj 
)ors,a 


have  gone  from  home  prosecating  the  fishery  ia  dififereDt  harbors  where 
I  have  seen  the  vessels  to  which  I  have  referred.  I  have  gone  from 
Guysborough  to  Fox  Island,  and  aboat  Gape  Canso,  and  from  there  to 
Port  Hood,  and  Sydney,  and  other  places. 

Q.  You  have  not  fished  in  a  vessel  of  your  own  on  the  deep-sea  fish- 
inp-grounds  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Therefore,  all  you  can  tell  us  in  this  regard  has  been  derived  from 
others! — A.  No;  it  is  derived  from  my  own  personal  knowledge.  I 
have  myself  seen  the  American  vessels  engaged  in  fishing. 

Q.  On  the  deep  sea? — A.  You  may  call  it  the  deep  sea  fishery,  but  I 
call  it  the  inshore  fishery,  within  3  or  •!  or  5  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  speak  about  the  fishery  beyond  that,  as  per- 
sonally acquainted  with  it? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  say  that  it  would  be  no  use  for  the  Americans  to  come  here 
and  fish  for  mackerel  unless  they  could  catch  bait  here  ? — A.  I  did  not 
say  so.  I  said  that  it  would  be  no  nse  for  them  to  come  and  fish  for  cod 
here  unless  they  could  catch  bait  here.  They  bring  their  mackerel-bait 
with  them,  I  presume. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  the  effect  of  a  fleet  fishing  within  three  mil(*s 
of  the  shore,  for  instance,  is  to  detain  the  fish  at  the  place  where  the 
vessels  are  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Owing  to  the  throwing  of  bait  overboard? — A.  Yes;  in  conse- 
qaenco  of  this  the  fish  do  not  move  on  as  usual  in  the  course  they  are 
accustomed  to  take  from  one  point  to  another. 

Q.  Have  you  found  that  this  is  the  experience  of  fishermen  pretty 
generally? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  fish  are  driven  off  shore  with  the  gales  ? — A.  These  also 
detain  them  in  the  North  Bay ;  and  consequently  the  fishermen  to  the 
westward  are  deprived  of  their  usual  catch.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that 
the  throwing  over  of  bait  keeps  the  fish  in  one  spot  all  the  time;  but 
this  is  generally  the  case  when  a  large  fleet  is  scattered  over  an  exten- 
sive surface  of  water.  The  fish  remain  in  such  a  neighborhood  longer 
than  would  be  the  case  otherwise.  I  think  that  boat  fishing  is  accom- 
panied by  the  same  tendency. 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  tlie  fish  are  driven  away  by  the  throwing  over- 
board of  gurry  and  matters  of  that  sort  ? — A.  If  a  vessel  throws  over 
gurry,  she  will  not  stop  to  catch  fish  in  that  place,  but  make  for  a  new 
l)erth.  I  think  this  is  the  best  proof  of  the  fact  that  she  cannot  pro- 
cure tish  where  offal  has  been  thrown.  When  they  are  about  to  throw 
oftal  overboard  the  vessel  will  jog  off,  so  as  to  have  it  thrown  outside 
of  their  own  fishing-grounds.  The  vessel  will  hardly  be  moving  at  the 
time,  having  only  steerage  way.  When  the  work  in  question  is  done 
tlie  vessel,  works  inshore  and  tries  again  for  fish. 

Q.  And*  you  think  that  the  effect  of  throwing  offal  overboard  is  to 
drive  the  mackerel  from  the  place  where  it  is  tlirown  in  to  some  other 
point?— A.  Yes;  and  this  remark  applies  not  only  to  mackerel,  but  to 
all  kinds  of  fish.    The  throwing  over  of  offal  disturbs  the  fish. 

Q.  Has  a  trade  in  squid  grown  up  in  Cape  Breton  ? — A.  Large  quan- 
tities of  squid  arc  caught  there. 

Q.  What  do  the  people  do  with  it  ?— A.  The  inhabitants  sell  them  to 
the  French  fishermen  from  St.  Peter's,  or  to  Newfoundlanders. 

Q.  Do  the  St.  Peter's  fishermen  come  there  in  their  own  vessels  ? — A. 
^0 ;  they  charter  vessels  from  Fortune  Bay,  Newfoundland.  While  on 
the  coast  in  a  cutter  I  considered  that  I  would  not  allow  French  vessels 
to  come  there  more  than  I  would  American  vessels ;  but  I  found  the 
French  fishermen  mostly  on  board  of  British  vessels. 


870 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Newfoundland  vessels  coald  come  there  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  would  not 
interfere  with  them. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  this  was  a  promising  trade  to  the  pieople !— A. 
I  think  so. 

Q.  You  did  not  object  to  the  French  coming  there  to  buy  squid,  I  sup- 
pose ? — A.  I  did  not  treat  them  as  Frenchmen,  when  I  found  them  in 
British  vessels. 

Q.  Suppose  that  a  French  ship  were  to  have  come  there  under  French 
colors,  not  to  fish  but  to  purchase  squid  as  a  matter  of  trade,  did  you 
understand  that  you  had  a  right  to  seize  the  vessel  ? — A.  I  should  for- 
bid their  buying  if  that  was  their  object;  but  they  would  not  come 
merely  to  buy  ;  they  also  came  to  fish.  They  combined  together  fishing 
and  buying;  that  was  the  only  way  in  which  I  ever  met  them  on  the 
coast. 

Q.  Suppose  a  French  vessel  merely  came  to  purchase  squid,  would 
you  consider  yourself  authorized  to  arrest  the  men  on  board  f — A.  I  do 
not  know  that  I  would  have  done  so  with  either  a  French  or  au  Ameri- 
can vessel  under  such  circumstances.  I  have  known  American  vessels 
come  there  to  buy  bait,  and  I  did  not  interfere  with  them,  save  so  far  as 
to  compel  them  to  go  to  a  customhouse  to  enter  goods  and  pay  duties 
if  they  were  selling  goods. 

Q.  I  observe  in  your  report  dated  November,  1872,  and  published  iu 
the  report  of  Commissioner  of  Fisheries  in  1873,  that  you  say : 

I  would  here  mention  that  a  new  trade  in  a  species  of  fish  known  by  the  name  of 
squid  (which  has  heretofore  been  looked  upon  as  useless  except  for  bait)  has  Hpruu); 
up  ou  the  eastern  coast  of  Cape  Breton  with  the  French,  wlio  come  to  that  part  uf  the 
coast  in  Newfoundland  vessels,  and  there  purchase  cargoes  of  those  fish,  which  anionnt 
to  a  considerable  sum  of  money,  and  are  carried  by  them  to  St.  Pierre  and  the  Banks 
to  supply  their  fishermen  with  bait.  I  have  no  doubt  but  this  branch  of  our  tisberieB 
will  be  continued  and  further  extended,  and  thereby  become  a  prohtable  source  of 
wealth  to  those  engaged  on  it. 

Bave  you  now  auy  reason  to  change  the  opinion  you  then  and  thus 
expressed  on  that  point  ? — A.  I  have  not. 

Q.  These  vessels  which  came  to  buy  cargoes  of  squid,  dealt  directly 
with  the  fishermen,  did  they  not  ? — A.  Yes,  so  far  as  I  am  aware. 

Q.  Would  you  not  consider  that  this  was  a  benefit  to  the  fishermeu 
concerned  iu  that  trade! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  what  offenses  did  you  seize  American  vessels  when  iu  charge 
of  cutters  ? — A.  For  violating  the  treaty  of  1818,  by  fishing  within  three 
miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  arrest  an  American  vessel  merely  for  purchasing  or 
selling  matters  of  trade? — A.  Yes;  I  seized  one  for  selling  dutiable 
goods. 

Q.  What  was  her  name  ? — A.  I  forget,  but  I  think  it  was  the  Grenada. 
She  was  at  the  time  iu  Port  Hood  Harbor.  I  found  on  board  of  her  a 
quantity  of  what  would  be  called  smuggled  goods,  and  a  large  quantity 
of  dutiable  goods  which  she  had  not  cleared  out  at  all  from  auy  Auiericau 
port.  She  got  them  on  the  way  up  somewhere.  She  had  liquors  ou 
board. 

Q.  Had  this  vessel  any  license  to  trade  ? — A.  I  think  that  she  had  au 
American  license  to  trade.    She  was  on  a  fishing  voyage. 

Q.  And  had  goods  on  board  to  trade  with  ¥ — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  she  not  have  a  manifest  of  them  ?— A.  J  think  so ;  but  there 
were  on  board  goods  which  were  not  included  in  her  manifest. 

Q.  Did  you  seize  her  for  that  reason  ? — A.  I  seized  her  for  selling  ou 
the  coast  goods  wlich  had  not  been  entered  at  the  custom-house. 

Q.  Had  you  proof  of  this  ? — A.  Yes;  I  was  aware  of  it. 


\  • 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


871 


Q.  Why  did  yoa  seize  ber  if  she  bad  a  manifest,  and  oonformed  to  the 
lavs  and  bad  a  manifest  ? — A.  Sbe  did  not  conform  to  tbe  laws ;  sbe 
was  over  a  week  on  tbe  coast  without  going  to  the  customhouse  to  re- 
port. 

Q.  Then  yon  did  not  seize  her  for  trading  ? — A.  I  seized  her  for  the 
violation  of  the  customs  laws  generally,  and  she  was  condemned  for  sell- 
ing goods  which  were  not  mentioned  in  her  manifest,  and  for  the  viola- 
tioa  of  tbe  custom-bouse  regulations. 

Q.  What  became  of  the  vessel  ? — A.  She  remained  in  Guysborough 
Harbor  while  tbe  captain  and  owner  came  on  to  Halifax.  Tbe  latter 
would  not  go  before  the  admiralty  court,  but  be  made  an  arrangement 
with  the  deputy  minister  of  justice,  to  deposit  a  sum  of  money  as  a  fine. 
The  money,  $800  I  think,  was  deposited  with  the  minister  of  customs, 
aii(l  tbe  vessel  was  allowed  to  go.  Tbe  minister  of  customs  was  to  see 
whether  tbe  fine  would  be  reduced  or  not. 

Q.  Ami  you  do  not  know  whether  anything  was  really  paid  ? — A.  I 
only  know  that  tbe  money  was  deposited. 

Q.  Did  yon  capture  more  than  one  vessel  for  trading  in  violation  of 
the  laws  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  seized  a  schooner  called  tbe  D.  H..  Mansfield. 

Q.  For  tbe  same  reason  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  became  of  her? — A.  She  was  liberated.  A  portion  of  her 
cargo  was,  however,  confiscated  and  sold.  She  had  sold  large  quanti- 
ties of  kerosene  oil. 

Q.  Did  yoa  arrest  any  more  American  vessels  for  that  reason  ? — A. 
M  that  I  am  aware  of  Just  now. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  have  you  arrested  solely  for  fishing 
within  three  miles  of  the  coast? — A.  Four,  I  think. 

Q.  Where? — A.  One  at  Aspee  Bay,  one  at  Ingonish,  one  on  the 
south  side  of  Cape  George,  and  one  at  Broad  Cove. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  them  all  fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  coast  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  see  them  doing  so? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  became  of  them  ? — A.  One  was  confiscated  and  sold ;  another 
was  confiscated,  and  bonds,  which  I  presume  were  paid,  were  entered 
into  for  her ;  one  was  stolen,  and  the  fourth  was  confiscated  and  sold 
nnder  condemnation  of  tbe  admiralty  court. 

Q.  Was  tbe  vessel  which  you  mentioned  as  having  fished  in  American 
waters  the  Lettie? — A.  I  tbiuk  not.  1  was  on  board  of  ber  in  Canso 
Harbor,  and  tbe  captain  told  me  he  had  been  fishing  in  American 
waters;  I  bad  no  reason  to  disbelieve  tbe  statement.  He  lives  in  Nova 
Scotia,  on  tbe  western  shore,  in  Sbelbourne  I  think. 

Q.  When  did  you  see  this  vessel  ? — A.  Within  the  last  two  months. 
Sbe  went  south  as  far  as  Delaware,  I  believe,  and  fished  in  American 
waters  this  spring.  He  went  down  to  meet  tbe  mackerel  and  follow  tbem 
ap,  I  presume. 

Q.  Did  be  get  up  about  tbe  time  that  tbe  maclvcrel  were  due  here  ? — 
A.  I  saw  tbe  captain  within  tbe  last  two  months  and  I  think  be  had 
then  but  a  short  time  returned  from  tbe  American  coast. 

Q.  He  bad  not  then  fished  up  here  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  but  that  he 
had  been  trying  for  fish  on  his  way  up.  Tbe  vessel  was  a  seiner;  I  saw 
him  afterwards  with  a  seine,  and  it  was  in  the  water  I  think  at  tbe  time, 
iu  Ciiedabucto  Bay.  I  think  be  bad  been  here  and  discharged  whatever 
he  had  had  on  board,  and  fitted  out  anew.  He  said  that  he  intended  to 
fish  up  here. 

Q.  During  how  many  years  have  they  been  building  up  tbe  light- 
houses  and  fog- whistles  which  you  mentioned  on  this  coast? — A.  Since 


872 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Nova  Scotia  war  first  settled  I  bnlieve ;  bat  darinflf  the  last  ten  years 
their  number  has  beeu  iooreased  much  fdster  than  was  the  case  pre- 
vionslv. 

Q.  That  is  since  1867  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  was  after  the  termination  of  the  Beoiprooity  Treaty ;  then  do 
.you  suppose  that  all  this  has  been  done  to  enable  the  Americans  to  Qsh 
more  safely  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  t — A.  I  do  not  say  that  they 
have  been  established  especially  for  the  benefit  of  the  Americans ;  but 
I  say  that  they  are  a  benefit  to  the  Americaiis. 

Q.  That  is  if  the  Americans  are  near  the  coast? — A.  They  are  half 
of  their  time  within  gunshot  of  the  rook  on  our  coast. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  convey  the  impression  that  what  I  raeutloned 
was  a  part  of  the  policy  of  the  Dominion  1 — A.  No ;  these  liijht-hoiise!) 
and  fog-whistles  have  been  erected  for  the  benefit  of  the  maritime 
interests  of  the  Dominion,  I  presume. 

Q.  And  of  all  foreign  vessels  that  have  a  right  to  come  here?— A. 
Yes ;  it  is  done  to  make  our  coast  more  easy  of  access. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  from  your  experience  that  it  would  be  practically 
possible  to  keep  the  American  fishermen  from  fishing  within  three  miles 
of  the  coast,  whatever  a  treaty  may  declare,  with  such  expenditures  at 
least  that  are  likely  to  be  made  for  the  purpose? — A.  That  will  depend 
chiefly  on  the  degree  of  protection  provided  for  the  purpose  along  the 
coast. 

Q.  What  protection  will  likely  be  given  within  the  limits  of  proba- 
bility and  reason,  that  will  enable  you  to  keep  the  American  fisberuea 
from  fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  coast,  so  as  to  afford  to  your  ova 
fishermen  a  practical  monopoly  of  your  fishing-grounds? — A.  In  the 
first  place  armed  vessels  would  have  to  be  provided,  and  in  the  next 
place  detectives  would  have  to  be  stationed  along  the  shore,  and  in  the 
harbors  where  and  to  which  the  American  vessels  resorted.  The  lat- 
ter would  watch  every  movement  these  vessels  made  and  report  them, 
and  finally  if  the  vessels  violated  the  law,  this  would  lead  to  seizures, 
and  hence  they  would  find  it  to  their  interest  to  keep  off"  our  shore. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  if  sufficient  watchfulness  was  shown  and  if  a 
sufficient  number  of  officers  was  appointed  to  do  the  work,  it  would  be 
done? — A.  I  think  that  it  can  be  done  with  proper  officers. 

Q.  You  consider  it  practicable  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  a  reasonable  expenditure  ? — A.  I  would  not  undertake  to 
speak  on  that  point.  [  think  that  it  would  entail  considerable  expense. 
1  do  not  know  what  the  government  would  decide  upon  in  this  regard. 

Q.  It  would  require  a  pretty  large  expenditure  ? — A.  Certainly ;  be- 
cause our  coast  is  a  very  long  one. 

Q.  It  would  be  necessary,  I  suppose,  to  have  the  co-operation  of  the 
people  living  on  the  shores  of  those  Provinces  in  order  so  to  exclude  the 
Americans? — A.  I  do  not  know  that  this  would  be  necessary.  It  I  am 
an  officer,  I  have  simply  my  duty  to  perform,  without  regard  to  whether 
1  am  indorsed  in  its  performance  by  the  inhabitants  or  not. 

Q.  Suppose  that  fishermen  and  others,  and  a  large  class  of  people 
along  the  coast,  had  an  interest  in  having  the  Americans  come  here,  as 
they  wanted  their  trade  with  regard  to  the  sale  of  bait  and  frozen  herring, 
and  of  such  articles  as  can  be  lawfully  sold  with  a  license  to  trade,  do 
you  not  think  that  it  would  be  a  more  difficult  and  expensive  matter  to 
keep  the  Americans  oft'  the  coast  than  would  otherwise  be  the  case?— 
A.  In  the  first  place,  the  class  of  persons  who  are  interested  in  and  who 
have  this  trade  is  the  smallest  number,  by  a  very  great  degree,  among 
our  inhabitants. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


873 


Q.  But  if  there  were  a  considerable  number  of  such  persons,  wonld 
not  tills  fact  make  it  more  difficult  for  those  on  tlie  cutters  and  other 
people  interested  in  the  matter  to  Iceep  the  Americans  off  the  coast  t— 
A.  I  do  not  think  it  would. 

Q.  You  have  said  that  the  throwing  over  of  gurry  tends  to  drive  the 
mackerel  from  the  place  where  it  is  cast  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why,  then,  does  not  the  poglu-balt,  consisting  of  the  heads,  body 
of  the  fish,  and  whatever  they  contain,  also  drive  the  fish  away  ? — A. 
If  I  correctly  understand  the  mode  of  preparing  this  bait,  the  fish  them- 
selves, but  not  their  garbage,  are  used  for  bait. 

Q.  Nothing  but  what  remains  after  the  heads  and  tails  are  cut  off, 
aud  tbey  aie  cleaned,  is  used  for  bait,  in  your  opinion  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  reference  to  the  throwing  over  of  this  gurry,  suppose  that 
there  is  a  very  strong  current — 8, 10,  or  12  knots  an  hour — where  it  is 
thrown,  do  you  not  think  that  this  would  make  a  difference  ? — A.  Yes, 
if  such  a  thing  existed  ;  but  a  lOkuot  current  cannot  be  found  on  the 
coast.  Even  in  the  Strait  of  Ganso  and  in  some  tidal  harbors  the  cur- 
rent runs  only  at  the  rate  of  about  4  knots ;  but  around  the  coast  the 
current  runs  at  times  only  half  a  knot,  or  a  knoc,  or,  at  the  most,  two 
kuots  an  hour. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  number  of  barrels  of  mackerel 
which  the  American  vessels  catch  in  our  waters  ? — A.  The  vessels  vary 
ill  this  respect.  I  was  informed  by  the  master  of  an  American  vessel 
that  they  landed  from  1,500  to  1,600  barrels  during  one  season  at  the 
Strait  of  Can  so.  Part  of  these  were  transshipped,  and  the  rest  were 
taken  home  in  the  vessel  at  the  end  of  the  voyage. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  he  make  that  season  in  the  bay? — A.  I  think 
that  vessel  made  four  trips  that  season.  I  understood  so,  at  least,  from 
the  master. 

Q.  Do  the  American  vessels  make  more  than  one  trip  a  season  ? — A. 
Some  make  only  one,  while  others  make  two  aud  three  trips ;  while  in 
the  case  I  just  mentioned,  as  well  as  in  several  others,  vessels  made 
four  trips  a  season.  This  is  done  when  they  land  their  fish  on  the  coast 
m\  transship,  thus  preventing  time  being  lost  by  them,  as  would  be 
the  case  during  the  season  if  they  took  the  fish  home. 

Q.  Have  you  a  sufficient  knowledge  of  the  American  catch  in  our 
waters  to  average  it! — A.  It  would  be  a  pretty  difficult  thing  for  me  to 
do  that. 

Q.  Judging  from  the  inquiries  you  have  made,  what  would  you  con- 
sider the  average  per  vessel  to  be  ? — A.  It  might  be  from  500  to  000 
barrels  a  season ;  but  I  would  not  attempt  to  speak  decidedly  on  this 
point. 

Q.  Do  American  vessels  come  to  our  coast  and  combine  fishing  for 
and  the  buying  of  bait  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  will  buy  it  from  the  inhabitants ; 
while  their  crews  will  catch  it,  when  the  opportunity  for  doing  so  is  pre- 
sented, by  the  appearance  of  a  school  in  their  neighborhood  at  the  time. 

Q.  I  believe  that  one  of  the  four  vessels  which  you  seized  was  stolen  ? — 
A.  She  was  taken  out  of  Guysborough  Harbor. 

Q.  By  force? — A.  Some  one  took  her  off.  She  had  been  seized, 
brought  in  by  me,  and  stripped  of  her  sails  and  rigging,  which  were 
placed  in  store.  The  latter  was  also  taken  away.  This  was  done  in 
the  uight.  I  had  two  missions :  one  was  to  protect  the  fisheries,  and 
the  other  to  protect  the  revenue.  This  was  the  case  all  the  time  I  was 
craisiug  on  the  coast. 


874 


AWABD  OF  THE   FI8HEBY  COMMISSIOl^. 


Q.  Gould  the  Americans  be  effectatilly  excluded  from  our  coast  fluh- 
ing-grouuds  at  very  small  cost,  wbich  would  be  repaid  by  the  recovery 
of  a  very  large  amount  from  the  sale  of  vessels  seized  f  Is  it  not  possi- 
ble and  quite  practicable  to  do  this  ? — A.  Yes ;  detectives  would  have 
to  be  employed  iu  the  work. 

Q.  Would  it  not  be  quite  practicable  for  detectives  to  go  on  board 
vessels,  or  observe  their  movements  from  the  shore,  talking  their  nutnes 
and  noting  the  circumstances  under  which  the  vessels  were  seen,  and 
to  have  the  vessels  afterward  seized  wherever  found  ? — A.  It  could  be 
thus  ascertained,  when  they  had  violated  the  law,  and  they  could  bo 
seized  by  armed  vessels.  These  latter  would  be  necessary  for  the  pur- 
pose. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  that  the  crews  would  resist  by  force  ? — A.  They 
would  be  strange  men  if  they  did  not,  on  opportunity  for  doing  so  pre- 
senting itself. 

Q.  But  assuming  that  they  would  not  resist  any  legal  means  employed  , 
in  seizing  the  vessel,  what  would  be  the  case  ? — A.  Certainly ;  tbcu  they 
could  be  taken  without  any  expense. 

Q.  Is  it  unusual  to  seize  vessels  in  port.  I  think  that  you  so  seized 
one  of  our  own  vessels  the  other  day  for  a  violation  of  the  law  f— a. 
Yes;  that  was  a  very  simple  thing,  because  when  I  took  her  papers  she 
became  useless  to  the  owner  or  crew. 

Q.  It  is  fair  to  assume  that  no  forcible  resistance  to  the  constituted 
authorities  would  be  made  by  crews  of  American  vessels  on  being  seized, 
under  the  circumstances  instanced? — A.  If  there  was  no  resistance 
they  could  be  taken  without  any  trouble. 

Q.  Then  it  could  be  done  without  the  aid  of  armed  vessels  f— A.  No 
difficulty  would  be  experienced  iu  making  seizures  if  no  resistance  to  it 
were  offered,  but  my  opinion  is  that  work  of  that  kind  cannot  be  carried 
out  without  the  co-operation  of  some  force. 

Q.  But  force  could  be  available  in  the  port  where  the  seizure  might 
be  made  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Assuming  that  such  provision  were  made  at  the  Strait  of  Ganso, 
could  vessels  be  there  seized  for  violation  of  the  law,  and  this  be  carried 
out  without  difficulty  ? — A.  If  the  crew  did  not  resist,  the  vessel  could 
be  taken  without  any  trouble.  In  that  case  it  could  be  done  with  a  very 
small  expenditure. 

Q.  Taking  care  that  no  case  would  be  tested  unless  you  were  abac- 
lutely  certain  as  to  the  facts,  would  it  not  be  quite  practicable  to  prevent 
altogether  American  vessels  from  coming  inshore  and  fishing  illei^ally  it 
this  were  illegal  at  any  time? — A.  It  could  then  be  done  with  less  ex- 
pense certainly ;  detectives  could  be  stationed  all  around  the  coast,  and 
as  soon  as  the  violation  of  the  law  by  vessels  was  ascertained,  and  the 
latter  were  aware  of  what  was  being  done,  they  would  keep  otF  the 
coast. 

Q.  You  never  met  with  any  resistance  when  making  seizures  ?— A. 
No ;  I  cannot  say  that  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  meet  with  any  resistance  in  such  cases? — A.  It 
was  needless  to  attempt  it ;  but  I  do  not  say  that  this  would  not  have 
been  attempted  if  I  had  not  been  prepared  for  it. 

Q.  Yon  had  only  one  small  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  had  a  large  number  of  men  on  their  vessels  ? — A.  What 
was  the  good  of  them ;  they  were  not  armed.  If  three  or  four  unarmed 
men  came  on  board  a  vessel  which  had  a  crew  of  twenty  men,  the  latter, 
if  they  were  worth  a  button,  would  chuck  them  overboard. 

Q.  But  if  the  crew  knew  that  they  had  violated  a  law  equally  pos- 


▲WABD  OF  THE  FISHRBY  COMMISSION. 


875 


gesoed  by  both  coantries  t—A.  When  I  made  seizures,  every  man  of  them 
knew  tbat  tbey  had  violated  the  law,  and  they  acknowledged  it. 

Q.  Has  the  trade  with  American  fishing  vessels  been  very  valuable 
to  the  i)eople  living  in  the  Strait  of  Oanso  ? — A.  I  think  not  as  a  whole. 

Q.  Have  our  people  profited  to  any  extent  by  this  trade? — A.  1  think 
nut,  because,  if  this  had  been  the  case,  we  would  likely  see  the  result  of 
in  evidences  of  increased  prosperity;  I  consider  that  the  reidult  has  been 
OD  tbe  other  side  of  the  lee. 

Q.  The  Americans  buy  certain  necessaries  from  the  traders  on 
shore! — A.  Yes. 

Q,  Do  not  these  merchants  make  any  profit  out  of  this  business  f — A. 
Tbey  may  do  so  at  the  time,  but  1  do  not  tbink  that  any  of  them  have 
made  money  out  of  it  in  reality.  Appearances  are  decidedly  against 
tbe  view  tbat  they  have  done  so. 

Q.  Why  do  they  not  make  money  out  of  this  business  ? — A.  They 
,bDy  a  large  quantity  of  goods  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  the  Ameri- 
cans, and  these  goods  often  lie  on  their  hands  for  a  long  time,  thus  occu- 
sioning  loss.    The  Americans  do  not  come  and  trade  for  the  purpose  of 
pleasing  Canso  people;  they  only  buy  what  tbey  actually  need. 

Q.  Is  it  a  usual  thing  for  these  dealers  to  have  goods  lying  on  their 
liaiids  for  a  long  time  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  conversed  with  the  "aders  themselves  on  this  subject  ? — 
A.  I  have  talked  with  some  of  them,  and  I  have  known  goods  lie  on 
their  hands  for  years. 

Q.  Did  they  tell  you  that  they  had  lost  money  in  this  business? — A. 
I  think  that,  as  a  general  thing,  they  have  lost  money.  Sometimes  they 
uiHy  make  it. 

Q.  No  licenses  to  trade  are  issued  on  our  coasts  ? — A.  No ;  I  know  of 
uo  such  papers  being  issued. 

Q.  No  American  vessel  can  be  licensed  to  trade  on  our  coasts  ? — A. 
We  pay  no  attention  to  the  kind  of  trading  papers  which  the  Americans 
bring  here.  I  take  it  for  granted  that  this  is  a  privilege  granted  them 
by  be  United  States  customs  authorities. 

Q.  But  the  Dominion  issues  no  such  papers? — A.  No.  And  wo  do  not 
acknowledge  the  validity  of  their  papers  at  all. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Did  you  seize  vessels  for  preparing  to  fish  ? — A.  I  seized  one  under 
suub  circumstances. 
Q.  What  was  she  doing  at  tbe  time? — A.  Buying  bait. 
Q.  What  was  her  name? — A.  The  J.  H.  Nickerson. 
■■•.  The  case  was  tried  here  ?— A.  Yes ;  all  these  cases  were  tried  here. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Was  this  previous  to  the  Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  Yes ;  it  was 
done  while  I  was  in  a  cutter. 

Q.  She  was  one  of  tbe  vessels  sold  under  decision  of  tbe  admiralty 
court  f — A.  Yes.  Perhaps  it  would  only  be  right  for  me  to  explain  that 
I  seized  her  on  the  second  occasion  of  her  violation  of  the  law  to  my 
knowledge.  The  first  time  I  caught  her  I  drove  her  off  and  she  came 
back  within  three  days  and  repeated  the  offense. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  You  seized  the  vessel  for  buying  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 
Q.  What  were  the  men  on  board  of  her  doing  on  the  first  occasion  ?— 


876 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


A.  They  'vere  buying  bait    I  warned  her  off  and  the  vessel  after  a  whilo 
went  away,  but  within  three  days  she  returned  to  the  same  spot. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  And  you  warned  off  a  good  many  other  vessels? — A.  I  did. 

Q.  It  was  considered  part  of  your  business  when  you  found  an  Ameri- 
can vessel  buying  bait  on  the  coast  to  warn  her  off? — A.  I  had  no  orders 
to  warn  them  off,  but  I  had  orders  to  seize  them  for  violation  of'  the 
treaty. 

Q.  But  you  did  give  her  notice? — A.  Yes.  I  took  that  responsibility 
upon  myself. 

Q.  Tliis  was  the  sort  of  thing  of  which  the  Americans  complained, 
was  it  not ! — A..  I  do  not  think  that  they  complained  of  that  particularly 
more  than  they  did  of  .inything  else. 

Q.  The  vessel  was  condemned  here  in  Nova  Scotia? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  found  a  judge  in  Nova  Scotia  who  held  that  buying  bait  was 
a  violation  of  the  treaty,  because  buying  bait  was  preparing  to  fish  ?— 
A.  He  condemned  her. 

Q.  And  they  held  the  other  way  in  New  Brunswick,  did  they  not  ?— 
A.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  that. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 
Q.  She  was  buying  bait  to  go  cod  fisLing" — A.  I  cannot  say  wliether 
the  bait  was  caught  or  given,  but  I  presume  that  she  was  buying  it. 

No.  48. 

Robert  McDougall,  of  Port  Hood,  in  the  county  of  Inverness,  C. 
B.,  sheriff  of  the  county,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her 
Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  You  are  sheriff  of  the  county  of  Inverness  ? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  You  reside  at  Port  Hood,  the  shiretown  of  the  county  ? — A.  Yo.<. 

Q.  Previous  to  your  appointmeut  as  sheriff  you  were,  I  believe,  car- 
rying on  bus'ness  ? — A.  I  was. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  say  hovv  many  years  ? — A.  I  have  \w^\i 
carrying  on  business  for  myself  for  sixteen  years,  and  I  was  carrying  ou 
business  for  another  man  in  the  same  locality  eight  years. 

Q.  That  is  24  years  altogether?  — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  Pott  Hood  ? — A.  Ye»,  part  of  the  time  on  the  island. 

Q.  That  is  at  the  mouth  of  the  port  ? — A.  Yes;  the  island  is  the  cause 
of  the  harbor. 

Q.  At  what  time  were  you  appointed  sheriff? — A.  In  18G9  j  in  Feb 
ruary. 

Q.  You  had  an  opportunity  of  communicating  personally  with  a  large 
number  of  skippers  of  American  vessels? — A.  I  had. 

Q.  Did  they  deal  with  you  ? — A.  Tliey  did,  sir. 

Q.  Did  they  deal  with  the  gentleni.m  whom  you  served  previously?— 
A.  They  did,  sir. 

Q.  Then  during  that  period  you  had  constant  )pportunity  of  meeting 
them  ?--A.  I  had. 

Q.  .  )uring  the  tishing  season,  were  they  in  and  out  of  your  place  fre 
quently  ? — A.  They  were. 

Q.  What  number  have  you  seen  In  that  port  at  a  time? — A.  Tlie 
most  I  can  say  upon  oath  that  I  ever  saw  was  about  300  sails. 

Q.  At  anchor  in  your  harbor  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


877 


lat  respousibility 


Q.  At  one  time  1 — A.  Yes;  I  remember  getting  upon  a  high  hill  and 
couuting  them. 

Q.  How  far  is  the  island  from  the  town  ? — A.  A  mile  and  a  half. 

Q,  Did  they  flsh  between  the  island  and  the  laud  ever? — A.  Well,  I 
saw  tliem  tishing  at  anchor  in  the  harbor. 

Q.  Well,  did  the  mackerel  frequent  the  shore  between  that  island 
and  the  town  ? — A.  The  mackerel  comes  right  into  the  harbor  along  the 
coast  as  far  as  the  eye  can  reach  on  each  side,  north  and  south. 

Q.  And  do  they  frequent  the  shores  of  the  island  itself? — A.  Yes,  they 
do. 

Q.  Then  they  frequent  the  shores  of  the  harbor  and  of  the  island  ?— • 
A.  They  do 

Q.  The  American  vessels  fish  for  them  between  the  island  and  the 
town  ? — A.  Well,  I  have  often  seen  them  raise  mackerel  in  the  harbor 
and  fi.sli  away  there  ;  but  they  go  out  in  the  bay  to  tish.  They  geuer- 
ally  go  out  of  the  harbor,  north,  south,  and  west,  and  lay  to. 

Q.  These  skippers  dealt  with  you  during  the  time  you  did  business  ? — 
A.  Yes,  considerably. 

Q,  They  bought  certain  articles  that  they  required  on  board  their 
vessels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  any  large  extent  ? — A.  !No ;  they  generally  got  some  wood  and 
some  provisions  that  they  wanted. 

Q.  Well,  I  would  like  you  to  state  to  the  Commission,  without  going 
ii)(0  details  for  that  long  [)eriod,  the  nature  of  that  trade,  what  advan- 
tage it  was  to  you  and  what  advantage  it  was  to  them. — A.  Well,  the 
first  year  I  went  there  on  my  own  account.  I  hadn't  half  enougli  of 
anything  that  they  wanted.  Next  year  I  went  largely  into  it.  I  im- 
ported largely,  and  that  year  1  didn't  do  anything  at  all.  Then  I  was 
overstocked. 

Q.  So  from  year  to  year  you  could  not  tell  exactly  ? — A.  No ;  and 
eventually  I  had  to  cave  in,  as  the  saying  is.    I  failed. 

Q.  After  all  that  long  period  of  endeavor  to  serve  them  and  make 
money  out  of  them  ? — A.  Yes.  One  year  1  would  have  a  rush  and 
another  year  nothing. 

Q.  To  attract  them  at  all,  it  was  necessary  to  have  everything  that 
would  be  required  ? — A.  A  little  of  everything.  If  1  had  stuck  to  my 
owu  people  and  kept  nothing  but  what  they  wanted,  I  would  have  beeu 
better  off. 

Q.  Do  you  give  that  as  a  fair  illustration  of  the  value  of  the  trade 
witit  the  American  mackerelers  on  that  coast  ? — A.  1  do, 

Q.  There  are  a  number  of  other  gentlemen,  also,  that  carried  on  that 
same  business  in  the  strait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Generally  speaking,  how  have  they  fared? — A.  As  far  as  my  opin- 
ion goes,  and  from  what  I  know,  when  tlie  American  tishermen  left  otl" 
coming  in  the  bay — there  was  hardly  a  man  in  the  Gut  of  (Janso  but 
when  the  Americans  failed  to  come  in  the  bay  they  failed  in  their  busi- 
ness. 

Q.  Well,  during  the  period  that  business  went  on,  however,  all  that 
length  of  time,  what  kind  of  a  business  was  it;  was  it  profitable  from 
yeiu'  to  year! — A.  No;  they  always  told  me  that  it  was  an  uuprofital  le 
tnisincss. 

Q.  Well,  during  the  period  you  were  going  on  did  you  find  it  fluctuate 
in  such  a  way  that  you  werp  embarrassed  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Continually  f — A.  Yes ;  it  was  not  a  sure  business  at  all. 

Q.  They  bought  just  what  was  necessary  ? — A.  Yes  ;  that  was  all. 

Q-  Was  it  an  advantage  to  them  to  get  these  things  ?   Could  not  they 


I'':* 


">i"; 


878 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


send  home  or  go  home? — A.  O,  they  could  have  sent  for  them,  but  it 
WHS  an  advantage  to  them  to  get  them  there,  for  they  might  lose  a  great 
deai  of  fishing  by  having  to  go  home. 

Q.  What  kind  of  things  did  they  get? — A.  Wood,  butter,  sugar,  mo- 
lasses. 

Q.  Vegetables  ? — A.  Yes,  potatoes. 

Q.  Well,  did  you  keep  a  supply  of  that  kind  of  thing  for  thera  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  That  is  perishable  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  money  on  that? — A.  ifo;  for  instance,  this  time 
I  was  telling  you  about,  when  a  large  fleet  was  in  the  bay.  It  was  not 
one  time  but  several  times  that  there  was  a  large  fleet,  but  this  time 
they  got  a  good  supply.  They  would  clean  me  out,  and  I  would  get  a 
good  supply  next  time,  when  perhaps  they  would  not  come  in  iit  all, 
I  had  to  throw  out  200  or  300  barrels  of  potatoes. 

Q.  I  don't  want  you  to  go  into  details  largely,  but  <h>  \ou  give  tliis 
as  a  frank  description  of  the  kind  of  trade  that  is  carried  on  ? — A.  Yes. 
A  stranger  to  come  in  would  think  w^e  wert»  making  money  hand  over 
fist  some  days,  but  at  the  last  we  would  make  nothing. 

Q.  They  would  go  to  Souris  or  somewhere  else  next  time? — A.  Ye^ 

Q.  When  there  were  300  of  their  fleet  in  there,  what  proportion  diil 
they  usually  estimate  that  to  be  of  the  whole  fleet  in  the  bay  ?— A.  I 
never  knew  of  any  more  than  600  being  in  the  bay. 

Q.  What  did  they  estimate  it  to  be  themselves? — A.  1  know  T  i; 
often  asked  them.    I  used  to  think  the  whole  fleet  must  be  in.     '  n 
used  to  say  generally  that  there  was  only  half  of  them. 

Q.  That  was  when  there  were  how  many  in  ? — A.  Three  hundred. 

Q.  Would  you  give  that  as  a  general  average  there? — A.  Y^es. 

Q.  How  much?— A.  About  300. 

Q.  But  you  said  before  that  was  half? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  they  say  that  was  half,  or  that  it  was  not  half? — A.  Tbey 
would  say  about  half. 

Q.  Then  you  would  give  600  as  the  general  average? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Ilave  you  heard  of  a  larger  number  being  in  some  seasons?— A. 
No,  not  of  the  Americans. 

Q.  We  had  an  American  captain  who  said  he  was  in  the  bay  with 
900? — A.  I  never  heard  of  900  being  in  the  bay. 

Q.  Well,  then,  you  give  600  as  the  average? — A.  Yes.  Of  course, 
these  last  years  there  is  nothing  like  that. 

Q.  There  are  fewer? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  is  it  this  year  ?  Is  the  fishing  likely  to  be  better? — A.  Well, 
tliCise  four  years  past,  since  the  American  vessels  don't  come  as  luimer 
ously  as  they  used  to,  our  boatmen  have  fairly  made  what  they  call  n 
little  fortune. 

Q.  These  boatmen  have  made  a  little  fortune? — A.  Yes,  some  of  them. 

Q.  How  many  are  there  of  them  ? — A.  I  have  counted  CO  in  one  day, 
not  over  a  fortnight  ago. 

Q.  Canadian  boats  ? — A.  Port  Hood  boats.  I  saw  them  in  one  string. 
They  go  together.  The  more  the  boats  are  tied  together  the  less  I  ait  it 
requires.  Very  little  bait  comparatively  does  them,  and  when  they  are 
together  they  keep  the  school  alongside  of  them. 

Q.  So  that  yon  would  consider  that  the  flsh  are  there  ready  to  be 
caught? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  ready  to  take  either  hook,  British  or  American  '—A 


Y'es,  indeed.     Well,  they  tell 
that  they  don't  bite. 


mo  that  the  flsh  are  plenty  as  ever, 


but 


111 


AWARD   OF   THE   FiSHERY   COMMISSION. 


879 


mtter,  sugar,  mo- 


ig  for  them  ?— A. 


there  ready  to  be 


Q.  Well,  how  did  they  make  their  little  fortunes  then  ? — A.  By  catch- 
iug  mackerel. 

Q,  Those  mackerel  that  did  bite? — A.  Yes. 

,}.  Then  there  must  be  an  immensequantity,  if  there  is  besides  those 
tliat  tliey  catch  a  large  quantity  that  do  not  bite  ? — A.  You  could  take 
them  up  in  a  scoop-net,  sometimes,  they  are  so  thick  there.  I  have  often 
gone  iu  a  boat  myself  for  the  novelty  of  the  thing. 

Q.  I  believe  the  Americans  have  a  better  way  of  taking  them  than 
we  have — some  improved  bait? — A.  1  believe  they  had  at  that  time, 
but  I  think  some  of  our  men  are  fully  able  to  catch  them  now  with  the 
AinericJins.  At  that  time,  when  the  Americans  used  to  frequent  the 
place,  they  were  no  doubt  ahead. 

Q.  Since  you  have  been  appointed  to  your  oflBce  you  do  not  know  so 
ninch  about  the  matter? — A.  No,  only  what  I  can  hear.  The  fishermen 
around  there  tell  me  that  since  the  Americans  left  oii"  going  down  they 
caii<j;ht  their  fish  right  inshore. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  know  where  the  American  cod-fishing  fleet  procure 
tbeir  bait? — A.  Yes,  a  good  many  of  them. 

Q.  Before  I  leave  this  matter,  do  you  know  from  the  Americans  them- 
selves wiiere  they  fished — how  near  the  shore  they  fished  ?  I'^ou  have 
seen  tliem,.bave  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Wiipre  ? — A.  Within  three  miles  of  the  shore  often. 

Q.  What  is  their  usual  method  of  fishing ;  when  they  come  in  where 
dotiieyruu  first? — A.  Between  Port  Hood  and  Ma rgaieo,  and  iu  Bay 
Saint  George. 

Q.  How  close  do  they  come? — A.  When  they  first  commence  to 
throw  bait  they  are  from  half  a  mile  to  a  mile  and  a  half  or  two  miles. 
I  have  seen  them  come  over  where  a  boat  would  be  fishing  from  half  a 
mile  to  two  miles  out,  and  I  have  seen  the  vessels  go  and  take  the 
school  away  from  the  boats. 

Q.  Well,  state  whether  their  usual  habit  is  to  fish  within  or  without  ?— • 
A.  The  usual  rule  when  there  was  no  cutter  was  to  fish  w'.thiu  three 
miles. 

Q.  Now  tell  me  if  you  know  this  from  the  Americans  themselves,  or 
whether  you  saw  them  day  after  day  ? — A.  Some  used  to  tell  me  that 
only  for  these  cutters  they  conld  load  up  in  no  time.  1  have  often  and 
often  heard  them  say  that.  In  fact,  iu  those  days  I  rather  liked  the 
Americans. 

Q.  You  didn't  want  them  i  >»  break  the  law  ? — A.  No.  I  used  to  like 
tlieui  as  a  peoi)le,  and  they  used  to  deal  with  me,  and  they  would  express 
anything  to  me. 

Q.  They  would  express  themselves  fully  to  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  heard  them  over  and  over  again  si\y  that  only  for  the 
cutters  they  would  be  able  to  load  up  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  1  was  asking  you  as  to  the  cod-fishers,  where  the;  '  .i  jure  their 
bait;  the  American  cod  fishing  vessels  ? — A.  I  don't  mind  tnat  any  of 
those  vessels  caught  their  own  bait,  but  they  used  to  come  inshore  to 
buy  it. 

Q.  You  don't  remember  their  cat(!hing  bait  at  Port  Hood? — A.  No. 

Q.  Their  practice  was  to  buy  from  the  boats? — A.  Yes.  Soujetimes 
tbey  u,->ed  to  run  their  cha?ice  of  nets.  They  would  get  a  fisherman's 
net  and  give  him  so  much  lor  the  chance.  For  instance,  if  they  came 
inshore  they  would  ask  how  ma-iy  nets  there  were.  They  would  say, 
"How  much  will  you  take  for  your  chance  for  the  night  ?" 

Q.  They  would  pay  them  so  much  i;>r  the  hire  for  the  night? 

Mr.  Foster.  That  is  not  the  statement  of  the  witness. 


feir.M: 


8    ■»«(«»•: 


'^mUiit 


m 


880 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Who  would  use  tbat  net?  Who  would  handle  it  I — A.  The  Amer- 
icans would  use  it,  and  take  the  fish  out  next  morning. 

Q.  They  would  pay  so  much  to  the  men  for  it  ? — A  Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  usual  or  unusual  ? — A.  It  was  usual,  especially  on  Sat 
urday,  if  it  is  not  unfair  to  say  it. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  you  whether  you  think  cod-fishing  could  be 
carried  on  without  getting  that  bait?— A.  I  could  not  say,  there  might 
be  other  ports. 

Q.  Unless  they  procured  fresh  bait  on  our  shores,  could  they  carry  on 
the  fisheries  profitably  by  bringing  salt  bait  from  home? — A.  No,  no; 
they  could  not  do  it. 

Q.  Do  you  lappen  to  know  whether  that  is  the  opinion  of  the  skip- 
pers of  the  cod  fishing  vessels  I — A.  Well,  I  have  never  got  any  opin- 
ion from  them,  out  I  have  seen  it  myself. 

Q.  Have  you  paid  attention  to  the  matter  as  to  whether  during  the 
period  vvhen  the  duties  were  imposed  on  mackerel  the  fishermen  got  as 
much  for  them  as  they  did  before  or  afterward  ? — A.  I  always  conaid 
ered  if  there  was  a  duty  imposed  that  they  got  the  same;  that  when 
th'3  duty  was  taken  olf,  of  course  they  got  the  same  price,  less  the  duty. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  price  they  would  take  for  fish  I — A.  I  have 
known  maekerel  as  high  as  $23. 

Q.  Do  you  know  as  to  the  price  they  got  for  mackerel  at  the  time  the 
duty  was  imposed  ?  At  the  time  there  was  a  duty  on  mackerel  do  you 
know  what  the  price  was  ?  Take  from  1860  to  1872  and  1873,  do  you 
knov;  what  the  price  was  then  ? — A.  I  could  not  say,  but  I  know  during 
the  Reciprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  What  was  the  price  then  ? — Well,  I  went  up  myself  in  an  Amer- 
ican vessel  and  I  got  $22 ;  some  got  $23. 

Q.  What  year  would  that  be  ? — A.  That  would  be  1860,  about. 

Q.  But  I  was  asking  you  as  to  the  price  the  mackerel  sold  for  at  your 
place  ? — A.  What  year  ? 

Q.  Take  1868  or  1869  ?— A.  Well,  about  $10  was  what  we  gave  for 
the  mackerel  out  of  the  boats.  We  never  bought  from  the  Americans, 
you  know.    That  is  what  I  bought  them  for  out  of  the  boats  myselt. 

Q.  That  is  what  yoa  paid  your  own  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  tbat  a  pretty  good  price? — A.  Yes,  a  pretty  fair  price;  it 
would  not  be  the  average  though,  because  it  would  be  for  good  mack 
erel ;  there  are  three  qualities. 

Q.  That  WPS  fresh  at  your  own  wharf? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  pay  more? — A.  Yes;  $19. 

Q.  What  year;  this  very  year,  1860? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  was  an  exceptional  year  ? — A.  No  doubt  of  it. 

Q.  Very  exceptional  ? — A.  1  do  not  believe  they  ever  were  so  high 
since. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  what  was  the  average  from  1866  to  1872  ?— A. 
The  mackerel  have  been  coming  down  ;  I  would  not  like  to  say  n'ore 
than  $10  in  that  period.    I  do  not  remember. 

Q.  What  time  did  you  speak  of  dealing  in  mackerel  ? — A.  About  0 
years  ago,  or  8  years  ago. 

Q.  You  haven't  dealt  in  mackerel  since  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  are  you  acquainted  with  the  prices? — A.  Yes;  I  am. 

ii.  What  were  they  on  an  average,  if  yon  can  i-ecollect? — A.  1  would 
not  say  for  the  average,  taking  all  the  numbers,  over  $6. 

Q.  Since  the  Washington  Treaty  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1868-'69  you  say  they  were  about  $10?— A.  Yes;  I  should  say 
so. 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


881 


—A.  TheAtner- 


self  iu  an  Amer- 


r  were  so  hijrli 


?— A.  xVbout  9 


;? — A.  J  would 


Q.  Did  they  continue  that  average  down  to  the  treaty? — A.  I  should 
think  they  did.  I  made  a  low  average  because  that  oue  year  they  were 
so  high. 

Q.  But  that  was  long  previously  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  you  say  that  for  several  years  previously  to  the  Washington 
Treaty  the  average  was  about  $10  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  was  fresh  mackerel,  bought  from  the  boats  at  your  place  1 — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  since  the  treaty  $(»  would  be  a  fair  average! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  me  what  the  general  opinion  of  your  people  is  with 
regard  to  excluding  the  Americans  from  fishing?  Do  they  think  it 
woul'l  be  better  for  our  fishermen  if  the  Americans  were  strictly  ex- 
cluded from  three  miles  from  the  shore,  generally  speaking? — A.  I  have 
talked  to  several  of  them.  Their  opinion  is  that  if  the  American  people 
were  excluded  from  our  waters,  our  own  people  that  are  away  in  the 
States  would  come  home  and  fish  at  home,  and  perhaps  the  consequence 
would  be  that  a  good  mauy  Americans  would  follow  them  and  fish  here  j 
and  the  increase  of  people  is  the  making  of  a  place. 

Q.  My  question  is  whether,  if  the  Americans  were  excluded,  our  peo- 
pie  would  prefer  it ;  that  is,  to  have  our  fisheries  to  themselves  ? — A. 
Of  course  they  would.    That  is  what  I  say ;  they  would. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  whether  they  attribute  their  making  money  lat- 
terly to  having  the  fisheries  to  themselves.  You  say  they  have  made 
little  fortunes  lately.  The  Americans  have  not  come  in,  so  many  of 
them? — A.  No.  I  have  known  some  of  our  fishermen,  that  are  half 
Ushermen  and  half  farmers,  pay  as  high  as  a  dollar  a  day  to  a  man  to 
do  their  work  on  shore  and  go  out  themselves  fishing,  and  get  as  much 
as  would  pay  a -man  a  month's  wages  iu  one  day.  1  know  they  attrib- 
ute their  success  to  the  fact  of  the  Americans  not  taking  the  fish  away 
into  deep  water.    They  used  to  do  that ;  there  is  no  doubt  about  it. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  of  any  Canadian  vessel  going  down  into  the 
American  waters  to  fish  ? — A.  I  believe  I  did,  not  long  ago. 

Q.  From  whom  ?— A.  I  think  I  saw  it  in  the  paper. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  whether  it  was  a  real  vessel  or  not  ? — A.  I  could 
not  tell ;  but  I  heard  people  talking  about  it,  that  it  was  a  made-up 
thing. 

Q.  How  mauy  years  since  you  heard  of  that  vessel? — A.  I  heard  of 
it  this  year. 

'^  Did  you  ever  hear  of  that  or  any  other  before  ? — A.  No. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  In  wliat  year  did  you  begin  business  for  yourself? — A.  Eighteen 
liuiKlred  and  fifty-two. 

Q.  What  year  was  it  that  you  failed  ? — A.  Eighteen  hundred  and 
sixty,  1  think. 

Q.  What  year  was  it  that  you  got  300  bushels  of  potatoes  to  sell  to 
the  Americans,  and  liad  to  loso  them  all  ? — A.  I  could  not  tell  you. 

Q.  Well,  wliat  year  was  it  th«it  the  Americans  began  to  fall  oil"  from 
•  oming  ?— A.  Well,  it  was  about  six  years  ago  that  they  began  to  fall 

ott', 

Q.  Yon  have  had  very  few  since? — A.  Very  few,  comparatively 
'^peiikiiig.  Sometimes  the  mackerel  would  strike  over  to  Prince  Edward 
I'^liuul,  and,  although  we  would  not  see  the  fish,  they  might  be  there. 

Q.  But  in  your  place,  these  six  years  past,  you  have  had  very  few  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

'i'.  Wiis  it  the  falling  off  of  the  Americans  that  made  your  business 
"jOp 


:^r---'i 


"^'^-.^ 


882 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


fall  off? — A.  Yea.    My  business?    No,  it  was  not.    It  was  jnst  thati 
prepared  too  much  for  them.    I  went  in  debt  to  prepare  for  tbeui. 

Q.  You  went  too  far  from  shore? — A.  Yes;  if  that  is  what  you  call 
it. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  all  the  people  engaged  in  this  business  failed  wlun 
the  Americans  ceased  to  come  there  ? — A.  Yes;  they  broke  down.  Well. 
they  had  no  capital  to  go  on. 

Q.  When  the  Americans  ceased  to  come  they  all  failed  ? — A.  They  all 
failed  before. 

Q.  1  thought  you  were  making  money  hand  over  flst  ? — A.  We  were 
just  between  wind  and  water. 

Q.  What  did  you  expect  the  result  to  be  if  you  could  ever  exclude  the 
Americans  from  your  inshore  fisheries ?  Was  it  that  jour  youiiii;  men 
who  had  gone  to  the  United  States  would  come  back  ? — A.  Yes ;  1 
think  so. 

Q.  Are  there  a  great  many  of  them  now  fishing  in  American  ves 
sels  ? — A.  A  great  many. 

Q.  They  generally  all  settle  in  the  States? — A.  Principally. 

Q.  So  that  you  actually  lose  population  ? — A.  O,  some  of  them  coiue 
home  in  the  winter. 

Q.  They  usually  come  home  better  off  ? — A.  I  think  some  of  them  are 
worse  off.  Some  of  them  have  eventually  to  come  home  with  their  wives 
and  children  to  live  with  their  parents. 

Q.  So  you  think  when  the  Americans  came  there  they  hurt  you,  aud  I 
when  they  ceased  coming  tliey  hurt  you,  and  when  your  people  go  tu  | 
the  States  it  is  injurious,  and  it  is  a  bad  business  all  round. 


No.  49. 


Thursday,  Augmt  30. 


The  Conference  met. 


P.  FoRTiN,  of  the  city  of  Quebec,  member  of  the  Legislature  of  tlie] 
Province  of  Quebec,  called  on  behalf  of  che  G-overnment  of  Her  Britau 
Die  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Doutre : 

Question.  You  are  a  member  of  the  Legislature  of  the  Province  of  j 
Quebec? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  been,  lately,  I  think,  speaker  of  that  assembly  ? — A.  Yes;| 
I  have  been  speaker. 

Q.  You  were  for  sometime  a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons  of  Ot  j 
tawa  ? — A.  I  was  for  seven  years — from  1867  to  1873. 

Q.  From  what  fact  do  you  derive  the  title  which  is  given  yoit  of  cap 
tain  ? — A.  Because  I  was  commander  of  a  vessel  for  the  protectiou  ot| 
the  fisheries  for  sixteen  years. 

Q.  From  what  period  ?— A.  From  1852  to  18G7,  inclusive. 

Q.  What  was  the  mission  with  which  you  were  intrusted  ? — A.  Myl 
mission  was  to  insure  peace  and  order.  It  was  to  insure  the  observancej 
of  the  fishery  laws  and  keep  peace  aud  order  on  the  coast  and  ia  tlie( 
harbors. 

Q.  You  were  for  that  purpose  a  stipendiary  magistrate  ? — A.  Yes;  II 
had  also  the  powers  of  sheriff  and  recorder. 

Q.  It  gavo  you  authority  over  all  that  part  of  the  province  ? — A.  Yes,j 
the  sea-coast  of  the  Province  of  Quebec. 

Q.  How  far  does  that  coast  extend  ? — A.  It  extends  on  the  north  coast! 
of  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  .as  far  as  Blanc  Sablou,  the  limit  botweeaj 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


883 


iu  A.merican  ves 


5DAY,  August  30. 


It  includes  Mag- 


the  Province  of  Quebec  and  the  territory  of  Labrador,  which  is  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  Newfoundland. 

{},  And  on  the  south  coast? — A.  To  the  Kestigouche  shore,  the  limit 
between  the  Province  of  Quebec  and  New  Brunswick. 
daleu  Islands  and  the  Island  of  Anticosti. 

Q.  Where  does  the  river  St.  Lawrence  end,  according  to  arrange- 
ments made,  and  where  does  the  gulf  begin,  according  to  arrangement  ? — 
A.  Well,  according  to  the  decision  made  by  the  Commissioners  in  virtue 
of  the  Keciprocity  Treaty,  the  estuary  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence  was 
limited  to  a  line  running  from  Point  des  Monts  on  the  north  shore  to 
a  little  above  Cape  Chatte;  it  is  about  Cape  Chatte  on  the  south  shore. 

Q.  Well,  what  is  the  extent  of  the  coast  ? — A.  About  1,000  miles. 
The  extent  of  the  coast  of  the  Province  of  Quebec  on  which  the  fish- 
eries of  Canada  are  conducted  is  about  1,000  miles,  including  the  coast 
of  Anticosti  and  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Well,  have  I  seen  how  far  up  the  river  the  flslieri(!s  were  carried 
011^— A.  They  were  carried  on  on  the  north  shore  as  I'ar  as  St.  Nicholas 
Harbor. 

Q.  How  far  above  Point  des  Monts  is  St.  Nicholas  Bay  ? — A.  About 
23  miles. 

Q.  Ou  the  south  shore? — A.  As  far  up  as  Mantane,  about  50  miles  to 
the  westward  of  Cape  Chatte. 

Q.  What  are  the  tish — the  kind  of  flsh  considered  as  sea  ftsh — that 
are  caught  iu  the  Quebec  waters? — A.  The  food  flshes  are  the  herring, 
mackerel,  codfish,  and  halibut.    These  are  the  principal  fish. 

Q.  Well,  we  will  begin  with  the  cod.  Is  the  cod  an  important  part 
of  the  flishery  ? — A.  Yes;  I  should  think  it  is  the  most  important  fish- 
ery. 

Q.  What  indications  of  its  importaace  are  there  ou  the  coast? — A. 
There  are  a  great  number  of  establishments  all  over  the  coast.  I  could 
jj'ive  you  the  list. 

Q.  You  might  give  the  names  of  the  parties. — A..  I  will  begin  at 
Cape  Chatte  and  go  down  as  far  as  Bay  t  iialeurs,  and  then  take  up  the 
uorth  shore.  They  are  as  follows :  From  the  south  shore  of  the  river 
St.  Lawrence  to  the  head  of  Bale  des  Chaleurs :  Cap  de  Chatte,  MM. 
Louis  Roy  and  Theodore  LaMontagne ;  St.  Anne  des  Monts,  Horatio 
LeBontillier,  Theodore  LaMontagne,  and  L.  Godereau ;  Montlouis,  H. 
LeBontillier  aud  Messrs.  Fruing  &  Co.;  Grande  Vallee,  F.  Dionne  and 
Messrs.  Fruing  &  Co.;  Grand  Etang,  Messrs.  F.  &  M.  L'Esperance ; 
Fox  River,  L.  Blouin,  B.  Levine,  Messrs.  Fruing  &  Co.,  and  Charles  Le 
Boutillier;  Gi'iflin  Cove,  Charles  LeBoutillier  and  Messrs.  Fruing  & 
Co.;  Cap  des  Hosiers,  Charles  LeBontillier  and  W^illiam  Hyman;  Grande 
Greve,  Messrs.  Fruing  &  Co.  and  William  Hyman;  Gaspe  Basin,  J.  «& 
E.  Collas,  Charles  LeBoutillier,  Messrs.  Fruing  &  Co.,  and  William  Hy- 
niiiii;  Douglastown,  Charles  Veit  and  William  Lindsay;  Point  St. 
Peter,  John  Fauvel,  J.  »&  E.  Collas,  Messrs.  Jacques  Alexandre  »&  Co., 
iiudJolin  LeGresley;  Barachois,  Patrick  Jones;  Perce,  Messrs.  Charles 
liobii)  &  Co.,  Messrs.  Valpy  &  Co.,  and  Abraham  LeBrun  ;  Bonaven- 
tine  Island,  Messrs.  LeBoutillier  Bros. ;  L'Anse  an  Beau  Fils,  Messrs. 
Charles  Robin  &  Co.;  Cape  Cove,  Hon.  Thomas  Savage,  James  Baker, 
Messrs.  Charles  Robin  &  Co.,  D.  Ahern,  and  John  liaker ;  Grand  River, 
Messrs.  Charles  Robin  &  Co.,  Thomas  Carbery,  L.  E.  Joncas,  and  Joseph 
Sirois;  Little  Pabas,  J.  C.  Tetu,  Messrs.  Charles  Robin  c^'  Co.,  D.  Man- 
ger, J.  Duguay,  and  J.  O'Connor  ;  Grand  Pabas,  Hon.  Thomas  Savage; 
Newport,  Messrs.  Charles  Robin  &  Co. ;  Paspebiae,  Messrs.  LeBoutil- 
lier Bros,  and  Messrs.  Charles  Robin  &  Co.    North  shore  of  river  aud 


^^A  '*\:::' 


!  iiniFS  U^^tl 


9, 

U:^M  -' 

;  ft    ' 

"•'i':\ 

*#r:"* 


•884 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Gnlf  of  St.  Lawrence :  ^Moisic,  John  Halliday  and  Messrs.  J.  &  K.  Col- 
las  ;  Shell  Drake,  Messrs.  J.  &  E.  CoUas  and  L.  Tonzel ;  Thunder  Kiver 
Messrs.  LeBoutillier  Bros.;  Dock,  Messrs.  Charles  Kobin  &  Co.;  Mag- 
pie, Messrs.  Charles  Robin  &  Co. ;  St.  John  River,  V.  Sirois,  Messrs.  J. 
&  E.  Collas,  and  C.  Hamilton  ;  Long  Point,  C.  Hamilton  and  .1.  Fauvel ; 
Esquimaux  Point,  Charles  LeBoutillier  and  Mrs.  Ruel;  Natfishquaii' 
Messrs.  Charles  Robin  &  Co. ;  Salmon  Bay,  William  Whitely  and  Cap! 
tain  Dodge,  Newburyport ;  Green  Island,  Messrs.  LeBoutillier  Bros.; 
Wood  Island,  Messrs.  LeBoutillier  Bros. ;  Blanc  Sablon,  Messrs.  Fruiiig 
&  Co.  Magdalen  Islands:  Amherst  Island,  J.  B.  F.  Painchaud,  Da^ 
mien  Devauy,  W.  O'Gilvie,  and  Hon.  Thomas  Savage  &  Co.;  Griml- 
stone  Lsland,  J.  B.  F.  Painchaud,  Hon.  Thomas  Savage,  and  William 
Leslie  &  Co.;  House  Harbor,  Messrs.  Frederick  Arsenault  &  Co.,  Wil- 
liam  Johnson,  and  R.  Delaney;  Grosse  Isle,  Neil  McPhail.  Anticosti: 
English  Bay,  Charles  LeBoutillier;  Southwest  Point,  Captain  Setter. 

Q.  All  those  establishments  deal  exclusively  in  codf — A.  Yes;  their 
principal  business  is  codfish.  Sometimes  herring  and  mackerel  are 
dealt  in,  but  not  much.    The  principal  is  codfish. 

Q.  Do  any  of  those  establishments  resort  to  Newfoundland  for  cod  ?— 
A.  Not  at  all ;  never. 

Q.  Well,  where  is  all  their  cod  caught  ? — A.  On  the  shore  and  from 
boats. 

Q.  Is  all  the  cod  they  deal  in  caught  in  Quebec  waters  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  boats? — A.  I'es,  and  they  fish  from  the  shore. 

Q.  What  kind  of  boats  ?  Open  boats  ? — A.  Fis  hing  boats  manned  by 
two  men. 

Q.  Do  they  remain  overnights  on  the  river  fishing? — A.  Sometimes, 
when  they  go  on  the  Banks.  When  they  don't  go  on  the  Banks  they 
never  remain  overnight. 

Q.  Name  the  banks  and  their  extent  which  exist  in  these  waters  — 
A.  On  the  north  shore  I  know  of  only  two  Bunks  of  small  extent.  St. 
John  or  Mingan  and  Natashquan. 

Q.  St.  John  and  Mingan  are  the  same  thing  ? — A.  Yes,  the  same 
Bank.    Six  or  seven  miles  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Of  what  length  is  it? — A.  They  lie  about  six  or  seven  miles  from 
the  shore,  but  they  merge  into  the  shoal  flshe'^^es.  They  are  not  dis- 
tinct from  the  shoal  fisheries.    They  are  seven  or  eight  miles  in  length. 

Q.  What  is  the  length  of  the  Natashquan  ? — A.  It  is  about  ten  miles 
in  length.    These  are  all  the  Banks  on  the  north  side. 

^i.  1^  ow,  on  the  south  side  ? — A.  Well,  from  Matane  (o  Cape  Gaspe, 
in  what  is  called  the  river  St.  Lawrence,  there  are  no  banks.  The  fish- 
ing is  all  carried  on  within  three  miles,  and  sometimes  within  two 
miles.  Then  there  are  two  Banks  opposite  the  shore  of  Gaspe  and  Bay 
Chaleur.  There  is  a  Bank  called  Point  Saint  Peter's  Bank,  which  is 
very  small,  ten  miles  out.  It  is  a  very  small  Bank,  three  or  four  miles 
in  extent.  Then  there  is  Bank  Miscou,  or  Orphan,  a  Bank  lying  off 
the  coast  of  Miscou ;  also  off  the  coast  of  Gasp6  or  Bay  Chaleur,  a  dis- 
tance of  about  twenty  miles — fifteen  or  twenty  miles. 

Q.  Now,  taking  into  account  these  Banks,  could  you  state  how  far 
from  the  shore,  or,  rather,  could  you  state  what  proportion  of  the  whole 
quantity  of  cod  taken  is  caught  within  three  miles? — A.  Taking  into  ac- 
count that  only  our  people  that  are  settled  on  St.  John's  River  and  a  place 
called  Long  Point  visit  this  Mingan  or  St.  John's  Bank,  also  that  but 
few  fishermen  from  Natashquan  go  on  the  Bank,  that  is  of  our  own  fish- 
ermen, and  taking  into  account  that  our  fishermen  generally  go  ou  tlie 
Bank  only  in  two  or  three  places,  I  should  think  that  more  than  three- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


885 


J.  &  E.  Col. 
luuder  lliver, 
&  Co.;  Mag- 
is,  Messrs.  J. 
ul  .1 .  Fauvel ; 
Natasbquaii, 
ely  aud  Cap- 
itillicr  Bros.; 
[essrs.  Truing 
uncbaud,  Da- 
Co.  ;   Grind- 
and  William 
t  &  Co.,  Wil- 
1.    Auticosti : 
3tain  Setter. 
A.  Yes;  tbeir 
mackerel  are 

und  for  cod  ?— 

bore  and  from 

?— A.  Yes. 

•ats  manned  by 

A.  Sometimes, 
lie  Banks  they 

jtbese  waters.— 
II  extent.    St. 

Yes,  tbe  same 

'en  miles  from 
are  not  dis- 
Tiles  in  lengtli. 
bout  ten  miles 

0  Cape  Gaspe, 
nks.  Tbe  fish- 
es witbin  two 
Jaspc  and  Bay 
Jank,  wbich  is 
)  or  four  miles 
Bank  lying  oil 
Cbaleur,  a  (lis- 

state  bow  far 
on  of  tbe  whole 
Taking-  into  ac- 
veranda  place 
also  that  but 
)f  our  own  fish- 
■ally  go  on  the 
,re  tban  three- 


? 


fourths — I  should  say  eighty  per  cent,  or  up  to  eighty-flve  per  cent,  of 
tbe  eodiish  takeu  by  Canadian   fisbermeu  are  takeu  inside  of  British 
waters. 

Q.  Well,  what  bait  is  used  for  codfish  ? — A.  Tbe  bait  they  use  are  cap- 
lin,  laiince,  herrinj;,  mackerel,  smelt,  squid,  clam,  trout,  and  chub. 

Q.  Where  do  they  generally  keep  if — A.  Near  the  shove.  The  capliu 
and  liuince  fish  are  on  the  shore,  rolling  on  the  beach  sometimes,  and 
our  fishermen  catch  many  of  those  with  dip-nets,  without  using  seines, 
llerring  was  caught  also  near  the  shore  with  nets. 

Q.  Well,  can  tbe  (!od-tishery  be  carried  on  advantageously  otherwise 
tbau  with  fresh  bait  ? — A.  No,  no.  Salt  bait  is  used  sometimes  when 
110  other  can  be  had,  but  it  cannot  be  used  profitably. 

(}.  Is  there  any  means  of  keeping  bait  fresh  for  some  time  ? — A.  Well, 
some  of  our  large  establishments  which  have  ice-houses  have  tried  to 
keep  the  bait  they  use  in  a  fresh  state  as  long  as  they  could,  but  they 
Irnve  not  succeeded  well.  They  may  from  half  a  day  to  a  day  in  warm 
vieathor,  perhaps. 

Q.  With  ice? — A.  Yes;  because  the  herring,  for  instance,  may  be  fit 
to  eat,  but  not  for  bait. 

Q.  Why? — A.  Hocause  the  bait  they  use  must  be  fresh  enough  to 
stick  on  the  hook.  If  it  is  not  very  fresh  it  does  not  stick  on  and  it  will 
not  catch  the  codfish,  because  the  codfish  will  take  tbe  bait  olf  the  book 
and  leave  the  hook. 

Q.  You  say  it  can  only  be  kept  half  a  day  or  a  day? — A.  It  may  be 
kept,  i)erhaps,  a  day  or  two.    It  depends  upon  the  weather. 

Q.  Well,  would  it  be  possible  for  the  Americans  coming  there  to  fish 
for  cod  to  bring  their  bait  with  them  in  a  fresh  state  ? — A.  No ;  it  is 
impossible. 

Q.  They  could  only  bring  salt  bait,  which  is  not  much  used? — A. 
That  is  all. 

Q.  Now,  have  you  seen  the  Americans  fish  in  the  waters  you  have 
described"? — A.  Yes,  a  good  many.  I  have  seen  a  good  many  and  have 
heard  of  more.  I  have  not  taken  a  list  of  the  vessels,  but  1  have  a  pretty 
good  knowledge  of  the  numbers. 

Q.  Combining  your  own  personal  knowledge  with  what  you  have 
beard,  what  number  of  American  vessels  would  you  say  used  to  frequent 
tliose  waters  yearly,  before  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  and  during  the 
treaty  '—A.  There  niight  be  from  200  to  350. 

Q.  In  Canadian  waters,  you  mean  ? — A.  In  Canadian  waters. 

Q.  When  you  mention  that  number  of  vessels  you  don't  speak  of 
other  vessels  that  might  be  on  tbe  shores  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — 
A.  Certainly  not.  From  what  I  have  heard,  I  believe  that  before  the 
Treaty  of  Reciprocity,  and  during  reciprocity,  most  of  it,  our  coasts 
were  visited  by  a  large  number  of  vessels,  averaging  from  200  to  350 
annually. 

Q.  That  is,  the  Quebec  waters  ? — A.  Y'es,  only  the  Quebec  waters. 

Q.  That  is  exclusive  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  You  refer  now  to  those  frequenting  British  waters  ? — A.  Well,  the 
iilea  I  have  is  from  conversation  with  tbe  American  captains,  and  also 
with  people  who  had  conversation  with  the  American  captains.  It  was 
a  matter  of  public  notoriety  during  tbe  Reciprocity  Treaty  that  the  num- 
ber of  American  vessels  frequenting  the  gulf  would  be  from  1,000  to 
1,200. 

Q.  Now,  coming  back  to  the  Quebec  waters,  the  establishments  you 
bave  mentioned,  are  they  of  new  creation,  or  have  they  been  in  existence 

for  some  time? — A.  Many  of  them  existed  in  the  time  of  the  French. 


h 


.•mm 


886 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISIIKUY    COMMISSION. 


They  abandoned  tlicm  after  the  conquest  of  Canada.  Some  dntc  from 
the  cession  of  (Jiinadii,  as  those  of  Messrs.  Itohin  &  (Jo.  The  estal»li,sl|. 
mcnt  of  Messrs.  Kniinfj  inij;ht  be  seventy  years  on  the  coast.  Itcsidcs 
these,  there  have  been  a  {^ood  many  mercliants  of  ('anathi  who  lime 
settled  and  afterwards  abandoned,  a:id  others  have  come  in  their  piuco, 
The  coast  has  been  fished  for  more  than  L'(M)  years.  Ft  has  been  tinhiJ 
ever  since  the  tiist  establishment  of  tlie  Frendi  in  the  {jnlf. 

Q.  Are  some  of  those  establisliments  prosperous? — A.  Yes;  tlioy 
seem  to  be.    They  carry  on  a  very  larfje  business. 

Q.  Some  have  nuide  fortunes  there? — A.  Yes;  the  house  of  Holjiu 
seems  to  have  amassed  a  h>rjje  fortune.  The  house  of  Le  IJniiiilllfr, 
represented  by  Ciiarh'S  Le  Boutillier,  nuuU^  money,  too.  Colhis  strms 
to  do  very  well,  and  other  houses,  too,  althoiifjh  they  do  not  all  do 
equally  well.  Homo  houses  have  not  done  so  well,  but  the  business 
seems  profitable  in  general. 

Q.  Is  there  a  considerable  portioji  of  the  Canadian  poi)ulntioii  do- 
voted  to  the  fisheries  ? — A.  Outside  of  the  coast,  do  you  mean  ! 

Q.  I  mean  along  the  coast. — A.  Well,  this  coast  1  have  spoken  of  is 
inhabited  by  about  30,000  people.  On  the  north  coast  they  do  notl.iii;' 
but  fish. 

Q.  There  is  no  land  for  agriculture? — A.  No;  their  avo(iation  is  nil 
fishing.  On  Anticosti  it  is  the  same.  They  only  raise  a  few  jjotatoi's 
and  vegetables.  At  the  INlagdalen  Islands  the  land  is  very  good  and 
fit  for  agriculture.  The  people  raise  a  good  amount  of  producte  beside 
being  fishermen.  At  Gaspe,  nearly  all  the  fishermen  have  their  own 
farms  and  cultivate  them  and  raise  cattle.  They  devote  about  two- 
thirds  of  their  time  to  the  fisheries,  or  perhaps  three  quarters,  and  the 
rest  to  agriculture. 

Q.  What  means  have  all  those  establishments  yon  mentioned  of  pro- 
curing fish  ?  Have  they  fishing  boats  of  their  own,  or  do  they  buy  tlie 
fish  ? — A.  They  have  fishing  boats  of  their  own.  On  the  coast  of  (laspL' 
the  mode  is  for  the  owner  to  own  a  place  near  the  shore  in  a  pretty  well 
sheltered  place,  and  to  have  large  buildings,  stages,  flakes  to  dry  fish  on, 
&c.,  to  get  their  own  boats  built  by  the  fishermen  during  the  winter,  ami 
then  make  arrangements  with  the  fishermen  to  take  fish  for  them,  which 
the  merchant  buys.  The  merchants  furnish  the  boat  at  so  much  a  year, 
and  they  pay  the  fishermen  so  much  for  the  draught  of  fish,  which  is 
238  pounds,  as  the  fish  comes  from  under  the  knife,  that  is,  after  being 
split. 

Q.  It  is  weighed  after  being  split  ? — A.  Yes ;  all  the  entrails  and  part 
of  the  backbone  are  taken  out,  and  the  head  taken  off.  That  diminishes 
the  weight  sometimes  a  quarter  and  sometimes  more. 

Q.  The  fish  is  weighed  fresh  from  the  knife  ? — A.  Yes ;  then  it  is  the 
property  of  the  merchant,  and  he  goes  through  all  the  operatijns  of 
curing  it. 

Q.  Is  that  fish  exported  to  the  United  States?— A.  No,  it  is  not. 

Q.  Where  is  it  generally  exported  ? — A.  It  is  exported  mostly  to  Bra- 
zil, Portugal,  Spain,  Italy,  and  the  West  Indies. 

Q.  Some,  I  sujipose,  is  for  home  comsumption  ? — A.  Some  is  sent  to  i 
Jersey,  a  few  loads.  But  the  f^ill  fish  go  to  (Juebec.  We  must  distin- 
guish between  the  summer  and  the  fall  fish.  When  the  people  begin 
fishing  they  are  engaged  to  the  merchants  to  fish  until  the  15th  ot 
August.  That  is  what  is  called  the  summer  fishery,  and  the  produce  of 
that  fishery  goes  to  the  merchants  to  pay  lor  advances  that  the  mer- 
chants have  made  to  the  fishermen,  and  debts  contracted  that  year  or 
years  before.    Well,  the  loth  of  August  comes,  anti  the  accounts  arej 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISHKKY    COMMISSION. 


887 


is,  after  being 


^ittl»'(l,  and  the  tlshonnau  Is  allowed  to  use  the  boat  of  the  merchant 
mill  {,'0  ami  llsli  for  himself  until  the  si'asoii  is  over.  Tht<  prodiKit  of 
that  is  sent  to  (Jiiebec!.  The  fisherman  himself  sends  it  to  iineboo  or 
s(>ll8  it  on  the  eoa.st,  if  he  can,  for  easli  to  bay  his  wiiittu"  |»rov'isioiis. 
The  inerehants  don't  take  that  llsh  from  thiMn.  That  is  tlie  system  on 
the  coast  since  the  bejjimiing,  I  suppose.  I  never  knew  tin*  time  that 
it  dill  not  exist. 

Q.  Has  it  been  attempted  tos'ml  cod  to  the  United  States  market  i — 
.V.  Well,  when  the  lleciprouity  Treaty  e,ame  into  oiieration,  we  thought 
that  the  American  mark(^t  would  be  favorable  to  the  Gaspe  population, 
and  as  for  myself,  I  hoped  it  would  be.     I  thought  we  might  get  a  better 
price  there  than  in  the  foreign  markets.     I  expected  that  the  trade  might 
become,  a  cash  trade,  but  our  hopes  have  been  disappointed.     I  know 
that  several  mercjluvnts  sent  pretty  good  cargoes  to  the  United  States, 
and  could  not  sell  them  as  well  as  in  the  foreign  markets.    So  oi"  late 
years  they  have  not  attempted  the  same  venture.    There  was  an  Amer- 
ican house  in  New  York  started  at  IJonaventure  a  few  years  after  Keci- 
procity.    Their  bark  came  in  the  spring  loaded  with  supplies  and  goods 
to  trade  with  the  people,  atid  got  some  flsh.    They  sent  their  cargoes 
to  the  United  States  mostly.     I  am  not  sure  whether  they  sent  the  whole 
there.    But  after  a  few  years  they  abandone<l  the  trade. 

Q.  Didn't  they  have  some  particular  .advantage  ? — A.  It  was  an  Amer- 
ican establishment. 
Q.  Was  there  not  a  free  port  there? — A.  It  was  then  a  free  port. 
Q.  In  Gaspd  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  could  enter  their  goods  free  of  duty. 
Q.  And  notwithstanding  that  advantage,  the  American  merchants 
could  not  establish  a  successful  business  ? — A.  Well,  I  suppose  that  was 
tlie  reason  it  was  abandoned  ;  because  they  did  not  find  that  they  sold 
their  fish  high  enough. 

Q.  Then  if  the  Americans  wanted  to  trade  on  the  coast  of  Gaspd,  they 
could  get  places  to  settle,  and  they  would  have  the  same  advantage  as 
our  people? — A.  Yes;  our  fishermen  would  engage  with  them  just  as 
well  as  with  others,  provided  they  gave  as  high  or  higher. 

Q.  Now,  coming  back  to  the  vessels  frequentiug  these  waters,  will  j'ou 
state  what  was  considered  by  an  American  vessel  to  be  a  load,  either  of 
codfish  or  mackerel  ?  These  I  suppose  are  about  the  only  shore  fishe- 
ries that  are  looked  to  by  the  Americans  ? — A.  Yes ;  the  Americans  used 
to  take  codfish  and  mackerel. 

Q.  Herrings? — A.  Yes;  a  great  quantity  at  the  Magdalen  Islands, 
with  seines. 

Q.  Is  it  an  advantage  to  the  Americans  to  be  able  to  land  on  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands  ? — A.  Y'es ;  because  if  they  did  not  land  they  could  not 
draw  their  seines.    I  have  seen  them  myself. 

Q.  That  is  the  most  profitable  way  of  fishing  for  herring? — A.  Y'^es; 
you  cannot  fish  herring  except  with  seines.  It  would  not  do  to  take 
them  with  nets.  You  would  not  take  enough  to  pay.  The  herring  taken 
there  is  spring  herring. 

Q.  Is  herring  fished  with  a  line? — A.  Never ;  it  is  always  with  seines 
oruets.  Our  people  on  the  coast  take  them  with  the  nets  for  bait;  but 
'vlieu  you  want  them  for  trade,  you  must  use  a  seine,  because  you  have  to 
taiie  a  large  quantity  of  them. 

Q.  In  the  codfish  or  mackerel  business  llshery,  what  is  considered  an 
ordinary  loa<l  for  any  vessel  ? — A.  Well,  for  an  ordinary  vessel  ? 

Q.  What  is  the  general  tonnage  of  the  vessels  which  you  have  seen 
there— American  vessels? — A.  The  American  codfish  vessels  range  from 
60  to  100  or  110  tons,  and  the  mackerel  vessels  from  i'A)  to  90  tons. 


II 


m*-'  ■'■■  '■ 


iWWr  8 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-S) 


1.0 

tSiK»     WIS 

•  50    "■■      li^H 
119 

I4S  li£    |2.2 

I.I 

1  --  IIIIIM 

iiiim 

1.25 

III  ..4      ,.6 

^ 


Photographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


23  WIST  MAIN  STRIET 

WnSTIR.N.Y.  MS80 

(716)  •73-4503 


^^  *', 


"^"•V* 


J 


\ 


«88 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Now,  wbat  is  considered  an  average  load  of  codisb  ? — A.  It  would 
be  from  350  to  600  quintals. 

Q.  And  of  mackerel? — A.  A  mackerel  load  would  be  from  250  to  350 
barrels. 

Q.  Have  yon  seen  any  Americans  fishing  cod  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  have  cer 
tainly. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  any  fishing  for  halibut? — A.  No;  because  tbey 
have  fished  only  lately,  since  I  have  left  the  service.  Tliey  have  lisbetl 
lately  most. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  the  Banks  where  cod  is  taken.  If  I  rerneinbci 
what  you  said  about  bait,  although  that  cod  is  taken  out  beyond  tbroe 
miles,  you  stated  that  the  bait  had  to  be  taken  within  three  miles !— A. 
Yes.  Sometimes  they  get  bait  on  the  Banks  with  drift  nets;  but  at 
other  times  the  bait  is  not  to  be  had  at  all  for  weeks.  Well,  wkn 
the  skipper  of  a  Bank-fl^fuing  vessel  cannot  get  bait,  he  is  idle  then— lie 
does  nothing.  If  he  has  a  chance  of  taking  bait  on  shore,  even  if  he  lias 
to  go  7  or  8  miles  for  it,  he  will  do  so.  He  can  send  his  bout  for  bait 
without  lifting  his  anchor,  and  he  can  continue  his  voyage.  They  use 
a  great  quantity  of  bait,  those  Bank  fishers. 

Q.  How  is  cod  fished  by  our  people  near  the  coast  ? — A.  All  with 
lines — principally  with  hand-lines.  They  start  in  the  morniug  generally. 
and  come  back  in  the  evening.  The  fish  is  at  once  thrown  on  thesta^'e, 
and  the  splitters  are  there.  The  fish  is  split  at  once  to  prevent  heatiug. 
That  is  the  main  reason  of  the  superiority  of  their  fish.  Then  it  is  salted, 
for  three  days  at  the  most.  Then  washed  and  exposed  to  the  sun  on 
the  flakes  in  n  very  well  ventilated  place,  generally  on  a  hill,  if  it  U 
possible  to  have  it.  Then  there  are  people  to  attend  to  the  drying  tbeie. 
It  has  to  be  attended  to  constantly.  If  the  weather  is  foggy,  or  the  ruin 
comes,  or  it  is  thick,  it  must  be  turned  with  the  skin  up,  and  made  intu 
bundles.  When  the  sun  shines  again,  and  there  is  wind,  it  must  be  ex 
posed  on  the  flakes  with  the  flesh  up.  It  is  a  veiy  difiicult  thing  to 
make  good  flah. 

Q.  Well,  that  kind  of  codfishing  could  not  be  advantageously  prose 
cuted  unless  it  coald  be  coupled  with  the  advantage  of  going  insboie 
and  drying? — A.  I  mean  to  say  that  the  bankers  on  Miscuu  Bank  or  St. 
John  Banks,  if  they  had  not  a  right  to  go  ashore  for  bait,  must  be  idle 
at  times.  I  know  I  have  heard  repeatedly  from  our  fishermen,  and  also 
from  the  bankers  that  it  happens  sometimes  that  bait  is  not  to  be  found 
on  the  Banks.  The  bait  they  use  is  herring,  because  on  the  Banks  tbey 
cannot  take  launce  or  caplin.  They  take  herring  or  mackerel,  but  the 
bait  they  principally  use  is  herring.  Sometimes  there  is  none  on  the 
banks  for  several  weeks.  Then  If  they  have  no  chance  to  got  them  from 
their  own  sources,  they  must  interrupt  their  labors. 

Q.  Now,  we  have  spoken  of  the  quantity  of  cod  taken  within  and 
outside  of  three  miles.  How  is  it  with  mackerel  ?  Where  are  these 
generally  taken  ? — A.  With  regard  to  mackerel,  I  may  state  tijat  on  tia 
shores  of  the  island  of  Ajiticosti  it  is  within  three  miles.  From  Mount 
Joly  to  St  Nicholas,  on  the  north  shore,  it  is  within  three  miles.  On 
the  south  shore  from  Matanue  to  Gaspe  it  is  within  three  mile.s.  From 
Ga8p6  to  Bay  Chaleur  it  is  taken  sometimes  outside  of  three  miles,  and 
at  other  times  within,  because  the  Bank  fisheries  merge  in  the  sboie 
fisheries. 

Q.  Then  if  you  were  called  uyton  to  give  the  proportion  of  the  whole 
quantity  of  mackerel  taken  inside  and  outside,  what  would  yuu,  say,  | 
put  down  as  taken  within  three  miles,  and  what  proportion  as  taken 


SION. 


AWARD   or   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


889 


lish!— A.  It  would 

I  be  from  250  to  350 

\..  Yes ;  I  bave  cer- 

.  No;  because  tbey 
1.    They  bave  lisbeil 

ken.  If  I  remember 
en  out  beyond  tbree 
liu  three  miles  ?— \. 
)i  drift-nets;  but  at 
weeks.  Well,  wbi-n 
,,  he  is  idle  then— he 
shore,  even  if  he  bus 
ud  bis  boat  for  b.iit 
s  voyage.    They  use 

coast  ?— A.  All  witli 
lemoriiiug  generally. 
thrown  on  the  stage, 
ie  to  prevent  beatiug, 
sh.  Then  it  is  salted, 
cposed  to  the  sun  on 
illy  on  a  bill,  if  it  is 
d  to  the  drying  tbeie. 
;r  is  foggy,  or  the  rain 
:in  np,  and  made  into 
8  wind,  it  must  be  ex 
•eiy  difficult  thing  to 

dvantageously  prose 

;age  of  going  inshore 

[n  Miseou  Bank  or  St. 

tor  bait,  must  be  idle 

r  ttsbermen,  and  also 

»ait  is  not  to  be  fouud 

iseon  the  Banks  tbey 

or  mackerel,  but  the 

there  is  none  on  the 

ince  to  get  them  from 

Id  taken  within  ami 
If  Where  are  these 
luay  state  tliat  ou  the 
1  miles.  From  Mount 
iin  tbree  mile.s.  On 
three  miles.  From 
|e  of  three  mile.s,  ami 
merge  in  the  shore 

Iportion  of  the  whole 

That  would  you,  say.  l 

1  proportion  as  taken 


outside! — A.  I  should  say  that  at  least  75  per  cent,  are  taken  inside  of 
three  miles,  positively. 

Q.  I  think  I  have  asked  you  about  what  constitutes  a  trip  for  a  ves- 
sel there  in  cod  or  in  mackerel  t — A.  Yes. 

y.  And  you  bave  answered  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  suppose  sometimes  some  of  these  vessels  bave  begun  outside  of 
the  Quebec  waters  and  tinisbed  there  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  sometime?  t'ley  begin  in  the  Quebec  watars  and  go  to  Prince 
Edward  Island,  or  somewhere  else,  to  complete  their  trip  ? — A.  I  bave 
said  that — yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  bait  used  for  halibut  ? — A.  Herring  and  codfish.  Cod- 
fish is  as  good  as  any.  It  is  firmer  tlian  herring,  and  holds  well  on  the 
liook.  They  put  a  large  bait  on,  so  that  the  small  codfish  cannot  take 
the  bait,  because  the  object  of  the  halibut  fishers  is  to  take  nothing  but 
lialibut.    When  they  take  codfish  they  have  to  throw  it  overboard. 

Q.  And  as  codfish,  as  well  as  herring,  are  taken  inshore,  they  bave 
to  come  insliore  ? — A.  Yes  ;  tbey  come  in  close  to  the  shore  for  halibut. 

t^.  Is  herring  a  fish  that  is  fouiul  in  large  quantities  in  our  waters  i — 
A.  Ves;  in  terrible  quantities. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  some  of  the  hauls? — A.  I  bave  .seen  a  good  many 
Lauls,  some  small  ones  and  some  large  ones.  I  bave  seen  GOO  barrels 
ot  Labrador  herring  hauled  in  one  haul,  and  3,000  Magdalen  Island 
herring  in  one  haul,  with  seines.  They  run  from  3,000  to  2,000  and 
1,000,  but  often  less. 

Q.  Does  the  herring  require  any  operation  for  market  ? — O,  yes;  it 
must  be  split,  salted,  and  pickled. 

Q.  Is  that  the  case  around  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  Well,  around 
Ma^tilalen  Islands  it  is  sometimes  taken  in  bulk.  Tbey  are  salted  as 
tbey  come.  As  they  take  them  they  are  thrown  into  the  bold  of  the 
vessel,  and  the  salt  thrown  in  with  them,  until  the  vessel  is  full.  That 
is  what  we  call  herring  in  bulk.  Then,  after  arriving  in  the  States, 
they  are  split  and  pickled  for  the  West  India  market  or  smoked. 

Q.  But  is  it  sometimes  cured  on  the  spot  1  This  cannot  be  advanta- 
geously done,  except  ou  land,  I  suppose  ? — ^^A.  Well,  tbey  cure  on  board 
tbeir  vessels  sometimes.  Sometimes  tbey  come  on  shore  to  repair  their 
barrels,  as  there  is  not  always  room  enough  on  board ;  and  tbey  gib 
tbeir  tish  on  shore  sometimes — that  is,  open  and  clean  them. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  effect  of  the  Americans  coining  on  the  coast  ? 
Do  they  always  carry  on  their  operation  with  due  respect  for  the  laws  ? 
When  they  have  come  in  large  numbers  bave  you  heard  of  depredations 
tbat  they  have  committed  ? — A.  Some  years  they  have  been  pretty  free 
there  on  the  coast.  I  bave  heard  of  houses  being  broken  into  and 
people  insulted.  I  bave  cited  ntany  such  cases  in  my  reports.  I  did 
not  see  any  myself,  because,  of  cour.se,  when  I  was  prese^'t  they  were 
'iniet,  but  our  people  have  suffered  very  sjuich  from  them  at  different 
times.  I  know  that  at  Seven  Islands  tlie  Hudson  Bay  post  was  nearly 
burnt  by  them,  with  the  furs  and  provisions;  I  bave  this  information 
from  their  agent  at  the  place.  Then  again,  their  vessels  used  to  come 
to  anchor  along  the  shore,  close  to  the  shore;  sometimes  among  the 
luoorings,  and  sometimes  inside  of  the  moorings.  The  mooring  is  the 
place  where  our  fishermen  tie  their  nets  to  get  bait.  The  net  is  tied  to 
hiuooiing  at  one  end  and  the  other  end  is  allowed  to  drift  all  night.  In 
the  morning  about  four  or  five  o'clock  the  fisherman  goes  to  his  net.  It 
lie  has  bait  he  can  get  codfish.  If  not,  he  cannot  get  any  codfl.sh,  how- 
per  plentiful  it  may  be.  Now,  sometimes  30  or  40  of  those  vessels  bave 
|(oine  in  and  anchored  inside  of  the  moorings.    Sometimes  they  bave 


890 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


anchored  in  such  a  way  as  to  prevent  them  from  settins^  their  net«. 
Sometimes  they  have  come  inside,  and  the  n^ts  have  been  set  oatside 
of  them,  when  a  gale  has  sprang  up,  and  the  Americans  getting  under 
way  have  torn  the  nets  up  as  they  went  out.  I  do  not  say  willfully, 
but  that  was  the  consequence. 

Q.  Well,  taking  the  condition  of  the  people  inhabiting  the  shores  yoii 
have  described,  has  the  Treaty  of  Reciprocity  or  the  Treaty  of  VVasliing. 
ton  been  any  advantage  to  these  ? — A.  No  advantage  at  all.  On  the 
contrary,  a  disadvantage,  because  the  American  free  market  is  no  use 
to  our  merchants  or  fishermen ;  and  the  American  inshore  fisheries  are 
of  no  use  to  us.  I  have  never  heard  of  a  fisherman  from  the  coast  I  have 
described  going  to  the  States,  and  I  know  they  will  never  go  there  to 
fish.  And  the  competition  of  the  American  fishermen  on  the  cod-tishing 
grounds,  as  well  as  near  the  coast  where  the  mackerel  is  taken,  is  very 
disastrous,  because  it  stands  to  reason,  whenever  people  are  taking 
mackerel,  if  a  fleet  of  these  vessels  comes  around,  they  will  attract  the 
mackerel  from  them,  and  lessen  the  chance  of  our  people  taking  fish. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  the  American  vessels  have  made  more 
than  one  trip  in  a  season  in  the  summer  ! — A.  Often  they  used  to  make 
two  and  sometimes  three  trips. 

Q.  Can  they  do  that  without  transshipping  somewhere  f  Have  they 
time  to  go  home  three  times  and  come  back  f — A.  I  don't  think  they 
could  go  home  three  times.  I  have  beard  of  some  going  twice.  During 
the  Reciprocity  Treaty  their  custom  was  to  transship  at  Prince  Edward 
Tsland  and  the  Gut  of  Canso.  Tbat  was  the  custom,  because  there  are 
several  schooners  belonging  to  one  firm.  One  schooner  would  take  all 
the  fish,  and  go  home  and  sell  them,  leaving  the  others  to  fish. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q  Ton  have  given  us  an  account  of  your  occnpations  at  many  times. 
How  has  it  been  this  summer  ?  What  have  your  occupations  been  ?— A. 
I  have  not  been  occupied  with  the  fisheries. 

Q.  Why  notf — A.  Because  I  am  not  in  the  service  any  more.  lam 
neither  in  the  service,  nor  am  I  a  merchant  or  a  fisherman. 

Q.  I  asked  you  what  were  your  occupations  this  summer  ? — A.  It  has 
been  going  through  an  election. 

Q.  Well,  that  is  in  your  capa^jity  as  a  politician,  but  not  as  a  doctor, 
sea  captain,  or  sheriff.  Did  it  take  you  all  summer  to  get  through  your 
election  f — ^A.  Yes ;  it  took  me  all  summer. 

Q.  Did  you  travel  around  f — A.  I  left  in  May  and  went  back  in 
July. 

Q.  Your  political  business,  then,  took  you  from  May  to  July  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  part  of  the  coast  did  you  visit  in  a  political  capacity  T— A. 
From  Gape  Chatte  to  Newport  and  the  Magdalen  Islands.  I  visited 
the  county  of  Gasp^,  of  which  I  am  giving  you  the  limits. 

Q.  That  is  from  Cape  Chatte  around  by  Gasp6  ?— A.  As  far  as  New- 
port. 

Q.  Which  side  of  the  Bay  Chaleur  is  that!— A.  It  is  north  side  of  the 
Bay  Chaleur. 

Q.  That  is  not  a  very  extensive  round.  What  is  the  whole  length  of 
the  sea-coast  f — A.  Two  hundred  and  forty  miles.  , 

Q.  Well,  at  the  same  time  you  were  doing  political  duty,  did  you  unite  { 
with  that  any  inquiries  into  this  business  f — A.  No ;  not  until  the  elec- 
tion was  over.    During  the  election  I  only  listened  to  what  the  people 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


891 


woaM  tell  me  as  we  were  speaking.    I  never  inquired  particularly  about 
the  fisheries. 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  memorandum  of  what  they  said  ? — A.  Not 
then. 

Q.  No  evidence  ? — A.  I  took  evidence  afterwards. 

Q.  I  meap  at  that  time  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Now  your  political  campaign  ended  in  July  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  when  did  you  enter  upon  other  duties? — A.  On  the  23th 
July. 

Q.  What  were  those  duties  ! — A.  1  was  asked  by  the  Federal  Govern- 
naent  to  go  around  the  coast  of  the  Province  of  Quebec  an<l  take  evi 
(lence  and  marshal  witnesses  to  be  examined  before  the  Commission 
This  occupied  about  three  weeks. 

Q.  What  places  did  you  visit  in  that  service! — A.  From  Cape  Chatte 
-the  principal  places  from  Cape  Chatte  to  Paspebiao. 

Q.  Where  is  that  ? — A.  On  the  Bay  Chalenrs.  Then  I  visited  from 
the  Seven  Islands  to  Esquimaux  Point.  Then  I  went  to  places  on 
Anticosti  and  on  the  Magdalen  Island. 

Q.  Well,  did  you  take  evidence  yourself! — A.  I  did. 

Q.  How  many  ? — A.  Ninety-seven  afflilavits.    About  that  number. 

Q.  Of  persons  from  all  these  regions  ? — A.  Yes,  as  they  came. 

Q.  Well,  how  did  you  find  the  people  t  How  did  you  discover  the 
witnesses? — A.  I  sometimes  went  for  the  person  that  I  thought  best  ac> 
quainted  with  the  fisheries ;  sometimes  fish  merchants. 

Q.  Whose  evidence  would  do  most  good  ? — A.  Well,  I  do  not  think  I 
rejected  any  man. 

Q.  Nobody  that  came  to  yon  and  asked  to  be  permitted  to  make  ad 
aflBdavit  was  rejected  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  any  such  cases  occur  f — A.  No.  Some  people  were  asked  to 
give  their  evidence,  and  said  they  had  not  time  or  that  they  would  not 
doit. 

Q.  But  such  as  consented  you  took  T — A.  All  that  consented  I  used 
to  ask  them  myself  or  send  one  of  the  agents  that  were  with  me. 

Q.  Who  were  with  you  f — A.  There  was  one  Doctor  Wakeham  who 
lived  in  Gasp6  12  years,  and  there  was  young  Mr.  Gait. 

Q.  Then  when  you  had  completed  your  service  that  would  bring  us 
to  the  middle  of  August ;  what  then  ? — A.  I  came  here. 

Q.  So  have  yon  been  here  ever  since  attending  to  the  business  of  this 
Commission  ? — A.  Well,  I  have  no  business  but  to  prepare  myself  to 
give  my  testimony.    I  have  no  official  business  with  the  government. 

Q.  Has  it  taken  you  all  this  time  to  prepare  to  give  your  testimony  f — 
A.  No,  but  I  have  nothing  to  do  here. 

Q.  Well,  to  look  after  the  witnesses? — A.  No,  not  here.  The  moment 
I  came  here  I  gave  the  evidence  to  one  of  the  agents  and  remained 
here  because  I  thought  I  would  be  asked  to  come  here  and  give  my  tes- 
timony.   I  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  government. 

Q.  But  you  have  seen  the  witnesses  that  have  come  on  here  f — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  talked  with  them  ? — A.  O,  yes ;  we  lived  in  the  same  place, 
and  I  have  seen  them  pretty  often. 

Q.  Well,  you  have  a  pretty  strong  opinion  that  this  Washington 
Treaty  is  a  bad  thing  f — A.  I  had  an  opinion  from  the  beginning. 

Q.  Before  it  was  made,  perhaps  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  not  kept  your  opinion  to  yourself,  have  you?  In  your 
varions  capacities  of  doctor  of  medicine,  sheriff,  and  politician,  yon  must 
liave  let  it  outf— A.  I  did  certainly  let  out  that  the  Treaty  of  Wash- 


892 


AWARD  OF  THE   IISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


ington  waa  iivjarious  to  the  fishermeQ  of  the  Proviooe  of  Quebec,  be- 
cause they  gave  a  great  deal  and  received  uothiug  in  exchauge. 

Q.  You  still  had  a  hope,  I  snpiiose,  that  after  giviug  a  good  deal 
away  and  receiving  nothing,  it  would  be  made  up  by  a  large  award, 
hadn't  you  f — A.  Well,  I  hope  we  will  receive  what  is  due  to  us. 

Q.  And  that  it  will  turn  out  to  be  a  large  sum  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Apart  from  the  breaking  of  nets,  insulting  of  women,  destroying 
of  property,  which  are  moral  delinquencies  of  the  Americans,  what  are 
the  chief  objections  to  their  coming  to  your  waters  to  fish  f— A.  Well, 
they  lessen  the  chances  of  our  people  taking  fish  within  the  three 
miles. 

Q.  Why  don't  your  people  build  vessels,  as  the  Americans  do,  ami  go 
down  and  follow  up  the  mackerel  T — A.  Well,  I  never  heard  of  a  tisher- 
man  that  wanted  to  go  with  a  schooner  to  fish,  if  he  had  fish  at  his  own 
door.  He  would  rather  fish  with  his  boat  than  take  a  vessel  and  go  Ave 
hundred  or  a  thousand  miles  from  his  place.  I  have  heard  the  Ameri- 
cans tell  me  that  if  they  had  fish  to  occupy  their  fishermen  on  their 
coasts,  they  would  not  come  here. 

Q.  Have  not  the  Americans  always  had  fishing- vessels  and  {;one  to 
the  Grand  Banks ;  perhaps  you  have  read  Burke's  speech  on  the  Wealth 
of  he  Sea  ? — A.  Yes,  I  am  aware  of  that,  but  the  fisheries  of  thn  gulf 
and  coast  have  always  tempted  the  Americans,  because  they  are  inshore 
fisheries. 

Q.  ''"hey  always  go  to  the  Grand  Banks  and  the  Georges  !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  l^ow  you  say  the  reason  the  people  gave  up  vessel-fishing  for  boats 
is  that  they  have  fish  at  their  own  doors.  That  cannot  be  true  of  all 
of  them.  Are  there  not  a  good  many  of  your  people,  inhabitants  of  the 
Dominion,  that  have  gone  into  American  vessels? — A.  From  Nova 
Scotia  and  New  Brunswick,  but  very  few  from  the  Province  of  Quebec. 
I  am  speaking  particularly  of  the  Province  of  Quebec,  because  I  am  not 
acquainted  with  the  other  provinces  except  in  a  general  way. 

Q.  You  know  in  a  general  way,  don't  yon,  that  without  restricting 
oui-selves  to  the  lines  of  the  provinces  a  very  large  number  are  engaged 
in  deep-sea  fishing  or  fishing  in  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  are  willing  to  serve  under  a  foreign  flag  ? — A.  Sometimes 
they  do.  I  know  that  a  good  many  people  from  the  Gut  of  Causo  are 
sometimes  engaged  on  board  American  vessels. 

Q.  A  good  many  from  New  Brunswick  and  a  good  many  from  Nova 
Scotia ;  is  it  not  so  f  A.  Well,  yes ;  but  from  the  Province  of  Quebec 
I  know  of  but  few  that  have  gone  on  board  of  American  vessels. 

Q.  You  think  those  that  engage  in  boat-fishing  are  those  that  bare 
the  fish  at  their  c  wn  doors ! — A.  Yes ;  I  do  not  believe  that  peo|)le  tha* 
liave  fish  at  their  own  door,  that  they  can  take  with  a  boat,  would  equip 
vessels  in  a  costly  manner  and  go  one  hundred  or  one  thousand  miles  to 
get  fish,  when  they  can  get  fish  at  their  own  doors  with  boats,  or  with 
vessels  that  are  less  costly.  The  fish  so  caught  can  be  split  and  cured 
without  the  fish  being  salt-burnt,  and  consequently  they  make  a  superior 
kind  of  fish.    I  have  my  opinion  on  these  facts. 

Q.  Then  all  these  reasons,  you  think,  account  for  the  fact  that  the 
people  of  Quebec  do  not  build  vessels  f — A.  Yes ;  I  am  speaking  of  the 
coast  from  which  the  Americans  are  excluded,  but  at  Magdalen  Islands 
the  people  build  schooners  and  go  to  the  north  shore. 

Q.  Why  do  they  go  away  T — A.  It  is  a  custom  they  have  had  for  some 
number  of  years.  They  find  they  can  take  fish  on  our  north  shore  iu  a 
shorter  time  than  on  their  own. 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


893 


Q.  Still  it  does  tempt  your  people  f— A.  It  tempts  tbem  ou  the  Mag* 
delen  Islands. 

Q.  There  is  flsh  enough  on  the  north  shore  to  tempt  those  people  fh>m 
the  Magdalen  Islands,  their  vessels  not  being  adapted  to  the  Banks  f — 
A.  If  they  flshed  around  the  Magdalen  Islands  they  would  have  to  deh 
like  the  bankers.  They  go  to  the  north  shore  in  order  to  take  a  voyage 
in  less  time  than  on  their  own  shore. 

Q.  These  expeditions  of  yours,  in  the  way  of  politics,  and  in  getting 
testimony  for  the  Gommission,  have  given  you  a  good  opportunity  to 
gee  what  vessels  there  are  off  the  coast  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  year  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  the  Americans  have  been  very  scarce  T— A.  Yes.  I  have 
seen  a  few  myself  in  the  Bay  Ghaleur.  One  came  to  anchor  alongside 
of  ns  in  the  Bay  Ghaleur,  having  hauled  in  30  barrels  of  mackerel  close 
to  the  bank  at  Paspebiac.  And  we  heard  of  another  taking  80  barrels 
at  Nonvelle,  ten  miles  eastward  of  Paspebiac ;  that  was  with  the  seines ; 
they  hauled  them  on  the  beach. 

Q.  Did  you  see  many  more  f — A.  Not  many  more.  We  saw  a  few 
outside.  But  it  was  rather  early  for  tbem  to  come.  It  was  then  about 
the  10th  of  August,  I  think.  Sometimes  they  come  earlier,  and  some- 
times later. 

Q.  But  you  aid,  when  I  asked  yon,  that  they  were  very  scarce  f— A. 
That  is  true. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  this  question  while  I  am  about  it.  Within  what 
period  of  time  can  the  caplin  be  taken  Y — A.  It  varies  very  much.  I 
bave  myself  seen  the  caplin  rolling  for  one  month  on  the  coast  of  Gaspe. 
Yoa  could  take  them  by  thousands  of  barrels. 

Q.  Do  they  come  at  the  same  time  all  along  the  coast,  or  can  they  be 
followed  up  from  one  place  to  another  ?— A.  They  don't  come  in  all  at 
the  same  time.  Tbey  come  later  on  the  north  shore  than  on  the  south 
I  shore,  I  think. 

Q.  So  that  you  can  follow  them  up  t — A.  Yon  mean  caplin  T 

Q.  Do  they  appear  simultaneously  on  the  whole  coast,  or  do  tbey 
come  at  one  point  and  then  at  another  f — A.  On  the  south  shore  they 
appear  pretty  much  about  the  same  time.  They  may  vary  a  few  days ; 
bat  on  the  north  shore  they  are  a  little  later,  as  far  as  I  can  remember. 

Q.  Tbey  do  not  visit  every  part  alike  f — A.  Sometimes  they  are  abun- 
dant at  one  place  and  not  so  abundant  at  another ;  and  where  they  are 
plentiful  one  year  tbey  may  not  be  seen  at  all  the  next.  Our  fishermen 
bare  a  way  of  sending  a  boat  to  get  caplin  and  take  it  to  the  fishing- 


Q.  If  I  understand  you  correctly,  I  understood  you  to  say  that  your 
people  who  caught  cod  in  boats  often  cleaned  them  in  the  boats  f — A. 
No;  tbey  do  not  clean  them  in  the  boats. 

Q.  Neither  mackerel  no;*  cod  Y — A.  No ;  they  clean  them  on  shore 
always. 

Q.  It  was  stated  by  one  of  the  counsel  here,  putting  a  question  to  you, 
that  the  Americans  had  the  right  to  fish  any  wbere  upon  the  Magdalen 
Islands.  You  say  you  have  seen  them  also  land  there  for  the  purpose  of 
drawing  their  nets  ? — A.  Yes.  I  have  seen  tbem  myself. 

Q.  Did  yon  ever  prohibit  tnem  ? — A.  No. 

Q>  Did  you  ever  know  an  instance  in  which  they  were  prohibited  T— 
A.  Ko.  At  AUright  Island,  the  entry  island,  the  Americans  have  set- 
tled there.  They  have  their  nets,  barrels,  salt,  boats,  and  everything. 
^bey  aet  their  nets  ontside,  and  take  their  fish  on  shore  and  cure  them 


894 


AWAKD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  That  ia  notorious;  it  is  not  a  secret f— A.  Tliere  is  no  secret 
about  it :  I  was  told  by  the  man  who  boards  them.  They  are  not  pro- 
hibited, bat  the  people  complain  a  good  deal.  They  do  not  like  it,  but 
they  cannot  help  themselves. 

Q.  In  your  capacity  as  commissioner  of  the  peace,  to  preserve  the 
peace  f — A.  I  was  stipendiary  magistrate. 

Q.  You  never  thought  it  expedient  or  proper  or  within  your  power  to 
prevent  them  from  doing  so  T — A.  No.  When  I  was  stipendiary  luagis 
trate  and  commander  of  the  vessel,  the  only  thing  I  saw  was  the  Atuer* 
leans  seining  herring  in  Pleasant  Bay  and  hauling  the  seine  from  the 
shore.  But  there  was  no  complaint,  that  I  knew  of,  and  I  was  not 
instructed  to  prevent  them  from  doing  that  I  was  always  told,  ou  the 
contrary,  to  behave  with  the  greatest  courtesy  to  the  Americans. 

Q.  You  say  that  your  people  don't  send  cod  to  the  United  States?— 
A.  I  say  that  they  tried  it. 

Q.  Under  the  Reciprocity  Treaty? — A.  Yes;  they  tritd  it. 

Q.  And  was  the  experiment  tried  by  persons  competent  to  try  it!  Was 
it  attempted  by  competent  merchants,  men  with  capital  f — A.  Yes ;  the 
best  fish-merchants  ou  the  coast  of  Gaspd  and  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence, 
Messrs.  Le  Boutilier  Brothers,  who  have  the  second  establishment  ou 
our  coast ;  also,  Bobin  &  Co.,  the  largest  in  the  gulf.  They  told  me 
themselves  that  they  had  a  good  assorted  cargo  and  sent  it  to  the 
United  States,  but  it  didn't  pay. 

Q.  An  assorted  cargo  ?^A.  Yes ;  they  sent  green  codfish  and  large 
and  small  dried  fish,  also  s^ne  maclierel  and  herring. 

Q.  They  had  to  cease  the  venture  because  it  didn't  pay  ? — A.  Yes; 
they  told  me  that. 

Q.  Did  they  prepare  the  fish  specially  for  that  market,  do  you  know; 
or  what  kind  of  dried  fish  did  they  send  ? — A.  The  best  hard  dried  tish. 

Q.  They  did  not  take  in  the  States,  I  suppose  T — A.  No. 

Q.  Was  it  not  also  found  that  the  States  were  well  supplied  with  all 
the  fish  they  wanted  t — A.  I  suppose  that  might  be  the  reason.  The 
market  for  that  kind  of  fish,  the  hard  dried,  is  not  good  in  the  States, 
because  their  fish  was  prepared  especially  for  warm  markets.  It  will 
keep,  while  the  American  fish  will  not  keep. 

Q.  They  found  they  could  do  better  with  that  kind  of  fish  in  the  for- 
eign markets  than  in  the  United  States f — A.  Yes;  if  we  only  half 
dried  our  fish  we  could,  no  doubt,  sell  it  in  the  American  market,  but  by 
continuing  the  operation  for  about  a  fortnight  to  three  weeks  more,  we 
get  $2  or  $3  more  per  quintal  for  the  fish. 

Q.  It  pays  better  to  send  it  abroad  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  have  a  very  good  opportunity  of  preparing  it  for  the 
foreign  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  state  that  the  Americans  opened  and  cleaned  their  fish  often 
on  shore  ? — A.  No ;  I  did  not  say  so  for  the  coast  of  Gaspe,  but  for  the 
Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  You  have  made  a  statement  here  which,  while  it  does  not  come  j 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Commission,  is  a  painful  one,  respectiug 
the  conduct  of  American  crews  on  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  reminds  us  of  what  we  have  been  reading  in  the  newspapers  j 
about  the  Cossacks  and  Turks  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  you  like  to  leave  the  impression  that  the  couduct  of  the] 
Americans  was  of  that  description  ? — A.  I  have  stated  in  my  reports  i 
what  I  knew  to  be  facts  obtained  from  reliable  people ;  but  I  stuted  also 
that  such  was  not  the  general  conduct  of  Americans. 

Q.  Not  the  universal  conduct  ? — A.  That  it  was  not  the  general  cou- 


AWARD   QF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


895 


duct  of  Ainericau  crews,  and  in  general  American  captains  were  decent 
aD(l  respectable  men.    That  is  what  I  stated  in  my  reports. 

Q.  That  sacb  was  not  the  general  conduct  of  American  crews  f — A. 
Not  the  general  conduct ;  but  often  when  the  crews  of  {lerhaps  ten  ves- 
gels  come  ashore,  they  make  great  depredations,  and  our  iieople  are 
very  much  afraid  of  them.  A  man  told  me,  not  long  ago,  that  he  and 
his  brother-in-law,  who  was  also  his  ueighlrar,  had  to  guard  their  houses 
for  about  seven  days,  because  tho  Americans  happened  to  be  seven  days 
jQ  that  cove,  and  tbey  feared  the  men  would  attempt  to  break  in  their 
bouses.    Tbey  were  afraid  for  the  women  and  children. 

Q.  When  did  that  occur  f —  A.  A  good  many  years  ago^teu  or  twelve 
Tears. 
'  Q.  When  were  you  told  it! — A.  This  summer. 

Q.  Where  ? — A.  At  Great  Valley,  ou  the  River  Saiut  Tiawrence. 

Q.  Who  told  you  so  ? — A.  The  man  himself  who  had  to  guard  bis 
bouse. 

Q.  What  is  his  name  ? — A.  I  forget  his  name. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  record  of  it  I — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  When  did  you  say  it  happened  f — A.  He  told  me  the  year  it  hap- 
pened ;  it  must  have  been  twelve  or  fifteen  years  ago. 

Q.  Had  you  heard  of  that  event  before  ? — A.  Not  of  that  particular 
cue. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  did  you  make  a  record  of  it?  The  time  within 
which  proceedings  could  be  taken  had,  under  the  statute  of  limitations, 
expired,  except  for  murder  or  certain  matters  against  the  Grown  f — A.  I 
thought  it  was  very  useful  to  prove  that,  when  American  fishermen  come 
and  take  fish  near  our  shores,  our  people  are  subjected  to  insults  and 
depredations  by  Americans.  I  thought  it  useful  to  show  that  to  the 
Commission.  It  was  not  to  show  that  it  was  the  usual  practice  of  Ameri- 
cans, but  to  show  how  exposed  we  are,  because  our  population  is  scat- 
tered along  the  coast,  and  that  five  or  six  crews  of  vessels  gathering  in 
one  cove  will  go  ashore  and  frighten  the  whole  people.  Sometimes  the 
crewH  are  sober  and  sometimes  they  are  in  liquor. 

Q.  Now,  that  would  apply  to  all  vessels  that  come  and  fish,  whether 
American  or  British  ? — A.  We  see  but  few  British  vessels  there. 

Q.  Would  not  that  apply  to  that  class  of  persons  engaged  fishing  in 
large  vessels ;  it  is  not  peculiarly  American  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Therefore  it  is  an  objection  to  all  fishing  conducted  in  large  ves- 
sels!—A.  No. 

Q.  Why  not? — A.  It  might  be  the  same  with  some  other  crews,  but  I 
don't  know. 

Q.  You  have  never  tried  ? — A.  No ;  and  we  would  not  like  to  try. 

Q.  You  thought  it  valuable  that  this  fact  should  be  preserved  ? — A. 
Ves.    There  are  several  other  similar  facts  also. 

Q.  Have  you  preserved  them  ? — A.  They  are  in  the  affidavits. 

Q.  Respecting  these  insults  ? — A.  Y'^es,  in  several  places. 

Q.  Would  you  give  me  the  names  of  any  other  persons  ? — A.  I  could 
not  give  you  the  names  now ;  if  I  look  at  the  affidavits  I  can  do  so. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  affidavits  in  which  these  matters  occur 
have  l)een  read  ? — A.  1  do  not  know. 

Q.  These  affidavits,  I  believe,  were  sworn  before  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  any  list  of  the  96  affidavits  taken  by  you  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  not  handed  in  a  list  ? — A.  I  handed  in  to  the  govern- 
Dient  the  affidavits  themselves. 

Q<  And  there  was  not  a  list  with  the  affidavits? — A.  A  gentleman 


896 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


who  accompanied  me  handed  in  the  aflAilavits  and  list,  if  a  list  was 
given. 

Q.  Did  yon  keep  any  list  f— A.  No. 

Q.  As  far  as  yon  know,  did  the  other  gentlemen  keep  a  list  t— A.  He 
kept  a  journal  and  entered  all  the  names. 

Q.  Who  did  f — A.  Dr.  Wakeman.  He  is  now  at  GaspiS,  and  be  took 
his  journal  with  him.  He  was  going  to  give  evidence  before  tlie  Com- 
mission, but  could  not  wait. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  aflBdavit  of  this  one  man,  whoRe  name 
you  don't  remember,  contained  anything  more  than  the  statement  cou- 
cerning  the  outrage f— A.  It  contains  different  matters  relative  to  the 
fisheries. 

Q.  How  many  morecasesof  outrage  did  you  examine  into  t— A.  We  did 
not  examine  witnesses  particularly  as  to  that,  but  what  they  knew  about 
the  flsherieK  in  regard  to  the  Treaty  of  Washington ;  and  when  they  made 
aflBdavits  on  oath,  they  made  these  statements  regarding  American  fish- 
ermen committing  depredations;  we  never  asked  them  particularly. 

Q.  How  many  more  of  these  cases  are  there f — A.  I  could  not  tell  the 
number ;  there  are  several. 

Q.  How  many  in  the  90  affidavits  which  yon  tookf — A.  I  dare  say 
there  might  be  at  least  ten  who  testified  to  depredations  committed  on 
the  coast. 

Q.  You  put  what  tbey  sttted  on  the  subject  of  depredations,  even 
though  committed  twelve  or  thirteen  years  ago,  into  the  affidavits  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  make  an  inquiry  as  a  magistrate,  stipendiary,  or  other- 
wise into  the  truth  of  those  statements  f — A.  The  people  who  gave  their 
affidavits  under  oath  as  to  what  tbey  knew  of  the  fisheries  in  regard  to 
the  Treaty  of  Washington  came  voluntarily.  1  said  to  them,  "  Do  yea 
know  anything  about  depredations  committed  by  Americans?"  And 
tbey  said  in  such  a  year  such  a  thing  happened,  either  to  me  or  my 
neighbors,  or  in  some  other  cove. 

(j.  Did  you  inquire  as  to  how  far  these  statements  were  true?— A. 
Yes,  when  we  could  do  so ;  but  it  was  difficult  because  of  the  shortness 
of  the  time.  We  did  not  want  to  prosecute  the  offenders ;  we  could  not 
do  so. 

Q.  You  could  not  prosecute  them  because  the  events  happened  too 
long  ago? — A.  One-half  of  the  time  we  did  not  know  who  committed 
depredations. 

Q.  Did  the  people  not  know  the  names  of  the  vessels  to  which  the 
crews  belonged  ? — A.  Sometimes  tbey  did. 

Q.  Did  yon  obtain  the  names  of  the  vessels  ? — A.  Not  from  those 
people  this  summer. 

Q.  But  you  did  obtain  the  names  of  p^^rsons  on  whom,  it  is  said,  dep- 
redations have  been  committed? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  yon  made  reports  on  the  depredations  to  the  department  of  j 
police? — A.  Certainly  not. 

Q.  You  thought  it  quite  sufficient  to  allow  them  to  go  in  tbe  scale  at 
this  Gommission  ? — A.  I  wanted  to  know  whether  our  fishermen,  living 
on  the  coast,  were  interfered  with  or  injured  in  their  fishing  by  Ameri- 
can fishermen,  who  are  allowed  by  the  treaty  to  participate  in  tbe  same  | 
fishery ;  and  I  found  it  was  amply  proved.  j 

Q.  Did  it  never  occur  to  you  that  this  matter  had  nothing  to  do  with 
the  snttiect  before  the  Commission  ? — A.  It  did  not ;  I  thought  jt  had  | 
something  to  do  with  the  question. 


▲WARD  OF  TllS   FI8HEBT   COMMISSION. 


897 


Q.  Do  yon  think  so  now  f — A.  I  think  so  yet,  and  shall  do  so  antil 
they  show  me  I  am  wrong. 

Q.  Wonld  it  not  take  a  good  deal  to  satisfy  yon  that  it  had  not  some- 
tbiiit;  to  do  with  the  subject  before  the  Gommissiouf — A.  1  would 
require  some  goo<]  reasons. 

Q.  If  it  produced  any  effect,  would  it  not  be  that  of  irritating  the 
people  and  causing  them  to  be  prejudiced  against  the  Americans  f — A. 
We  never  did  anything  to  prejudice  the  minds  of  the  people,  and  we 
bflre  Hdffered  in  silence  for  many  years. 

Q.  In  that  same  wayf — A.  Tes.  We  have  suffered  from  the  depre* 
dntionR  uf  Americans,  and  have  suffered  in  silence.  The  iieoplo  might 
have  made  complaints  to  the  government ;  many  complaints  were  made 
to  me,  for  I  was  then  commander  of  the  government  vessel. 

Q.  Did  you  try  to  arrest  the  offenders  f — A.  It  was  difficult  to  run 
after  vessels  outside. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  catch  any  vessel  or  man  that  had  committed  depre- 
(lationM  ? — A.  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  examine  into  any  case,  except  to  take  depositions 
for  this  hearing  on  this  question  of  the  value  of  fisheries  ? — A.  I  exam- 
ined officially  into  some  casjs,  but  we  could  not  find  the  perpetrators; 
they  had  gone.    I  believe  in  some  cases  I  knew  the  names  of  the  vessels. 

Q.  Did  you  follow  up  those  cases  in  which  you  knew  the  names  of 
vessels  f — A.  I  sometimes  took  the  depositions  of  the  people  in  expecta- 
tion of  again  finding  the  vessels  in  British  waters,  but  I  did  not  find 
them. 

Q.  What  have  you  done  with  those  depositions! — A.  I  suppose  they 
are  now  lost. 

Q.  Have  you  looke<1  after  them  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  get  them  and  utilize  them  in  this  inquiry  T — A. 
We  (lid  not  think  of  prosecuting  the  offenders  except  at  the  time. 

Q.  Did  it  ever  occur  to  you  that  yon  might  look  up  these  affidavits 
and  make  use  of  them  before  the  Commission  f — A.  Never. 

(j.  Why  wonld  they  not  be  as  good  to  prove  outrages  as  the  affidavits 
taken  during  your  recent  trip  f — ^A.  They  might  prove  them  as  well,  but 
I  never  thought  of  them  and  never  looked  for  them. 

Q.  You  say  American  vessels  come  in  to  your  shrre^,  that  your  peo- 
ple lay  out  their  nets  at  night,  and  that  the  Americans  have  torn  up 
and  injured  those  moored  nets  Y — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  made  inquiry  into  any  of  these  cases  of  injury  and 
insult!— A.  Certainly. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  arrested  any  party? — A.  Sometimes;  yes.    You 

I  nnst  remember  I  had  1,000  miles  of  coast  to  protect,  and  many  times  I 

came  to  places  where  outrages  had  been  committed  after  they  had  been 

I  (oiiiniitted.     Sometimes  the  people  knew  the  names  of  the  vessels. 

SoinetiiDes  they  lodged  a  complaint,  and  sometimes  they  did  not  think 

it  worth  while.    When  they  made  a  deposition  I  took  the  name  of  the 

ressel,  with  the  expectation  of  perhaps  finding  the  vessel  a  second  time 
Nnring  the  season  in  British  waters.  As  to  depredations,  I  know  my* 
klf  as  to  the  fact,  because  when  I  have  entered  coves  the  people  have 

(ome  out,  boarded  my  vessel,  and  told  me  that  one,  two,  or  three  weeks 
more  American  vessels  had  come  to  anchor,  moored  inside,  and,  when 
lifter  wards  getting  nnder  way,  they  would  sometimes  tear  the  nets  and 
Itometiines  carry  the  nets  away  altogether. 

Q-  Did  the  people  whose  affidavits  yon  obtained  complain  very  mach 
l«f  injury  done  to  their  nets  by  Americans  during  the  last  twelve  or 
jfoarteen  years  ? — A.  They  did  not  give  that  as  a  complaint.    It  is  onl;* 
57  p 


898 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


sure;  I 


to  show  that  daring  the  Beciprooity  Treaty  not  only  were  their  flsli  taken 
by  foreigners,  bat  they  were  sabjeoted  to  insults  and  depredatioiiH. 

Q.  Among  them  yon  include  injury  done  to  nets  f— A.  I  mean  iter- 
•onal  insultSf  breaking  into  houses  and  insults  to  women. 

Q.  Among  the  injuries  you  include  injuries  to  nets  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  do  not  su)  pose  the  injury  done 
to  the  nets  was  intentionally  done  t— A.  I  do  not  believe  it  was  iu  most 
cases :  but  in  several  cases  it  was  intentional.  Perhaps  it  was  luore 
done  for  a  lark  than  anything  else.  I  took  an  aiUdavit  iu  which  a  inaii 
said  an  American  vessel  getting  under  way  took  his  net,  with  his  anchor. 
The  fisherman,  the  owner  of  the  net  caught  by  the  anchor,  was  in  Im 
Ixwt  as  the  net  was  fastened  to  the  stern  of  the  boat  because  be  sum 
drifting.  The  American  got  under  way  and  took  away  the  net  with  the 
anchor.  It  was  blowing  a  good  breeze,  the  vessel  was  under  sail,  and 
the  boat  was  dragged  stern  foremost  six  or  eight  miles,  and,  of  course, 
the  boat  was  in  danger  of  being  capsized  and  the  man  of  losing  hii 
life,  but  the  people  ou  board  of  the  vessel  were  laughing  all  the  time. 

Q.  Did  it  happen  at  night  f — A.  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  Why  don't  you  think  it  was  at  night  f — A.  Because  the  man  told 
me  that  under  oath. 

Q.  Did  he  tell  you  it  was  not  at  night  1 — A.  I  don't  remember 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  was  not  done  at  night  f — A.  I  am  not 
don't  believe  it  was. 

Q.  Why  do  you  not  believe  so  ? — A.  I  don't  remember. 

Q.  Then  when  you  don't  remember,  you  always  assume  the  \ror»t 
against  the  Americans,  do  you  f — A.  The  man  gave  his  affidavit  iu  that 
way. 

Q.  Where  is  the  affidavit  f — A.  In  the  hands  of  the  governmeut. 

Q.  What  is  the  man's  namef — A.  I  don't  remember.  Yon  will  flud 
the  man's  name  if  you  look  at  the  affidavit ;  he  is  from  Great  Valley. 

Q.  You  don't  know  whether  he  deposed  that  it  occurred  during  the 
day  or  at  night  f — A.  1  don't  remember. 

Q.  But  you  assume  it  was  by  day  f — A.  They  don't  drift  on  dark 
nights.    I  assume  it  was  daylight. 

Q.  You  say  there  was  a  strong  gale  of  wind  blowing  ? — A.  A  very 
good  breeze  blowing — a  strong  breeze. 

Q.  You  made  up  your  mind  that  what  was  done  was  all  intentional  ?— 
A.  I  never  made  up  my  mind  that  they  hooked  the  net  intentionally.  I 
am  only  repeating  what  the  depouent  said  under  oath  in  his  affidavit. 

Q.  Your  opinion  is  that  if  he  did  not  hook  the  net  intentionally  yet 
he  drifted  intentionally  f— A.  Yes;  that  is  what  the  people  said. 

Q.  Have  you  got  any  more  cases  of  insults  or  injuries;  can  you  give 
US  any  names? — A.  There  are  some  others  in  the  affidavits.  Icau't 
remember  their  names. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  places  from  which  there  are  affidavits  regard 
ing  outrages f— A.  There  is  one  from  a  man  from  Mont  Louis. 

Q.  Were  iiunries  done  to  that  man's  vessel  f — A.  He  explained  in  bit 
affidavit  the  injuries  he  suffered. 

Q.  Were  his  nets  injured  f— A.  No. 

Q.  How  many  cases  are  mentioned  in  the  affidavits  you  took  of  injoryj 
having  been  done  by  American  vessels  to  the  nets  of  your  people!— Aj 
I  don't  remember;  I  believe  in  ten  affidavits  they  speas  of  depredations,! 
ii^juries  done  on  shore  and  to  nets. 

Q.  How  many  relate  to  injuries  done  to  nets  f— A.  I  don't  remember. 
These  people  were  speaking  of  what  was  done  ou  a  certain  coast;  def 


▲WARD  OF  THE  FISHERY   C0MMI8SI0N. 


899 


redatiooH  might  have  been  oommitted  at  another  place,  and  the  people 
at  the  former  place  would  not  know  of  them. 

Q.  lojnries  to  nets  iu  other  places  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  ii^ury  being  done  to  a  fisherman,  a  Brit- 
jgh  subject,  by  another  British  subject T — A.  I  have  heaid  that  some  of 
the  crews  of  vessels  from  Canso  had  lauded  on  the  shore  and  had  in- 
salted  and  frightened  the  people. 

Q.  Did  you  take  affidavits  iu  regard  to  those  casesf — A.  I  took  depo- 
sitions when  those  cases  happeued,  wheu  I  was  stipendiary  magiHtrate. 

Q,  This  3'ear  you  were  getting  up  testimony  with  two  geutlemen  and 
you  beard  of  those  cases;  did  you  make  any  memoranda  or  take  any 
evidence  as  to  those  outrages? — A.  Nut  oue  of  the  deponents  that  I  saw 
ever  offered  to  make  a  deposition  against  a  British  vessel  or  subject. 

Q.  But  yon  heard  there  were  such  casesf — A.  I  heard  there  were 
when  I  was  commander  of  the  government  vessel;  but  I  8up|K)se  the 
cases  I  have  heard  of  were  nut  known  of  by  the  persons  who  made  the 
depositions. 

Q.  You  were  there  this  summer;  were  you  only  after  cases  of  injury 
done  by  Americans !— A.  We  were  not  after  the  subject  of  injuries  in 
particular. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  Did  you  keep  a  list  of  American  vessels  you  saw  during  your  late 
trip  this  summer  T — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  yon  enumerated  all  yon  saw  this  summer  T — A.  No. 

Q.  I  wish  you  would  state  to  the  Gommission  all  the  American  vessels 
yoD  saw,  and  how  many  fish  they  were  catching. — A.  I  did  not  see  many. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  how  many  American  vessels  you  saw  during  the 
trip? — A.  I  saw  but  very  few  American  vessels. 

Q.  Begin  where  you  saw  one  vessel,  and  give  the  Gommission,  in  de- 
tail, an  account  of  the  American  vessels  which  were  enjoying  the  privi- 
lege of  fishing  in  and  about  British  waters,  and  which  you  saw  during 
yoar  three  week's  trip. — A.  We  saw  them  in  Bay  Ghaleurs. 

Q.  You  have  mentioned  those  already.  Were  those  all  yon  sawf — 
A.  Yes,  on  the  coast  of  Gasp^. 

Q.  Did  you  not  see  any  in  the  places  where  yon  took  affidavits  f — A. 
So. 

Q.  Were  there  none  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  T — A.  Yes,  there  were 
several. 

Q.  What  were  they  doing  f — A.  Fishing  for  mackerel. 

Q.  How  many  do  you  say  were  at  Magdalen  Islands  f — A.  I  wight 
have  seen  about  25  maokereling  and  sailing  about. 

Q.  Did  you  see  any  at  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  f — A.  We  did  not 
pa88  that  way.  We  had  not  much  chance  to  see  vessels,  because  in  the 
daytime  we  were  anchored  near  the  shore,  and  at  night  we  went  from 
one  place  to  another,  and  there  was  a  great  deal  of  fog  dnring  th?  trip. 
We  were  only  three  days  at  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  dnring  a  day 
ud  a  half  there  was  fog ;  but  as  we  went  into  Pleasant  Bay  we  saw 
25  outside. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  bow  many  vessels  the  fleet  numbered  there  f — A. 
We  beard  there  were  70. 

Q.  Where  did  yon  hear  that  f — A.  At  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Did  you  not  hear  about  the  number  of  vessels  at  other  points  T— 
I  A.  We  did  not  hear. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  fact  that  there  were  not  any  except  those  yon  have 
I  nferred  tot — A.  We  were  not  taking  the  names  of  vessels. 


900 


AWARD   OF  THE   FI9HERT   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Have  yon  renson  to  Rnppose  there  were  any  American  vesssis  an.y> 
▼here  in  the  vicinity  of  tho  pI(M:e.s  yon  went  to,  except  such  as  you  have 
already  mentioned  ? — A.  At  the  Magdalen  Islands  I  saw  only  one  side 
of  the  islands,  and  I  was  told  there  were  a  good  many  on  the  other  side. 

Q.  Was  the  reason  you  gave  to  Mr.  ]3ana  for  there  biding  m  few 
American  vessels,  that  it  was  not  late  enough  in  the  season  t— A.  Yes; 
on  the  coast  of  Gasp^. 

Q.  Did  you  go  through  fcbe  Strait  of  Canso? — A.  No;  we  weut  from 
Oasp^  to  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  remained  there  three  days. 

Q.  Did  you  not  come  down  iuto  this  province  f — A.  To  Picton. 

Q.  At  what  time  do  American  vessels^usually  arrive  at  Gasp^?— A.  In 
August. 

Q.  At  what  time  in  August? — A.  Sometimes  at  the  beginning,  some- 
times in  th^  middle;  sometimes  in  July.  It  depends  ou  the  quantity  ot 
fish  they  And  on  the  way. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  the  usual  time  for  the  arrival  of  American 
fishing-vessels  at  the  grounds  where  they  intend  to  flsh  on  these  coasts 
is  about  the  4th  of  July  If — A.  It  might  be  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  and 
Prince  Edward  Island,  but  they  come  late  to  Gasp6. 

Q.  How  late  I — A.  A  bout  the  middle  of  August  and  the  end  of  Au- 
gust, and  sometimes  the  beginning  of  August.  When  commanding  the 
government  vessel  I  never  saw  a  fleet  there  till  the  beginning  or  end 
of  August;  sometimes  I  saw  a  few  vessels  there  in  the  beginning. 

Q.  Have  you  not  kept  yourself  familiar  with  the  Gasp^  coast,  so  as 
to  know  that  no  considerable  number  of  American  vessels  have  fished 
for  mackerel  there  ? — A.  There  have  not  been  many  for  some  years. 

By  Mr.  DouLre : 

Q.  As  to  the  opinions  that  you  expressed  about  the  Washington 
Treaty,  were  they  acquired  opinions,  or  did  you  express  similar  opiuious 
formerly,  at  other  times  ? — A.  I  expressed  opinions  unfavorable  to  the 
Treaty  of  Washington,  because  I  knew  the  bad  effect  of  the  Eeciprocity 
Treaty. 

.  Q.  What  occasion  had  you  to  express  such  opinions? — A.  Because 
under  the  Eecipcocity  Treaty  we  gave  up  the  fisheries  of  the  Gulf  ot"  St. 
Lawrence,  our  fishermen  getting  nothing  in  return  except  the  competi- 
tion of  American  fishermen  in  their  own  waters. 

Q.  Had  you  any  public  occasion  to  express  such  opinions?— A.  I 
expressed  them  in  Parliament. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  voyage  made  by  you  on  the  coast  of  Gaspe,  what 
remuneration  have  you  received  ? — A.  None  at  all. 

Q.  What  remuneration  do  you  expect  to  receive? — A,  None. 

Q.  Have  you  received  even  your  traveling  expenses  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  done  this  from  public  spirit?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  believ*.'  you  were  not  round  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Cape 
Breton  and  do  not  know  what  number  of  vessels  were  fishing  there  f— 
A.  I  do. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  You  have  spoken  of  caplin  coming  into  the  shore  at  certain  sea- 
sous;  what  do  they  come  in  for? — A.  To  spawn.    They  come  in  toj 
spawn  in  immense  numbers.    You  see  the  spawn  in  great  quantity  on 
the  sand  and  beach,  as  you  see  lantz.    Gaplin  continued  on  the  coast  of  | 
Gasp6  for  more  than  a  month  during  each  of  two  years. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  Do  you  regard  yourselt  as  particularly  well  informed  as  a  uatnra!- 1 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


901 


istf— A.  I  was  a  naturalist  by  occasion,  not  by  profession, 
described  some  varieties  of  tlie  flsli  and  birds  of  tlie  gulf. 

No.  50. 


I  have 


James  Higksox,  government  fishing  overseer  for  the  county  of  Glou- 
cester, residing  at  Bathurst,  Gloucester,  N.  B.,  called  on  behalf  of  the 
Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  As  fishery  overseer  your  jurisdiction  extendsi  from  the 
couuty  line  at  Belledune  Eiver  down  to  Tracadie,  I  believe  ? — Answer. 
Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  resided  in  Bathurst  all  your  life  ? — A.  I  was  born  on  the 
coast,  twenty  miles  below  Bathurst,  where  I  lived  during  the  summer 
luonths  until  twenty-five  years  ago.    I  have  resided  in  Bathurst  since. 

Q.  During  all  your  life  you  have  had  an  acquaintance  with  the  fish- 
ery, have  you  not  I — A.  I  know  the  coast-fishery  pretty  well. 

Q.  Is  there  a  large  fishing  business  prosecuted  on  the  south  shore  of 
Chalenrs  Bay  ? — A.  There  is  a  very  large  business  in  cod-tlshing,  and 
has  been  for  a  number  of  years;  and  the  mackerel  fishing  and  salmon 
fishing  are  increasing  yearly. 

Q.  Are  there  Banks  along  the  south  shore  of  Bay  Chalenrs? — A. 
There  are. 

Q.  About  how  far  are  the  Banks  from  land? — A.  The  cod- banks  are 
from  one  mile  to  two  miles  and  a  half  from  the  shore  along  the  coast. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  depth  of  water  on  the  Banks  ? — A.  It  aver- 
ages about  seven  fathoms. 

Q.  Between  the  shores  and  these  Banks  there  is  much  deeper  water  f^ 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  beyond  the  Banks  the  water  is  still  deeper  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  the  water  abruptly  deep  on  each  side  of  the  Banks  ? — A.  Shoal* 
ing  oft'  as  it  would  on  any  sand  or  gravel  bank. 

Q.  What  fish  feed  on  those  Banks? — A.  Codfish,  chiefly. 

Q.  Are  the  cod  chiefly  taken  on  those  Banks  in  Chalenrs  Bay  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  why  they  resort  to  those  Banks? — A.  They  resort 
there  for  food. 

Q.  Tliere  is  more  food  to  be  taken  on  those  Banks  ? — A.  There  is  more 
food  on  the  Banks  than  at  other  places. 

Q.  Do  the  Banks  extend  toward  Restigonchef — A.  I  don't  know  that 
they  extend  above  the  mouth  of  Bathurst  Basin.  I  am  acquainted  with 
several  of  the  Banks,  and  have  fished  at  several  between  that  point  and 
Caraqnette. 

Q.  How  is  the  cod-fishery  prosecuted  in  that  bay  ? — A.  It  is  hand- 
fishing  with  book  and  line  by  the  inhabitants. 

Q.  It  is  boat  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  About  how  many  boats  are  employed  ? — A.  I  took  an  account  for 
it  number  of  seasons,  and  it  appears  in  the  fisheries  report.  I  rendered 
that  account  to  the  department  as  a  correct  account  of  the  number  of 
boats  on  the  south  side  of  the  bay. 

Q.  The  number  is  entered  at  1,128  boats  ? — A.  That  will  be  correct. 

Q.  How  many  men  are  employed? — A.  The  number  is  also  given  in 
the  report.    Some  of  the  boats  have  two  and  some  three  men  each. 

Q-  What  do  they  do  with  the  cod  they  catch  ? — A.  Some  few  are 
cured  by  the  fishermen  themselves.    Generally  the  fish  are  brought  to 


902 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


sbore  and  sold  green  to  the  merchants,  who  care  them  and  ship  them  to 
Europe. 

Q.  Does  any  part  of  the  cured  cod  go  to  the  United  States?— A.  I 
have  had  no  report  of  any  being  shipped  to  the  United  States,  aud  I  an, 
not  aware  of  any. 

Q.  Is  a  large  quantity  of  mackerel  taken  on  your  shores  ?— A.  There 
is  a  large  quantity  taken  some  years,  and  other  years  the  quautity  is 
not  so  large. 

Q.  In  those  years  when  a  less  quantity  of  mackerel  is  taken,  to  what 
do  you  attribute  it  f — ^A.  To  stormy  weather  Hud  want  of  bait. 

Q.  Does  the  stormy  weather  affect  the  chance  of  getting  bait?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  bait  do  you  generally  use  for  mackerel ! — A.  Our  fishermen 
use  spring  herring,  lantz,  and  pogies  when  they  can  get  them. 

Q.  Does  caplin  come  in  to  the  shore  ? — A.  In  large  quantities. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  when  you  say  that  when  there  is  a  want  of  bait 
those  years  and  yon  do  not  catch  as  many  fish,  it  is  due  to  the  weather 
being  too  stormy  ? — A.  It  is  because  it  is  too  stormy  to  get  the  bait. 

Q.  What  time  does  the  bait  season  commence  with  you? — A.  The 
spring  herring  strike  in  as  soon  as  the  ice  is  out — on  1st  May.  The 
caplin  comes  about  1st  June,  smelt  about  15th  June,  and  lantz  in  July 
aud  August. 

Q.  How  do  your  fishermen  take  the  bait  ? — A.  They  take  smelt  in 
the  mouths  of  rivers  with  scoop-nets,  and  capliu  with  scoop-nets  along 
the  shore. 

Q.  Do  they  keep  a  large  supply  of  fresh  bait  on  hand  or  do  they 
trust  to  a  daily  supply  ? — A.  They  have  to  trust  to  a  daily  supply. 

Q.  Then  when  it  is  very  stormy  and  the  fishermen  cannot  get  bait, 
they  consequently  cannot  get  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  north  side  of  the  bay  ? — A.  !N^ot  suffi- 
ciently to  speak  regarding  it. 

Q.  Take  the  south  side  of  the  bay ;  is  the  mackerel  fishery  an  inshore 
or  outshore  fishery? — A.  Three-fourths  of  all  mackerel  taken  on  the 
south  side  of  the  bay  are  taken  inside  of  three  miles  from  a  coast  line. 

Q.  How  far  inside  as  a  rule  ? — A.  From  all  my  experience  and  obser- 
vation I  think  the  greatest  quantity  of  mackerel  is  taken  about  two 
miles  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Do  mackerel  feed  much  on  the  cod-banks  you  speak  of? — Q.  'So; 
they  feed  more  on  lantz,  caplin,  and  smelt,  inside  the  Bauks. 

Q.  That  would  be  within  one  mile  of  the  shore  ? — A.  A  great  quan- 
tity is  taken  within  one  mile ;  but  the  bulk  of  the  mackerel  is  taken 
between  one  mile  and  two  miles  from  the  shore  all  along  the  coast. 

Q.  From  Belledune  River,  which  is  the  dividing  line  between  Resti- 
gouche  and  Gloucester  counties,  all  the  way  down  on  the  south  side  and 
around  Miscou,  and  down  as  far  as  Tracadie,  you  have  jurisdiction,  and  i 
know  the  coast  ? — A.  I  can  speak  with  more  certainty  from  Belleduue 
Point  to  Point  Miscou  than  I  can  from  the  eastern  point  of  Miscon  to 
Tracadie. 

Q.  Is  not  the  codfish  also,  to  a  great  extent,  an  inshore  flsh  ?— A.  In 
the  early  part  of  the  season  the  cod  are  taken  within  one  mile  of  the  i 
shore  j  at  some  seasons  they  move  farther  out,  but  they  are  generally  j 
taken  along  the  Banks  I  have  spoken  of  as  their  feeding-grounds.        i 

Q.  Is  the  annual  catch  of  cod  there  very  large  ? — A.  It  is  a  large  j 
catch. 

Q.  Is  it  increasing  or  decreasing  every  year? — A.  Last  season  it  wasj 
not  so  good  as  it  bad  been  some  seasons  before. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERT   COMMISSION. 


903 


Q.  Why  f — A.  They  attribute  it  to  the  weather  being  very  stormy  and 
vant  of  bait.  This  season  it  is  better  than  it  has  been  for  a  number  of 
years ;  it  is  gradually  increasing. 

*  Q.  I  suppose  it  is  increasing  because  more  people  are  engaged  in  the 
basiness  T — A.  Not  on  our  coast.  I  do  not  think  there  are  any  more 
fishermen  there  than  there  were  ten  years  ago.  The  business  is  con- 
ducted by  firms  which  carry  on  their  business  by  rule.  I  am  now  speak- 
ing of  the  Jersey  honsen. 

Q.  Do  the  Jersey  houses  have  fishermen  go  up  as  far  as  Bathurst  I — 
A.  No ;  they  are  out  more  towards  the  open  gulf,  Caraquette,  Shippe- 
gan,  and  round  there. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  how  many  vessels  are  employed  on  the  south  side 
of  Bay  Cbaleurs  f — A.  It  is  also  in  the  roport. 

Q.  The  number  stated  is  17  vessels  f — A.  I  think  that  is  the  number. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  how  many  American  mackerelers  were  fishing 
on  the  south  side  of  Bay  Ghaleurs  during  the  years  of  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty? — A.  I  have  seen  them  sailing  up  and  down  the  coast  fishing, 
but  I  could  not,  from  personal  observation,  give  yon  the  number,  for  I 
did  not  board  them  and  take  their  names.  From  reliable  information, 
lean  state  there  were  300  in  Little  Sbippegan  at  one  time.  One  man 
said  be  counted  306,  and  another  man  said  he  counted  300  at  a  different 
time. 

Q.  Would  those  numbers  coincide  with  your  own  opinion  on  the  sub- 
ject i — A.  Yes.  I  have  seen  sufficient  American  vessels  sailing  up  and 
down  the  bay  to  believe  such  was  correct.  I  counted  30  within  a  few 
miles'  space  fishing  and  drifting  off. 

Q.  How  close  in  were  they  fishing? — A.  At  that  time  they  were 
within  one  mile  and  a  half  and  two  miles  from  the  shore.  They  start 
early  in  the  day  inshore  with  a  southwest  wind,  throw  out  their  bait,  an  d 
drift  ott  as  they  fish. 

Q.  What  was  their  practice  in  coming  inshore  f  It  was  not  very  safe 
inshore? — A.  With  a  southwest  wind  they  are  perfectly  safe.  They 
would  run  in,  throw  out  the  bait,  heave  to  on  the  main-sail  ci^d 
jib,  and  drift  off  with  the  wind  to  a  distance  of  perhaps  five  or  six  miles 
oat. 

Q.  The  vessels  would  take  the  fish  out  with  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  mackerel  frequent  the  body  of  the  bay  or  the  shores  ? — A.  They 
frequent  the  shores  for  feeding  purposes. 

Q.  Then  to  get  them  out  toward  the  middle  of  the  bay  you  must  entice 
tbeni  out  ? — A.  Yes,  the  vessels  entice  them  out. 

Q.  Could  any  person  having  only  the  right  to  fish  in  the  body  of  the 
bay  and  away  from  the  shores,  possibly  succeed  in  fishing  ? — A.  Not  to 
make  it  pay. 

Q.  You  (io  not  think  it  could  be  successfully  carried  on  ? — A.  It  would 
not  pay  in  Bay  Ohaleurs. 

Q.  What  would  you  say  to  the  statement  that  the  inshore  fisheries 
for  mackerel  along  that  coast  are  practically  useless  and  worth  nothing 
at  all,  and  that  the  whole  profitable  fishing  is  outside  ?— A.  I  should 
say  the  man  who  made  it  either  knows  nothing  of  the  fisheries  or  else  he 
"vas  telling  a  willful  falsehood. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  the  mackerel  you  catch?— A.  They  are 
shipped  chiefly  to  the  United  States,  but  some  go  to  Quebec. 

Q.  Are  they  sent  fresh  ? — A.  They  are  now  shipping  them  fresh  in  ice 
by  the  Intercolonial  Railroad.  It  is  getting  to  be  a  very  large  and  grow- 
ing trade.  There  will  be  very  little  mackerel  pickled  this  year  their 
vay,  for  they  are  shipping  nearly  all  fresh. 


904 


▲WABD  OF  TU£  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Then  for  the  purpose  of  shippiug  fish  into  the  United  States,  the 
Treaty  of  Washington  will  be  of  very  little  value  to  your  part  of  the 
country,  for  before  the  treaty  fresh  fish  went  into  the  United  States 
freeY — ^A.  It  will  not  be  the  slightest  benefit  in  that  respect. 

Q.  You  don't  send  any  vessels  from  Bay  Chaleurs  to  fish  in  American 
waters,  I  suppose? — A.  I  never  heard  uf  any  of  our  vessels  going  there. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  a  Canadian  vessel  going  there  to  fish  ?— A. 
I  never  heard  of  one. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  catches  of  American  vessels,  do  you  know  a  ves- 
sel called  the  John  Wesley  ? — A.  I  remember  her  well ;  I  have  seeu 
her  frequently. 

Q.  Can  you  fix  the  years  ? — A.  I  cannot ;  but  she  came  year  after  year 
to  our  shores.  I  have  seen  her  about  20  years  ago,  aud  I  think  the  last 
time  I  saw  her  was  6  or  7  years  ago. 

Q.  Did  she  come  year  after  year  to  the  same  place  to  fish  ? — A.  She 
always  fished  along  the  same  coast,  from  Bathurst  Harbor  down  to 
Grindstone  Point,  aud  on  to  Caraquette  aud  back  again  dowu  that  coast. 
She  got  two  cargoes  a  year  generally.  She  was  a  small  vessel,  GO  or  70 
tons. 

Q.  She  got  all  she  could  carry  ? — A.  Yes ;  aud  she  generally  went 
home  early.  She  was  cjanted  oue  of  the  lucky  ones,  aud  she  wa.s  well 
acquaiuted  along  the  shore.  The  captain  uud  crew  used  to  call  aloug 
there  and  obtain  fresh  meat,  butter,  &c.  They  were  well  kuowii  and 
they  behaved  well.  They  fished  generally  right  aloug  the  shore  wherever 
they  wished  to  do  so,  no  oue  interfered  with  them. 

Q.  Did  that  vessel  come  each  year  to  catch  fish  inshore  ? — A.  So  far 
as  I  know,  she  always  caught  her  full  cargoes  along  the  coast  each  and 
every  year.  I  have  frequently  seeu  her  fishing  within  oue  and  a  half 
miles  of  the  shore,  year  after  year.  Several  other  Americau  vessels 
also  did  so,  but  I  cannot  give  their  names.  I  well  recollect  the  vessel  I 
particularly  mention.  I  know  the  captain,  aud  I  have  cou versed  with 
him  frequently.    I  do  not  remember  his  name. 

Q.  Did  she  fish  inside  the  limits  after  the  abolition  of  the  lleciprocity 
Treaty  ? — A.  I  cauuot  say  that  she  did.  I  do  uot  remember  of  her  hav- 
ing done  so. 

Q.  Besides  the  fisheries  of  which  you  have  spoken,  have  you  not  a 
herring  fishery  there? — A.  Yes,  we  have  a  spriug  aud  fall  herring 
fishery. 

Q.  Where  is  it  carried  on  ? — A.  The  spring  fishery  is  prosecuted  all 
along  the  coast.  The  herring  strike  along  the  coast  in  ahuo^t  all  direc 
tions.  The  fall  fishery  is  chiefiy  pursued  on  Caraquette  aud  Shippegau 
herring  banks,  aloug  the  coast. 

Q.  Was  this  a  very  important  fishery  at  oue  time  ? — A.  Yes,  and  a 
very  good  fishery.  Large  quautiiies  of  a  very  good  quality  of  herring 
were  taken  there. 

Q.  Are, these  Banks  within  IJ  miles  of  the  shore?— A.  The  Cara- 
quette Bank  is  situated,  I  think,  about  2  or  2^  miles  ott  Caraquette 
Island,  aud  Poiut  Mizenette;  oue  of  them,  a  small  bank,  is  uot  more 
than  one  mile  from  Poiut  Mizeuette,  and  the  other  one  is  situated  dowu  j 
towards  Miscou.  The  latter  is  the  Shippegau  Bank.  It  lays  probably  j 
one  mile  off  a  line  dowu  from  Point  Mizeuette  to  the  northeru  poiut  ut 
Miscou.  ; 

Q.  Those  were  two  important  and  prolific  fisheries  f — A.  Yes.  | 

Q.  Are  they  so  now  ? — A.  j^o.  1  went  there  two  years  ago  with  refer- 
ence to  some  disputes  which  had  arisen  among  schooners  and  tishing- 
boats ;  and  I  was  then  iuformed  by  all  parties  that  those  fisheries  had  j 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


»05 


been  nearly  dentroyed,  owing  to  the  throwing  of  giirry  overboard  from 
the  vessels.  The  fisheries  were  very  poor  that  season  and  last  season 
aloo,  owing  to  that  reason.  They  used  generally  to  catch  the  fish  in  aboat 
5  fatlioms  of  water,  but  the  year  J  was  there  they  had  had  to  move  out 
and  Ash  for  herring  in  about  9  fathoms  of  water,  as  fish  were  only  to  be 
taken  in  any  quantity  in  that  depth  of  water.  Last  season  they  took 
tbem  there  in  10  and  11  fathoms  of  water,  having  been  obliged  to  move 
«till  farther  out. 

Q.  How  far  would  this  be  from  the  land  ? — A.  Perhaps  half  a  mile  or 
a  mile  oft'  the  regular  Bank  where  the  herring  used  to  be  caught. 

Q.  Did  the  disputes  to  which  you  refer  arise  between  the  boats  and 
Anierican  vessels  f — A.  Word  was  sent  me  that  they  were  American 
vessels,  but  I  did  not  find  any  of  them  there.  Tbey  told  me  that  the 
Americans  left  before  I  arrived.  I  found  some  Nova  Scotian  and  Prince 
Edward  Island  vessels ;  these  also,  the  fishermen  said,  threw  gurry 
overboard. 

Q.  And  it  is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  this  has  destroyed  these  fish- 
eries ? — A.  Yes ;  it  has  done  so  to  a  great  extent  on  these  Banks. 

Q.  During  the  last  ten  years  the  Dominion  Government  has  gone  to 
cousiderable  trouble  and  expense,  I  believe,  in  reference  to  the  protec- 
tion of  the  fisheries  in  rivers  entering  into  the  Gulf  and  Bay  of  Cha- 
ieurs? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  lias  this  protection  of  the  fisheries  increased  the  number  of  the 
fish  in  those  rivers  ? — A.  Y'^es ;  and  also  along  the  coast. 

Q.  Has  it  improved  the  sea  fisheries  ? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  Because  it  has  increased  the  food  of  the  flsh.  Their 
food  has  thus  become  more  numerous  along  the  coast,  and  the  fish  come 
of  course  to  the  places  where  their  food  is  must  abundant. 

Q.  In  short,  you  say  that  the  protection  of  the  river  fisheries  has 
had  the  eft'ect  of  increasing  the  value  of  the  bay  fisheries  ? — A.  I  have 

00  hesitation  in  saying  so  positively. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  you  have  paid  attention  to  this  matter,  and  that 
it  is  part  of  your  business  to  do  so  If — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  has  increased  the  number  of  salmon ;  and  are  small  salmon 
preyed  upon  by  sea  fishes? — A.  Yes;  as  much  as  any  other  fish  while 
tbey  are  small  and  unable  to  protect  themselves.  Our  small  salmon  are 
destroyed  as  quickly  as  smelt. 

Q.  The  bait  of  these  flsh  has  been  increased  in  consequence  of  the 
protection  of  the  river  fisheries? — A.  Yes;  tbis  is  acknowledged  by 
every  one  who  is  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  subject. 

Q.  And  the  fish  in  the  rivers  are  increasing  rapidly  from  year  to 
year! — A.  Yes;  they  are  increasing  very  rapidly. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  system  of  trawl-fishing  ? — A.  I 
never  saw  them  trawling,  but  1  have  seen  the  trawls  when  rigged  and 
prepared  for  being  set. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  complaints  regarding  the  effect  of  trawl-fishing? — 
^■Yes;  our  Caraquette  and  Shippegan  boatmen,  who  fish  with  the 
line,  grumble  terribly  about  it,  and  say  that  by  trawling  all  the  large 
ud  parent  fish — the  breeding  fish — are  taken ;  thus  the  boat  fishermen 
ire  deprived  of  the  opportunity  of  taking  many  fish,  and  they  do  not 

1  <«CQre  their  share  of  the  large  fish  at  all. 
Q.  What  do  they  say  about  purse  seining  ? — A.  That  it  is  destructive 

I  (oucerning  all  kinds  of  fish,  big  and  small. 
Q>  Did  an  instance  of  this  occur  the  other  day  before  you  oamo  here? — 
^  fes ;  an  American  schooner,  said  to  hail  from  Gloucester,  cast  her 
leiae  about  three  miles  below,  and  to  the  east  of,  the  mouth  of , the  bar- 


906 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


bor,  and  abont  a  mile  off  shore,  and  snrroanded  a  very  lar^^e  quantity 
of  mackerel.  They  drew  the  purse,  and  while  so  doing  the  seine  caught 
on  a  fluke  of  an  anchor,  which  tore  a  great  part  of  the  bottom  out  of  the 
seine ;  hence  a  great  portion  of  the  mackerel  escaped,  but  nevertheless 
the  seiners  obtained  a  very  good  haul.  They  also  brought  up  a  very 
large  quantity  of  lobsters  in  the  seine.  I  tried  hard  to  obtain  ike  name 
of  this  vessel,  but  was  unable  to  do  so. 

Q.  The  purse  seine  takes  in  all  kinds  of  fish,  big  and  small  ? — A.  Yea- 
it  is  a  small  meshed  seine,  and  everything  that  it  encircles,  tbe  food  ot' 
the  fish,  tbe  fish,  and  everything  else,  is  taken. 

Q.  It  scrapes  the  bottom  clean  f — A.  Yes.  They  have  now  these 
seines  so  leaded  and  weighted  that  they  will  sink  to  the  bottom,  wiiat 
ever  be  the  depth  of  the  water.  As  soon  as  they  draw  the  seiiio  around 
the  mackerel  tbe  latter  descend.  They  first  raise  the  mackerel  in  a 
school  by  feeding  them,  and  then  they  shoot  out  the  boats,  and,  encir- 
cling the  school  with  the  seine,  draw  the  purse.  The  mackerel  always 
descend  in  order  to  get  under  the  seine,  and  therefore  the  latter  must 
reach  the  lK>ttom  almost  immediately  after  being  cast. 

Q.  Do  the  seiners  thus  kill  many  fish  useless  to  them  ? — A.  O,  dear, 
yes.  This  mode  of  seining  is  very  destructive  to  all  kinds  of  fisheries- 
very  destructive  indeed. 

Q.  Do  American  vessels  come  to  our  coast  to  secure  bait  for  fishing 
purposes? — A.  Yes.     Tbey  mnst  get  bait  from  the  shore  fishers. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  for  it  or  buy  it,  or  do  they  fish  for  and  buy  it  ?— A. 
They  fish  for  it  when  they  can,  and  if  they  can  buy  it  tbey  do  so. 

Q.  Have  you  squid  along  your  shores  ! — A.  Yes ;  in  large  quantities 
at  some  seasons  of  the  year.  They  strike  inshore  some  time  about  the  last 
of  August  and  the  first  of  September.  Tbey  have  not  arrived  yet.  Large 
quantities  were  there  last  season,  and  this  is  generally  the  case  every 
season. 

Q.  Squid  are  a  favorite  bait  for  cod  I — A.  They  are  lae  best  cod-bait 
for  trawling  lines  that  can  be  obtained.  They  are  considered  to  be  the 
best  bait  for  cod. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  oome  inshore  for  them  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  yon  have  largo  quantities  of  that  bait  on  your  coast  l'— A. 
Yes;  also  all  along  the  shore  from  Belledune  Point  to  South  Tracadie. 
I  have  seen  places  where  twenty  barrels  of  them  could  be  taken  with  a 
scoop-net;  you  could  wade  out  and  just  scoop  them  in. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  Americans  could  successfully  prosecute  the 
cod-fishing,  either  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  or  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs, 
nnless  they  had  the  privilege  of  coming  inshore  for  bait? — A.  No;  I  do 
not  think  that  they  could  do  so  otherwise.  I  do  not  consider  it  reason* 
able  to  think  that  they  could  carry  on  this  fishery  witaout  that  privilege. 
I  know  that  our  fishermen  have  to  come  in,  if  they  have  not  bait  etiongb, 
with  half  a  load,  and  sometimes  with  less  than  that ;  as  soon  as  their 
bait  is  done  they  have  to  come  inshore  to  secure  bait. 

Q.  You  said  that  there  was  not  a  very  good  catch  of  fish — say  mack- 
erel, for  instance — last  year,  and  you  attributed  this  to  the  stormy 
weather f — A.  Yes;  all  the  fishermen  of  whom  I  inquired  also  thought 

80. 

Q.  Did  you  see  the  fish  schooling  last  year! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  can  you  thus  tell  whether  they  are  plentiful  or  not ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  see  these  fish  schooling  as  usual  last  year  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  the  weather  was  too  stormy  to  permit  of  their  being  taken  T— 
A.  Yes ;  these  fish  will  not  rise  in  stormy  weather;  they  want  a  south- 
west wind  to  induce  them  to  do  so.    A  wind  oft'  land  is  the  best  wind  for 


[S8I0N. 

a  very  large  quantity 
oing  the  seine  ciinght 
the  bottom  out  of  the 
>ed,  but  nevertheless 

0  brought  ap  a  very 
(1  to  obtain  the  name 

itndflinall  ?— A.  Yes- 
encircles,  the  food  of 

ley  have  now  these 
to  the  bottom,  wfiat- 
raw  the  seine  around 
*e  the  mackerel  in  a 
he  boats,  and,  encir- 
The  mackerel  always 
efore  the  latter  must 
ast. 
them  !— A.  O,  dear, 

1  kinds  of  hsheries- 

ecnre  bait  for  flshiiig 

shore  fishers. 

for  and  buy  it  ?— A, 

it  they  do  so. 
;  in  large  quantities 
je  time  about  the  last 
t  arrived  yet.   Large 
jrally  the  case  every 

*re  lae  best  codbait 
considered  to  be  the 

i.  Yes. 

on  your  coast  i'— A. 
fc  to  South  Tracadie. 
mid  be  taken  with  a 

in. 

isfully  prosecute  the 
the  Bay  of  Chaleiirs, 
bait f— A.  No;  I  do 
t  consider  it  reason- 
tjout  that  privilege. 
»ve  not  bait  enough, 
kt ;  as  soon  as  their 
t. 

of  fish — say  mack- 
this  to  the  stormy 
quired  also  thought 

Yes. 

ul  or  not  t — A.  Yes. 

rear  f— A.  Yes. 

tieir  being  taken  f' 
they  want  a  soutb- 
is  the  best  wind  for 


AWARD   OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMfSSION. 


907 


the  taking  of  mackerel ;  when  the  water  is  perfectly  calm  they  school 
better  and  rise  better  to  the  bait. 

Q.  I  understand  that,  in  fact,  all  the  mackerel  now  taken  in  your 
neighborhood  are  shipped  at  once  to  the  United  States  in  the  fresh 
state  t— A.  Yes ;  the  chief  portion  of  them  is  so  shipped.  This  is  done 
wherever  they  can  be  brought  in  the  fresh  state  to  a  railway. 

Q.  If  the  market  for  fresh  fish  is  not  very  good  at  any  time,  do  they 
freeze  and  keep  them  ? — A.  Yes ;  for  winter  use. 

Q.  And  ship  them  in  winter  ?— A.  Yes.  1  think  there  are  five  freez- 
ers in  Bathurst. 

Q.  What  are  these  freezers  like!— A.  A  building  in  which  the  fish  are 
to  be  frozen  is  prepared,  and  they  generate  the  frost  by  mixing  salt  and 
ice,  and  putting  this  between  galvanized  iron  plates;  and  as  the  frost  is 
thrown  off  from  the  ice  by  the  decomposition  of  the  salt,  it  is  introduced 
into  the  fish  through  these  galvanized  sheet-iron  plates. 

Q.  And  the  fish  are  thus  frozen  in  summer  as  hard  as  it  is  possible  to 
freeze  them  in  winter? — A.  Yes;  a  forty-pound  salmon  can  be  frozen 
hard  in  twenty-four  hours. 

(^  And  how  long  can  they  keep  in  that  state?— A.  For  12  months  if 
yon  so  choose. 

(}.  And  if  the  market  for  these  fish  is  not  favorable  in  the  summer, 
they  can  be  frozen  in  the  fresh  state  and  sent  in  the  frozen  state  in 
winter  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  Yes. 

(}.  Practically  this  Washington  Treaty  is  of  no  earthly  use  to  the 
fishermen  in  your  neighborhood  ? — A.  It  is  not,  as  far  as  I  am  aware. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Do  you  remember  from  what  port  the  John  Wesley  comes  ? — A. 
No ;  nor  the  captain's  name,  though  I  have  seeu  him  frequently. 

(^>.  How  many  years  have  passed  since  she  visited  your  shores  ? — A. 
I  do  not  think  that  she  has  been  there  for  seven  years. 

().  She  does  not  appear  to  have  availed  herself  of  the  benefits  of  the 
Washington  Treaty? — A.  She  may  have  come  since  to  our  coast;  she 
may  be  afloat  yet,  for  all  I  know. 

Q.  How  many  American  mackerel  fishing  vessels  have  you  seen  this 
year  ? — A.  1  could  not  say. 

Q.  Uow  many  have  you  heard  of  as  being  there  ? — A.  None  were  in 
when  I  was  down  the  coast. 

<^  When  was  that  ? — A.  About  the  20th  of  July. 

(J.  Have  you  heard  of  any  being  there  since  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Uow  many  ?— A.  Some  have  passed  up  the  bay,  but  I  could  not 
tell  liow  many,  because  tbey  may  pass  up  and  come  down  again. 

Q.  So  the  same  vessel  may  be  counted  twice  f — A.  Yes,  for  aught  I 
know. 

(^  One  is  pretty  sure  to  count  them  twice  I — A.  Yes.  I  only  know 
of  three  or  four  vessels  tliat  have  been  seen  coming.  Of  course  I  did 
not  make  inquiries  on  the  subject,  but  the  seiner  I  mentioned,  and  two 
or  three  others,  were  on  the  coast. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  did  you  see  along  the  coast  last 
year  ? — A.  I  saw  very  few. 

(J.  Did  you  see  half  a  dozen  ?— A.  There  might  have  been  more ;  but 
I  only  saw  a  ffew,  and  I  did  not  keep  any  correct  count  of  them. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  see  in  1875  ? — A.  I  could  not  tell. 

Q.  Their  number  was  small  ?--A.  Yes,  compared  with  what  it  used 
to  be. 


908 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMI88ION. 


Q.  How  was  it  in  1874  t~A.  I  think  that  their  namber  was  small 
that  year  as  compared  with  former  years. 

Q.  What  aboat  1873 f — A.  The  number  was  then  something  the  same. 

Q.  When  was  the  last  yeat*  during  which  a  considerable  uuinber  oj 
American  fishing-vessels  were  seen  on  the  south  side  of  the  Bay  of 
Ohaleurs  f— A.  Probably  about  1870.  I  think  that  there  wus  a  large 
American  fleet  in  that  year. 

Q.  But  not  since  f — A.  I  wonld  not  say  so  positively,  for  a  number  of 
these  vessels  have  been  there  since.  A  great  many  were  there,  bow 
ever,  about  1870. 

Q.  1  understood  you  to  say  that  the  reason  why  the  cod- fishery  had 
not  been  good  this  year  was  owing  to  stormy  weather  and  the  waut  of 
bait  ? — A.  I  then  reterred  to  last  season. 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  that  there  was  no  bait  which  the  fishermen  could 
use,  or  that  there  was  actually  no  baitf — A.  They  could  uoc  catch  bait; 
it  was  too  stormy  to  permit  of  it. 

Q.  Do  you  attribute  the  failure  of  mackerel  bait  to  the  same  reason!— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  your  boatmen  who  fish  for  mackerel  had  been  suppliinl  with 
pogies  from  the  States,  could  they  not  have  caught  fish  f — A.  Probably 
they  could  have  done  so,  but  they  do  not  generally  procure  this  bait. 
There  is  no  occasion  to  do  so  uuless  the  weather  is  very  stormy,  and 
this  is  seldom  the  case. 

Q.  There  being  usually  a  good  supply  of  bait  on  your  coast,  that  bait 
is  not  worth  the  expense  that  would  be  entailed  in  bringing  it  there  !— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  miles  of  coast  are  there  in  your  district? — A.  I  could 
hardly  say. 

Q.  How  many  harbors  are  in  your  district  ? — A.  We  have,  for  vesMs, 
Bathurst,  Caraquette,  Big  Shippegan,  Little  Shippegan,  and  Tnieudie 
Harbors — five. 

Q.  And  in  these  five  harbors  you  have  seventeen  fishing- vessels  ?— 
A.  Yes.  They  are  chiefly  owned  in  Caraquette  and  Shippegan  Harbors. 

Q.  What  is  the  tonnage  of  these  vessels  t— A.  I  suppose  they  would 
average  from  thirty-five  to  forty  tons. 

Q.  How  do  they  dispose  of  the  mackerel  which  they  catch  and  which 
are  sent  to  the  States? — A.  A  good  many  of  the  boat-fishers  ship  to  the 
States  themselves  in  what  is  called  the  Quarry  schooner.  Grindstoues 
are  shipped  from  a  quarry  to  the  United  States,  and  for  a  number  of 
years  a  good  many  of  the  fishermen  have  sent  their  fish  to  the  States 
in  the  schooner  with  the  grindstones.  Mr.  Low,  or  whoever  takes  tbera, 
sells  them  and  makes  the  returns.  Others  sell  their  fish  to  speculators, 
who  come  there  for  the  purpose  from  the  States. 

Q.  Are  firms  established  for  this  purpose  there  I — A.  No ;  not  for  the 
purchase  of  mackerel. 

Q.  And  those  who  do  not  send  their  fish  direct  sell  them  to  the  spec 
nlatorsf — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Formerly  when  American  vessels  were  there  did  any  sell  their  fish 
to  these  vessels  or  is  this  done  now  ? — A.  1  never  knew  of  it  being 
done.  These  vessels  generally  caught  their  own  cargoes.  This  year  the 
fishermen  are  shipping  nearly  all  the  fish  in  the  fresh  state  packed  in 
ice. 

Q.  In  search  of  what  food  do  the  mackerel  go  to  the  Banks  r— A. 
Lantz.  The  mackerel  come  inshore  for  them.  The  lantz  play  along  the 
sand  beach,  and  the  mackerel  follow  them  and  the  oaplin. 

Q.  Are  the  lantz  a  kind  of  sand-ell  T— A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


?oa 


eir  namber  was  small 


t  to  the  same  reason?— 


district?— A.  I  could 


Q.  HoMT  long  is  it  f — A.  Six  or  seven  inches. 

Q.  Is  It  found  a  good  ways  out  from  the  shore? — A.  I  have  not 
known  them  to  be  found  more  than  a  mile  or  two  from  the  shore. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  the  shrimp  or  that  little  red  fish  ? — A.  It  stays 
mostly  on  the  bottom.    The  shrimp  is  a  small  shell-fish. 

Q.  1  refer  to  the  shrimp  or  brit  which  the  mackerel  consume?— A. 
They  lay  generally  along  the  shore.  They  uie  never  found,  to  my  knowl- 
edge, in  very  deep  water. 

Q.  Your  experience  has  been  chieHy  with  regard  to  the  fishery  within 
2  and  3  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  1  am  pretty  well  acquainted  with  it  be- 
yond that  distance. 

Q.  Would  you  be  surprised  to  hear  that  the  brit  are  found  25  and  50 
miles  off  shore  ? — A.  This  may  probably  be  the  case.  I  am  not  much 
a(;qnainte<l  with  the  habits  of  the  brit  or  shrimp,  but  I  am  perfectly  ao- 
qnainted  with  the  habits  of  the  lantz. 

Q.  And  this  bait  confines  itself  to  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes  *,  it  half  buries 
itself  in  the  sand.    It  is  a  sand  fish. 

Q.  Are  there  any  mackerel-spawning  grounds  along  the  south  side  of 
the  Bay  ofHJhaleurs  ? — A.  I  cannot  tell  that.    I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Your  experience  has  not  been  sufficient  to  enable  you  to  say  when, 
where,  and  how  the  mackerel  spawn  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Yet  you  have  had  a  good  deal  of  observation  with  regard  to  the 
habits  of  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  not  this  one  of  the  recondite  things  which  very  few  naturalists 
after  close  observation  are  able  to  decide  ? — A.  I  do  not  think  that  I 
ever  heard  anything  authentic  on  the  subject  as  to  where  and  how  they 
spawn. 

Q.  I'ou  would  not  give  much  weight  to  a  common  fisherman's  state- 
ment concerning  a  particuLir  locality  as  being  a  mackerel-spawning 
ground  ? — A.  Such  a  statement  might  be  correct  for  aught  I  know. 

Q.  You  would  not  pin  your  faith  to  it  as  a  matter  of  science  ?  Is  it 
not  a  very  difficult  thing  to  tell  ? — A.  Such  a  fisherman  may  have  had 
more  opportunities  for  observation  on  this  point  than  I  have  had  ;  and 
I  would  not  dispute  the  statement  of  a  man  on  oath  or  his  word  when 
my  own  experience  had  not  taught  me  to  think  differently. 

Q.  Caplin,  you  say,  appear  on  the  shore  about  the  1st  of  June  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  on  the  average  do  they  stay  there?— A.  Perhaps  for  a 
fortnight  or  three  weeks  j  they  strike  in  along  the  coast  in  different 
parts. 

Q.  It  would  be  a  surprising  long  stay  if  they  remained  in  one  place 
for  six  weeks  ? — A.  It  has  not  been  my  experience  that  they  remain  so 
long  as  that  in  one  place.  Their  average  stay  varies  from  two  or  three 
weeks,  in  my  experience. 

(J.  Do  they  come  to  all  the  points  they  frequent  in  your  bay  at  once  i — 
A.  No.  They  first  strike  the  coast  near  Belledune,  and  they  go  down 
along  it. 

Q.  How  far  south  are  caplin  found  ? — A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  It  is  an  Arctic  fish  ?— A.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  is  or  not. 

il  It  is  not  found  in  the  States  ?— A.  They  are  very  numerous  along 
our  coast  in  the  spring — too  much  so,  that  they  scoop  them  up  and  use 
tbem  in  large  quantities  for  manure. 

Q.  They  are  not  good  for  eating  unless  cooked  immediately  after  being 
canght,  l' believe? — A.  I  have  known  some  of  them  to  be  dried ;  but  I 
do  not  know  what  kind  of  bait  they  make  when  dried.  They  are  a  very 
good  food-fish  while  they  are  i^rfeotly  fresh. 


910 


AWARD  OF  TH£   FI8UEBY  COMMI88ION. 


Q.  Are  they  salted  or  pickled  or  cared  in  any  way,  to  be  mml  as 
bait  f — A.  I  uever  kuew  of  their  being  cured ;  they  are  too  tuiider  tor 
that. 

Q.  now  lonjr  will  they  keep  in  the  fresh  state  ?— A.  They  can  be  dried 
and  used  long  afterward. 

Q.  How  loug  f — A.  All  the  season,  I  understand,  if  thoy  nre  dried 
properly.  They  are  thrown  into  a  pickle,  in  which  they  remain  three 
or  four  hours,  and  then  they  are  spread  out  in  the  sun  and  dried. 

Q.  Do  any  people  come  to  your  place  to  buy  caplin  f — A.  1  Uave  lieard 
of  this  being  done,  but  I  do  not  personally  know  tUat  it  is  the  case. 

Q.  If  they  were  sold  in  large  quantities,  would  they  not  becuine  valu.i. 
ble  to  your  flshermen  t — A.  They  can  be  cured  and  sold  wben  dried. 

Q.  If  you  had  a  market  in  which  to  dispose  of  the  caplin  you  use  for 
manure,  would  they  not  assume  a  new  value  to  youl — A.  Yes ;  if  the 
l)eople  do  not  stop  destroying  them  thus,  it  will  ruin  our  llsheries. 

Q.  Are  herring  very  abundant  on  your  coast  in  the  spring? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  are  sold  at  a  very  low  price,  are  they  not  f — .A.  They  are 
n6t  worth  anything  much,  except  for  bait.  The  spring  herring  is  not  a 
good  food-fish  ;  it  is  not  marketable. 

Q.  Are  they  not  cured  in  the  spring  ?— A.  O,  yes ;  they  are  salted 
down  in  quantities,  chiefly  for  domestic  use,  and  tbey  are  very  cheap. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  the  autumn-herring  fishery  ? — A.  These  herring  are 
a  good  marketable  fish. 

Q.  What  used  to  be  done  with  the  autumn  herring? — A.  Thoy  were 
generally  shipped  to  Quebec  and  sold  for  home  consumption. 

Q.  In  the  pickled  state  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  herring  smoked  in  your  neighborhood  ? — A.  That  class  of 
herring  is  not  generally  smoked,  but  there  is  a  small  herring  which  is 
sometimes  smoked.    Bome  autumn  herring,  however,  are  smolied. 

Q.  Autumn  herring  were  never  sent  largely  to  the  States  f — A.  1  can- 
not say  that  they  were.    I  think  tbat  they  were  chiefiy  sent  to  Canada. 

Q.  And  your  codfish  have  never  been  largely  sent  to  the  States  ?— 
A.  No. 

Q.  Have  your  salmon  been  largely  sent  there  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  your  American  market  for  salmon  was  cut  off,  would  it  at  all 
afl'ect  your  salmon  business? — A.  O,  yes ;  certainly. 

Q.  That  would  be  a  serious  thing  for  your  people  ? — A.  We  want  a 
market,  of  course,  for  our  salmon,  and  that  would  efi'ect  them  considera- 
bly, I  suppose,  unless  they  secured  another  market  for  these  fish. 

Q.  The  same  thing  would  hold  true  regarding  your  business  in  mack- 
erel?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  it  is  of  some  consequence  to  you  to  have  a  market  for  your 
mackerel  and  salmon  in  the  United  States  ?— A.  O,  certainly  it  is. 

Q.  Fresh  fish  are  very  rapidly  taking  the  place  of  salt  mackerel  in 
the  market,  and  the  importance  of  salt  mackerel  and  other  cured  tish  is 
diminishing  more  and  more  every  year.  Is  not  this  the  case  ? — A.  That 
is  my  experience  in  my  district. 

Q.  And  owing  to  the  extension  of  the  railroad  system  and  tbe  use  of 
ice-cars,  pickled,  salt,  and  smoked  fish  will  steadily  become  of  less  con- 
sequence f — A.  Gertainly. 

Q.  How  long  can  mackerel  be  kept  in  ice  so  as  to  be  sold  fresh  ?— A. 
I  do  not  know.  Fresh  mackerel  are  now  sent  away  to  market  in  tons, 
not  frozen,  bat  packed  in  ice.  They  are  regularly  so  sent  to  New  York, 
and  sold  there  in  good  condition. 

Q.  How  many  days  does  it  take  to  send  them  to  New  York !— A. 
Foar,  I  think.    They  do  not  even  take  the  trouble  to  freeze  them,  but 


AWARD  OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


911 


-A.  Tbe.v  can  be  dried 


pack  them  in  ground  ice;  the  fish  are  packed  solid,  and  are  brought  in 
a  frcHli  condition  to  market. 

Q.  Would  the  flsh  then  be  as  good  to  eat  as  if  caii;?ht  in  the  morn- 
ing !— A.  I  would  not  think  so,  but  still  this  is  done  regularly  now  all 
tlie  season. 

Q.  Mackerel,  I  believe,  peculiarly  requires  to  be  eaten  fresh  f— A. 
Yos;  the  moment  tliey  are  taken  out  of  the  water  th«  tisli  are  placed  in 
icehouses  along  shore,  or  in  ice  kept  in  the  boats,  and  they  are  kept  in 
ice  until  they  reach  the  market. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  Are  the  flsh  not  opened  first  ?— A.  They  are  drawn,  but  not  opened, 
and  the  entrails  are  taken  out.  This  is  done  when  they  are  sent  any 
distance,  but  not  for  short  distances. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

(i.  Uas  not  your  personal  observation  of  the  fishery  been  principally 
contiued  to  the  boat-fishery  f— A.  O,  yes;  to  boat  and  schooner  fishing. 

(J.  And  the  boats  fish  generally  within  three  miles  of  land  ? — A.  O, 
no ;  our  class  of  boats  can  go  out  nearly  as  far  as  any  schooner.  They 
can  be  taken  out  to  the  Banks,  or  to  sea.  The  boat-fishermen,  however, 
generally  come  home  Saturday  nights  and  go  out  again  Monday  morn- 
ings. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  If  the  market  for  our  fresh  fish  in  the  States  was  closed,  another 
market  for  them  would  have  to  be  secured  i— A.  Certainly. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  neither  salmon  nor  fresh  mackerel  are  ad- 
mitted free  of  duty  into  the  CTuited  States  under  the  provisions  of  the 
Washington  Treaty  T — A.  Yes ;  it  is  patent  that  if  a  market  for  any 
article  is  closed,  an  injury  is  sustained  in  this  respect. 

Q.  And  an  injury  would  also  be  also  sustained  by  a  large  number  of 
people  who  created  that  market! — A.  Certainly;  the  closing  of  the 
market  in  the  United  States  to  us,  as  far  as  our  fresh  fish  are  concerned, 
would  injure  Americans  as  much  as  our  fishermen. 

Q.  The  consumers  there  would  be  as  much  inconvenienced  as  the 
fishermen  here  ? — A.  Decidedly  that  would  be  the  case. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  search  for  mackerel-spawning  grounds  in  the  bay? — 
A.  No,  never. 

Q.  If  a  common  fisherman  has  practical  experience  of  a  fact  of  which 
lie  is  witness  with  his  own  eyes  every  day,  I  presume  that  it  would  re- 
<iuire  a  good  deal  of  argument  to  drive  that  out  of  his  mind  f — A.  I 
think  so.  If  I  saw  mackerel  spawning  in  a  certain  place,  I  would  come 
to  tiie  conclusion  that  they  spawned  there,  and  no  man  could  shake  my 
views  on  that  point. 

Q.  If  a  scientific  gentleman  came  here  and  assured  you  from  the  most 
wonderful  scientific  reasons  that  these  fish  could  not  possibly  spawn 
there,  that  would  be  the  case  ? — A.  Certainly ;  1  would  not  believe  him 
rather  than  my  own  eyes. 

Q.  Your  experience  respecting  the  brit  or  shrimp  is  that  it  is  not  a 
deep-water  lish  f — A.  What  I  call  the  shrimp  is  a  small,  crooked  little 
fish,  which  is  generally  found  along  shore.  I  do  not  know  it  by  the  name 
of  brit ;  it  has  many  little  legs,  curls  itself  up,  and  crawls  on  its  side. 
It  is  a  great  food  for  cod  and  a  great  many  other  flsh. 

Q.  You  describe  the  ordinary  shrimp.— A.  That  is  what  I  call  the 
shrimp. 


912 


AWARD  OP  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION^ 


By  Mr.  Davies : 
Q.  This  alirimp  is  found  in  the  sand  T— A.  Yes. 
Q.  It  does  not  float  in  deep  water  f— A.  No ;  it  goes  along  tlio  saml. 

By  Mr.  Thomson  : 

Q.  I>o  mackerel  feed  on  this  shrimp  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tliat  is  undonbte<lly  an  inshore  tisli  f — A.  Yes. 

y.  The  brit  are  very  small  fish  with  large  eyes  i — A.  I  do  not  know 
it  by  that  name.  1  never  heartl  this  name  before.  I  refer  to  a  hiiiuH 
crooked  tish. 

Q.  Shrimp  are  found  in  large  numbers  on  your  coasts! — A.  Vcs. 

Q.  Are  they  used  for  food  at  all  by  your  people  f — A.  No. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  tish ing  boats  stay  out  for  a  week  somutiinps  f— A. 
Tes ;  if  they  have  bait  and  fair  weather. 

Q.  These  are  cod-fishers  ? — A.  Yes,  and  also  mackerel  flsliorM.  The 
boats  are  built  for  the  purpose,  and  tliey  can  go  anywhere  in  mid-bay. 

Q.  Do  they  take  out  ice  with  them  ?— A.  Yes,  and  they  draw  the  tish 
at  once.  They  draw  the  entrails  out  by  the  gills.  They do  not  cut  the 
fish  open. 

Q.  Were  not  the  .3()0  American  schooners  of  which  you  spoke  pretty 
large  f — A.  Some  were  large  and  some  were  small.  None  of  tho^ethat 
resort  to  onr  coast  are  very  large. 

Q.  What  do  they  average  f — A.  Something  between  GO  and  80  tons,  I 
think.  They  are  generally  of  pretty  broad  beam  and  flat  bottomed.  I 
have  frequently  been  on  board  of  them. 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  to  say  that  there  was  not  a  large  fleet  of  American 
vessels  in  the  bay  in  1873  or  1874  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  wlietlier  that  wa.s 
the  case  or  not,  1  do  not  remember  of  having  seen  them  ;  that  is  all. 
I  do  not  recollect  that  I  had  any  opportunity  for  seeing  them  during 
those  years.    A  large  fleet  may  have  been  in  for  aught  I  know. 

Q.  It  was  not  your  business  to  see  whether  they  were  there  or  not  ?— 
A.  No ;  and  I  wiis  not  down  the  coast  during  the  miickerel-iisliiug  sea- 
son. 1  did  not  take  notice  of  them.  They  may  have  been  there  in  large 
numbers. 

Q.  Nepisguit  Bay  is  a  bay  along  the  shore  of  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  ?— 
A.  Yes;  it  extends  from  the  headland,  Belleduuo  Point,  to  Mi/.uiiette 
Point. 

Q.  Did  yon  ever  hear  of  caplin  being  dried  and  then  used  for  bait  *— 
A.  No ;  but  I  have  known  them  to  be  dried  for  other  purposes. 

Q.  And  they  are  eaten  when  dried  as  a  kind  of  rellsli  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  never  heard  of  fishermen  fishing  with  dried  caiilin  ?— A.  No. 

No.  51. 

Enos  Gardner,  overseer  of  fisheries  for  the  county  of  Yarmouth, 
and  clerk  of  the  peace  for  tlie  county  of  Tusket,  Yarmouth  County, 
N.  S.,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn,  and  examined. 

Question.  What  fishery  is  prosecuted  along  the  shore  of  the  Yarmouth 
County  coast!— Answer.  The  co«l,  mackerel,  and  pollack  fisheries. 
Some  halibut  are  also  taken  there.  All  the  mackerel  taken  near  oar 
coast  are  caaght  inshore. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ?— A.  Quite  close  to  it ;  from  half  a  mile 
to  1^  miles  from  it.  This  has  always  been  the  case,  to  my  knowledge. 
I  do  not  know  of  any  mackerel  being  taken  beyond  that  distance  from 
the  shore.    I  never  heard  of  it  being  done. 


▲WARD  OP  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


913 


goes  Along  the  sand. 


Q.  Are  the  cod,  halibut,  and  hake.  &o.,  aa  well,  taken  inshore  to  any 
extent  f— A.  They  are  caught  near  the  shore  in  what  we  call  the  shore 
fishery.    They  are  taken  from  5  to  25  miles  offshore. 

Q.  Are  any  cod  or  halibut  taken  as  near  as  from  one  to  two  miles  ot 
the  coast  1 — A.  I  think  so,  in  some  parts,  but  not  to  any  great  extent. 

Q.  What  bait  is  used  by  the  codtishers  ?— A.  I  think  that  they  use  a 
great  deal  of  mackerel. 

Q.  Then  they  have  to  come  inshore  for  such  bait  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  also  use  herring  for  bait  f— A.  They  use  herring  for  that 
purpose. 

Q.  Are  these  herring  taken  inshore  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Near  where  the  mackerel  are  caught  If — A.  Yes.  The  herring-nets 
are  set  where  the  mackerel  are  taken. 

Q.  Do  the  oapliu  visit  your  coast  ?— A.  No ;  I  know  nothing  about 
them. 

Q.  Do  squid  do  so  f— A.  No. 

Q.  Yon  only  have  herring  and  mackerel  for  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  American  vessels  come  in  largely  along  that  portion  of  the 
coast  for  bait  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  for  it  or  purchase  it  f — A.  They  chiefly  purchase  it. 
I  do  not  think  that  they  fish  for  it  at  all  there. 

Q.  Can  the  cod- fishery  be  carried  on  without  fresh  bait? — A.  The  fish- 
ermen tell  me  not. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  Americans  could  successfully  carry  on  the 
cod-fishery  within  from  5  to  25  miles  of  your  cocist,  a  tiiey  had  not  the 
privilege  of  coming  inshore  for  bait? — A.  No;  I  do  not  tbiuk  that  they 
conld. 

Q.  Are  the  mackerel  taken  in  boats  in  the  inshore  fishery  ?— A.  92 
small  schooners  fish  there :  very  few  of  them  go  to  the  Banks.  The  ma- 
jority of  them  are  engaged  in  the  shore  fishery. 

Q.  These  vessels  belong  to  your  county  alone  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  their  average  tonnage  ? — A.  From  about  60  to  70  tons. 

(^  What  is  the  number  of  vessels  engaged  in  this  fishery  ?~A.  It  is 
over  400. 

Q.  How  many  men  are  employed  on  these  schooners  ? — A.  Between 
1,200  and  1,300. 

Q.  And  on  the  boats  ?— A.  About  700  or  800. 

(}.  Have  you  noticed  the  fact  that  the  mackerel  are  extremely  plenti- 
ful along  the  coast  this  year  ? — A.  There  will  be  a  very  large  catch  of 
mackerel  by  Yarmouth  County  fishermen  this  year.  It  will  amount  to 
about  12,000  barrels,  I  should  think. 

Q.  Are  these  fish  now  caught  ?— A.  Yes.  I  suppose  that  the  catch  is 
about  over.    I  refer  to  spring  mackerel. 

Q.  Do  you  not  have  a  fall  catch  ?— A.  Very  few  are  caught  in  the  fall. 

Q.  And  about  12,000  barrels  have  been  caught. — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  have  yon  been  fishery  overseer? — A.  I  acted  with  my 
predecessor,  and  I  commenced  to  perform  this  duty  in  1870. 

Q.  Have  the  fisheries  of  all  kinds  since  1870  increased  enormonsly  on 
your  coast?— A.  Yes.  The  fisheries  have  almost  trebled  in  value. 
This  has  been  the  case  since  1869;  since  the  fishery  act  came  into  force. 

Q.  This  act  was  passed  in  order  to  protect  the  fisheries  ?— A.  Yes ; 
the  river  fisheries. 

Q.  Has  this  had  the  effect  of  improving  the  coast  fisheries  ?— A.  It 
has  had  a  great  deal  to  do  with  that  improvement,  in  my  judgment. 
The  young  fish  were  very  largely  destroyed  in  the  rivers  before  the 
58  p 


dU 


AWABD   OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


fishery  act  came  into  force,  and  since  then  they  have  increase 
largely,  and  thus  afforded  bait  for  the  sea  fish. 

Q.  The  river  fisheries  have  besides  been  greatly  improved  ?— A 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  fisheries  in  the  gulf !— A. 

Q.  Is  there  a  large  fishery  in  St.  Mary's  Bay  T—A.  Only  a  stnf 
tiou  of  this  bay  is  in  my  district.  A  great  deal  of  fishing  is  a 
Green  Cove.    The  county  line  runs  by  this  point. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  fish  there  much  f — A.  Not  to  my  know 
but  I  have  heard  of  their  being  there. 

Q.  All  the  mackerel  taken  off  your  coast  are  caught  within  a  . 
the  shore  ? — A.  They  are  all  taken  close  to  the  shore — from  hull 
to  one  and  a  half  miles  from  it. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  Do  your  people  confine  themselves  almost  entirely  to  bof 
iug  ? — A.  Ninety-two  schooners  are  owned  in  the  county. 

Q.  Where  do  they  fish  T — A.  Most  of  them  fish  along  the  shore, 
go  to  the  Banks ;  but  not  a  great  many  during  the  last  few  years 

Q.  Are  these  vessels  decked  f — A.  O,  yes.  Most  of  them  are  en 
in  the  cod  fishery,  but  some  few  fish  for  mackerel. 

Q.  They  fish  anywhere  inside  or  outside  of  the  limits? — A.  Ye 
on  the  Banks. 

Q.  You  do  not  undertake  to  say  where  the  cod  fishery  is  maini 
ried  on  ! — A.  O,  no. 

Q.  Do  Americans  come  to  fish  for  mackerel  much  on  your  coai 
A.  No  ;  but  they  come  there  to  buy  mackerel  for  bait.  I  do  not 
that  they  come  there  to  fish. 

Q.  Then  your  coast  has  not  suffered  from  their  presence  in  the 
seining  or  the  throwing  overboard  of  ofi'al  or  anything  of  that  sort 
I  do  not  think  that  they  fish  much  on  our  shore  ;  but  they  come  ii 
frequently  to  buy  bait  and  carry  on  the  deep-sea  fisheries. 

No.  52. 

Tuesday,  Sq>temh 
The  Conference  met. 

William  Ross,  hon .  collector  of  customs,  Halifax,  called  on 
of  tbe  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Mujesty,  sworn  and  exauiiii 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  You  reside  in  Halifax  T — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  a  customhouse  ofiicer  f — A.  I  am  collector  of  custo 
this  port. 

Q.  You  were  for  a  long  period  in  the  legislature  of  Nova  Scotin 
Eight  years. 

Q.  Previous  to  confederation  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  afterward  you  were  a  member  of  the  House  of  Comino 
the  Dominion  of  Canada!— A.  Yes,  from  confederation  to  the 
1874.  ,   , 

Q.  You  were  also  a  member  of  the  privy  council  of  Canada  ?■ 

was. 
Q.  Minister  of  militia  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Some  years  ago  you  were  engaged  in  business  ! — A.  Yes. 
Q.  At  w  hat  place  ?— A.  At  St.  Ann's. 
Q.  That  is  on  the  north  side  of  Cape  Breton  !— A.  Yes. 
Q.  Between  Cape  North  and  Cow  Bay  I— A.  Yes.  My  knowle 


COMMISSION. 


AWAED   OV  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


915 


le  cod  fishery  is  mainly  car 


Tuesday,  Sqtttmhcr  4. 


slature  of  Nova  Scotia  ?— A. 


the  House  of  Commons  for 
COD  federation  to  the  fall  ot 

council  of  Canada!— A.  I 


)U8iue88t— A.  Yes. 


the  fisheries  is  pretty  much  confined  to  between  Scatarie  and  Cape 
North ;  that  is,  my  personal  knowledge. 

Q.  What  kind  of  business  did  you  do  at  St.  Ann's?— A.  A  general 
country  business  and  supplying  fishermen,  hiring  crews  for  fishing. 

Q.  For  whom! — A.  For  myself. 

Q.  Did  you  prosecute  the  fishery  by  vessels,  schooners  ?— A.  Slightly— 
not  a  great  deal. 

Q.  By  boats,  and,  to  some  extent,  in  vessels  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  From  what  year  f    State  the  period.— A.  From  1850  to  1863. 

Q.  Did  you  deal  at  all  with  the  American  fishermen  ?— A.  Sometimes. 

il.  Were  they  in  the  habit  of  entering  your  harbor ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  To  what  extent  ? — A.  I  scarcely  understand  you. 

Q.  To  what  extent  did  they  enter  your  harbor? — A.  They  would  come 
in  there,  quite  a  large  number  of  them.  They  would  buy  country  pro- 
duce— butter,  potatoes,  beef,  mutton. 

Q.  You  suppi  ied  them  then  ? — A.  Yes,  whatever  they  wanted. 

Q.  At  what  period  of  the  year  did  they  frequent  that  part  of  the 
island  ? — A.  Principally  in  September  and  October.  More  during  Sep- 
tember and  October  than  any  other  time. 

Q.  Were  you  in  the  habit  of  purchasing  and  exporting  fish  ? — A.  Yes, 
I  bought  fish  all  the  time. 

Q.  For  many  years  ? — A.  During  the  time  mentioned. 

Q.  Did  you  purchase  and  export  mackerel  ? — A.  I  used  to  send  most 
mackerel  here — to  the  Halifax  market. 

Q.  You  purchased  and  caught  mackerel  on  the  coast  of  Cape  Bre- 
ton I — A.  Yes,  I  purchased  all  the  time,  and  had  my  men  engaged  in 
catcbing  fish  for  me. 

Q.  The  whole  of  that  period  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  the  whole  of  that  period,  did  the  American  mackerel  ves- 
sels enter  your  port — wore  they  in  the  habit  of  frequenting  the  coast  ?^ 
A.  Yes,  certainly.    Some  years,  of  course,  more  than  others. 

Q.  Now,  with  regard  to  the  time  the  mackerel  came  in — when  they 
fiist  appeared  in  that  part  of  the  island? — A.  The  mackerel  came  from 
the  southward,  and  made  their  appearance  gersrally  not  earlier  than 
about  the  25th  of  May,  and  followed  on  till  about  the  15ih  or  20th  of 
June. 

Q.  Going  north  ? — A.  Yes ;  all  thoj  a  were  all  poor — large,  poor  mack- 
erel, full  of  spawn,  I  think  on  their  way  to  the  spawning  ground. 

Q.  What  period  afterwards  would  you  find  them ;  what  time  would 
you  commence  to  fish  ? — A.  As  soon  as  the  mackerel  made  their  appear- 
ance. We  would  commence  in  May.  We  would  prepare  to  fish  from 
the  2."»tb  of  May,  but  the  best  fishing  of  the  season  would  be  from  the 
5th  to  the  20th  of  June. 

(i.  That  would  be  the  best  of  the  season  ?— A.  Yes,  for  spring  mack- 
erel. 

Q.  Then,  how  late  would  the  mackerel  remain  on  your  shorea  ?— A. 
Well,  we  would  keep  our  crews  engaged  for  mackerel  as  late  as,  say,  the 
lOtb  of  November. 

Q.  Then  you  would  keep  your  crews  engaged  from  May  15th  to  the 
lOth  of  November?— A.  Yes. 

(J.  And,  more  or  less,  would  you  fish  during  the  whole  of  that  period  ? — 
A.  From  the  20th  of  June  till  about  the  middle  of  July  would  be  alack, 
very  slack.    We  might  catch  a  few,  but  few. 

Q.  But  you  would  still  have  crews  engaged  ?— A.  O,  yes.  After  that 
the  mackerel  would  trim  the  shore,  and  we  would  look  for  mackerel  all 
the  time  from  that  out. 


916 


AWARD   OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  From  the  16th  of  June  they  would  trim  the  shore  until  they  left 
the  coast  T— A.  They  went  home  in  the  fall.  They  went  to  their  wiuter 
qnailers,  wherever  that  is. 

Q.  Now,  at  what  period  did  the  American  fishermen  first  appear  there- 
at what  period  were  they  in  the  habit  of  first  appearing  on  your  coast?— 
A.  The  American  fishermen  always  used  to  come  around  there.  Thev 
came  from  the  north  to  our  coast.  They  would  come  from  the  north 
side  of  the  island.  They  would  come  around  Cape  North  and  follow  the 
fish. 

Q.  About  what  period  did  they  appear  f — A.  From  August  to  Septem- 
ber or  October.    There  were  more  in  September  and  October. 

Q.  Now,  to  what  extent  did  they  appear  there;  in  what' number  at 
8t.  Ann's !  From  what  you  learned  from  themselves,  or  from  what  you 
saw,  can  you  give  us  an  idea  what  numbers  came  to  that  part  of  the 
island  ? — A.  They  did  not  all  come  to  St.  Ann's. 

Q.  Well,  I  don't  mean  St.  Ann's,  1  mean  that  side  of  the  island.  What 
numbers? — A.  I  could  not  say  exactly ;  perhaps  from  sixty  to  one  hun- 
dred  vessels. 

Q.  Well,  have  you  any  idea  whether  they  fished  inshore  or  offshore?— 
A.  Well,  more  inshore.    They  fished  both  inshore  and  offshore,  1  thiuk. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  your  fish  f — A.  All  inshore. 

Q.  Within  what  distance  of  the  land  ! — A.  Mostly  within  three  quar- 
ters of  a  mile,  half  a  mile  and  quarter  of  a  mile. 

Q.  From  one  quarter  of  a  mile  to  three-quarters  of  a  mile  you  would 
catch  your  fish  Y — A.  Sometimes  closer. 

Q.  Why  didn't  you  fish  further  from  the  shore  than  three-quarters  of 
a  mile? — A.  Because  we  would  be  going  off'  the  fishing  grounds. 

Q.  Then,  if  I  understand  you,  the  bulk  of  the  fish,  the  lari/est  quau- 
tity  of  the  fish,  are  within  three-quarters  of  a  mile  of  the  shore  ?— A. 
The  fish  trim  the  shore  close  in  tine  weather,  when  the  wind  is  off  the 
shore.  When  the  wind  is  cu  the  shore  the  fish  are  like  a  ship,  and  they 
"work  out  gradually  to  deep  water. 

Q.  Do  they  leave  the  place  altogether? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  they  go  anywhere  else  for  shelter? — A.  When  it  is  rough, 
stormy  weather,  with  the  wind  on  shore,  they  work  off' and  get  into  some 
other  lea.    Then  when  the  weather  is 

Q.  When  the  wind  is  oft'  shore  at  your  place,  where  would  they  go 
for  shelter  ? — A.  That  I  cannot  say.  But  when  the  weather  gets  tine 
again  they  all  come  back. 

Q.  I  think  you  said  you  had  vessels  engaged  in  the  fisheries— sdiooii 
ers,  had  you  ? — A.  1  had  a  schooner  engaged. 

Q.  Well,  will  you  un«lertake  to  say  whether  it  would  bo  worth  while 
to  engage,  to  invest  capital  in  the  mackerel  fishery,  provided  you  were 
excluded  from  fishing  within  three  miles  of  the  shore? — A.  1  don't  think 
any  iHjrson  would  try  it  on  our  coast. 

Q.  Wouldn't  it  be  profitable? — A.  No;  I  don't  think  it  would. 

Q.  Would  it  be  profitable,  I  mean,  to  send  vessels  into  the  Gnlf  of 
St.  Lawrence  at  all  for  mackerel,  provided  you  were  excluded  from  tish- 
iug  within  three  miles  of  the  land? — A.  I  can't  speak  of  the  Gulf  of  St. 
Lawrence  from  observation  ;  I  can  only  s))eak  of  our  own  coast. 

Q.  Well,  as  far  as  that  coast  is  concerned,  you  are  able  to  si>eak  ot 
that?— A.  Yes. 

il.  Are  you  aware,  from  the  Americans  themselves  (you  are  s[»Liiii- 
ing  of  the  coast  between  Scatari  and  North  (Jape)  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  from  the  Americans  themselves  whether  they  woukl 


AWABD  OF  The  fishery  commission. 


917 


8  of  a  mile  you  would 


where  would  tlicv  2:0 


consider  it  worth  while  to  come  into  the  gulf  to  fish  unless  allowed  to  fish 
inshore? — A.  They  were  always  anxious  to  have  the  right  to  fish  within. 

Q.  You  know  that  from  themselves? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  know  whether  they  fished  inshore  after  the  abroga- 
tiou  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  ? — A.  I  believe  they  did. 

Q.  And  before  that,  did  they  fish  inshore?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  were  in  the  habit  of  so  fishing?— A.  I  think  that  always, 
when  they  found  there  was  no  person  to  look  after  them,  they  would 
go  to  the  fishing  grounds,  and  that  would  be  close  inshore. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  they  were  in  the  habit  of  fishing?- A.  They 
carried  on  the  fishing  with  the  hook  on  our  coast  pretty  much  altogether. 
There  was  one  year  that  two  vessels  fished  with  nets  at  our  harbor,  but 
they  did  not  follow  that  up  often. 

Q.  When  they  were  actually  engaged  in  the  fishery,  how  were  they  in 
the  habit  of  commencing  to  fish  and  carrying  it  on  ? — A.  Well,  they  had 
their  bait ;  they  would  run  in  close  to  the  shore  to  smooth  water. 

Q.  Describe  ,how  close  to  the  shore. — A.  Well,  as  close  as  it  would 
be  comfortable  for  vessels  to  go. 

Q.  As  close  as  it  would  be  safe  ? — A.  Yes ;  that  is  the  way  they  would 
contrive  to  raise  the  fish  ;  then  they  would  throw  their  bait  overboard. 
Some  days  the  fish  would  be  abundant,  but  would  not  bite.  The  mack- 
erel is  very  peculiar.  There  may  be  one  great  day  for  the  fish,  when 
the  fishermen  will  remark  that  they  are  hungry.  The  mackerel  will 
bite  better  before  a  storm  always.  If  there  is  a  fine  day  before  a  storm 
the  mackerel  will  always  bite.  Well,  they  throw  the  bait  overboard  ; 
if  they  raise  the  mackerel,  a  lot  of  vessels,  then  they  drift  off  shore,  and 
the  fish  would  follow  them  and  they  would  continue  fishing.  By-and- 
bye  the  mackerel  would  appear  to  get  slack,  and  then  they  would  set 
their  sail  and  run  in  toward  the  shore. 

Q.  As  close  as  they  could  come  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  they  would  drift  off  again  in  the  same  way  ?— A.  Y'es. 

Q.  And  they  would  continue  that  mode? — A.  Yes;  they  would  con- 
tinue and  would  catch  some  of  them  outside  the  limits,  as  we  would  say. 

Q.  But  the  quantity  of  fish  would  slacken  until  they  would  have  to 
run  in  again  and  go  out  the  same  way  ? — A.  Y^es. 

Q.  That  is  the  practice  of  catching  fish  ? — A.  That  was  the  practice 
on  our  coast. 

Q.  Well,  would  they  run  in  where  your  boats  were  fishing  ?— A.  Some- 
times. 

Q.  Did  they  in  any  degree  interfere  with  the  fishing  ?— A.  Our  people 
would  say  that  once  the  vessels  came  in  amongst  them  they  could  not 
catch  fish. 

Q.  Why  not  ? — A.  Well,  the  bait  the  Americans  had  for  fishing  was 
better,  and  they  threw  large  quantities  of  it  overboard,  and  the  fish  ap- 
peared to  be  attracted  by  it.  Our  people  fished  in  their  boats,  you  know ; 
they  would  fish  just  from  their  moorings. 

Q.  What  time  did  you  leave  St.  Ann's ;  you  had  a  business  estab- 
lishment there,  and  resided  there,  did  you  not,  all  the  time  ? — A.  From 
1847  until  1874. 

Q.  Well,  then,  you  removed  from  there  ?— A.  I  removed  from  there. 

Q.  Now,  did  you  carry  on  the  business  of  mackerel-fishing  until 
1874?— A.  From  1850  to  1873. 

Q.  You  carried  it  on  until  you  moved  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  your  establishment  go  into  the  hands  of  another  person? — A. 
Yes. 


918 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Has  he  been  carrying  on  the  mackerel  fishing  since  ?— A.  Yes  • 
to  some  extent.  ' 

Q.  He  has  your  place  of  business,  your  flsbing  boats  and  gear,  and 
just  stepped  into  your  shoes,  as  it  were  ? — A.  Well,  I  didn't  keep  a  large 
namber  of  fishing-boats,  except  sufficient  for  my  own  use,  but  I  supplied 
the  whole  country  along  there  and  took  their  tish. 

Q.  He  has  been  going  on  up  to  the  present  time!— A.  Yes;  be  is 
there  now. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  were  in  frequent  communication  with  hira  ?— A. 
Yes ;  every  week,  nearly. 

Q.  Has  he  been  going  on  with  it  this  year? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  any  better  this  year  ? — A.  I  can't  say  that  it  is. 

Q.  Tou  don't  know  whether  it  is  or  not !— A.  He  took  about  a  couple 
of  hundred  barrels  with  the  seine  sometime  in  July. 

Q.  Well,  these  mackerel,  these  200  barrels,  were  taken  with  the  seine 
inshore,  were  they  I — A.  They  were  taken  at  Ingonish. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  such  a  mode  of  taking  them  as  by  the  purse- 
seine  by  our  fishermen  T — A.  No ;  not  with  our  fishermen,  but  they  have 
with  us  what -they  call  a  spiiler;  that  is,  where  you  take  mackerel  on 
rough  bottoms,  where  you  can't  haul  the  seine  ashore,  you  have  another 
seine  to  put  inside  to  take  the  fish  out. 

Q.  By  that  mode  do  yoa  take  all  the  fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  don't  throw  any  of  them  away.  Do  you  know  anything  about 
the  purse-seine?— A.  I  know  only  by  report. 

Q.  Do  you  know  it  from  the  Americans  themselves  f — A.  Well,  by 
what  I  understand  about  it  it  is  that  you  can  take  msickerel  with  tbem 
wherever  you  can  find  them,  wherever  they  show  themselves. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  this  injures  the  fishing-grounds  or  not  ?— A. 
If  the  mackerel  are  allowed  to  go  to  waste,  or  get  destroyed,  or  anything 
of  that  kind,  that  would  be  cou8i«lered  in.iurious.  The  mackerel  are  con- 
sidered by  the  fishermen  to  be  easily  frightened.  Our  people  have  a 
prejudice  against  seining  mackerel  altogether. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  Americans  consider  our  mackerel  in- 
ferior or  superior  to  what  they  take  on  their  own  coasts  ! — A.  There  is 
no  mackerel  superior  to  ours  when  they  are  properly  dressed.  The  fur- 
ther you  go  north  the  better  the  fish. 

Q.  I  believe,  ^Ir.  Boss,  you  were  in  the  House  of  Commons  at  the 
time  the  Washington  Treaty  was  discussed  ? — A.  I  was. 

Q.  Did  you  oppose  or  support  it  ? — A.  I  opposed  it.  One  of  tlie 
bright  things  in  my  jwlitical  history  is  that  I  opposed  the  Wasbiiigtou 

Q.  Did  you  consider  it  would  be  better  for  Canada  to  preserve  her 
own  fisheries,  and  exclude  the  Americans? — A.  My  reason  for  opposing 
the  Washington  Treaty  was  that  it  left  unsettled  the  very  thing  that  it 
shonld  have  settled.  It  left  undone  what  it  ought  to  have  performed. 
That  was  a  great  weakness  in  the  treaty.  Then  I  opposed  it  apfain  be- 
cause I  believed  we  were  giving  away  too  much  and  receiving-  too 
little. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  believe  that  now  ?— A.  !  have  no  reason  to  change 
my  mind ;  that  is,  unless  you  get  it  now, 

Q.  Now,  what  do  you  consider  the  general  opinion  of  those  fully  ac- 
qnainted  with  the  subject  to  be  with  regard  to  the  question  f — A.  I 
know  my  constituency  highly  approved  of  my  action  in  opposing  the 
Washington  Treaty. 

Q.  You  were  aware  of  that  t— A.  Yes ;  I  had  good  evidence  of  it. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  the  people  in  that  section  approved  of  those 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


919 


ing  since  f— A.  Yes 


uo  reason  to  change 


opinions  that  yon  held T— A.  Yes;  I  was  returned  by  acclamation  after- 
ward, at  the  next  genernl  election. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  have  means  of  ascertaining,  besides,  that  that  was 
the  general  sentiment  of  the  people  fully  acquainted  with  the  fisheries  ? 
—A.  Well,  the  sentiment  of  our  people  is  that  the  advantages  were  too 
limited  for  what  we  were  giving  in  return.  Those  are  my  own  senti- 
ments. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  find  that  to  be  the  general  opinion  of  those  ac- 
quainted with  the  subject?— A.  That  is  the  opinion  of  the  leading  men 
ill  my  own  constituency. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  know  whether  the  price  of  mackerel  after  the  abro- 
gation of  the  treaty— has  the  price  increased  or  fallen  off?— A.  Some 
years  it  fell  off  to  less  than  it  was  before.  1  think  it  was  the  year  1873 
that  mackerel  was  very  low. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  average  price  after  the  imposi- 
tion of  the  duty  ? — A.  Well,  we  supposed  it  was  only  our  best  mack- 
erel that  was  wanted  for  the  American  market.  For  instance,  the  poor 
fish,  a  quantity  of  that  would  be  wanted  for  the  West  Indies  trade. 
Our  fall  mackerel  would  be  wanted  by  the  Americans  because  they 
were  fat,  and  the  price  averaged  from  $11  to  $14,  according  to  the 
quality. 

Q.  Well,  since  the  Washington  Treaty  have  the  fishermen  received 
any  more,  or  less  ? — A.  Not  so  much. 

Q.  Since  the  Washington  Treaty  the  fish^jrmen — I  am  not  speaking 
of  any  particular  class,  but  generally  speaking — since  the  Washington 
Treaty  you  say  the  fishermen  have  not  received  as  much  f — A.  One  year 
during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  the  price  was  high. 

Q.  I  am  now  asking  with  regard  to  the  Washington  Treaty.  You  say 
tbey  have  not  received  as  much  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  know  where  the  bait  is  procured  by  the  Americans 
lor  the  co(i-fi8hery  ? — A.  Sometimes  they  run  into  our  harbors  for  bait. 

Q.  Did  they  get  bait  from  you  ? — A.  No.  I  never  sold  it.  You  know 
the  bait  would  not  be  caught  where  I  reside.  It  would  be  caught  about 
lugonish  and  Cape  North. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  they  could  carry  on  the  fishery  successfully 
without  procuring  bait  from  our  shores  ! — A.  I  think  for  the  successful 
prosecution  of  the  cod-fishery  fresh  bait  is  absolutely  necessary. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  often  they  would  come  in  for  it  at  the  places 
yon  speak  of  ? — A.  Just  occasionally. 

(^  How  many  times  during  the  season  would  they  come  in  ? — A.  I 
could  not  speak  from  observation,  only  that  they  used  to  come  into  In- 
gonish,  antl  along  there,  to  get  bait. 

Q.  During  every  season  ? — A.  Yes,  during  every  season  they  fished 
oft  there. 

Q.  I  don't  know  whether  you  are  aware  of  their  transshipping  or  not 
from  the  Americans  themselves  ? — A.  I  heard  from  them. 

Q.  From  themselves  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know,  from  what  they  were  in  the  habit  of  informing  you — 
do  you  know  whether  they  consider  it  a  valuable  privilege? — A.  It 
would  be  a  privilege  so  that  they  could  prosecute  the  fishery  to  a  better 
advantage  during  the  fishery  season. 

Q.  In  what  respect  ?— A.  They  fitted  out  again  and  went  on  the  fish- 
ing-grounds without  being  compelled  to  go  home  with  the  fish. 

Q.  What  proportion  more  of  codfish  do  you  think  they  would  take  by^ 
Laving  the  privilege  of  obtaining  bait  under  the  treaty  ?— A.  I  should 


920 


▲WARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


think  a  vessel  using  fresh  bait  would  catch  at  least  double  the  nuantitv 
of  fish.  * 

Q.  You  have  confined  your  statements  chiefly  to  your  own  district.  I 
don't  know  whether  you  have  ever  learned  from  the  Americans  what 
number  of  vessels  they  bad  in  the  gulf.  Can  you  speak  on  that  sub- 
ject ? — A.  I  could  not  say  positively.    Perhaps  six  or  seven  huiulred. 

Q.  And  do  you  know  how  many  barrels  of  mackerel  they  were  in  the 
habit  of  catching  each  trip  ? — A.  I  think  from  GOO  to  700  barrels,  or  800 
barrels.  Of  course  that  would  be  a  successful  trip,  a  very  successful 
trip.    They  would  not  average  that. 

Q.  Well,  now  did  the  American  fishermen  ever  deal  with  any  person 
else  on  your  part  of  the  coast  except  yourself? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  I  mean  any  trader ! — A.  Up  at  Itigouish  there  were  some  traders. 

Q.  How  far  is  that  from  your  place  ? — A.  Twenty-five  miles. 

Q.  But  1  am  speaking  of  your  harbor  f — A.  Not  much.  Tliey  dealt 
some  at  Sydney.    They  would  fish  there  and  get  cargoes  off  there. 

Q.  But  that  is  a  long  distance  from  you  ? — A.  About  25  miles. 

Q.  The  harbor?  I  thought  it  was  more.  Then  you  are  not  speaking 
of  those  same  vessels  that  would  deal  with  you  f  They  would  not  deal 
at  Sydney  f — A.  Sometimes  the  same  vessels  would  fish  from  our  coast 
right  up  to  Sydney  and  go  in  there  and  get  what  they  wanted  as  it 
suited  them. 

Q.  Was  it  usual  or  unusual  for  a  vessel  not  to  get  her  fare  of  mack 
erel  f — A.  The  vessels  that  frequented  our  place  would  be  generally  on 
their  second  trip ;  sometimes  on  their  third. 

Q.  Would  they  usually — was  it  usual  or  unusual  for  vessels  not  to  get 
a  good  catch  of  mackerel  ? — A.  Sometimes  vessels  would  be  nearly 
loaded ;  at  other  times  there  would  be  perhaps  some  vessels  with  a  very 
small  catch.    The  majority  would  be  well  filled. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  Speaking  of  the  mackerel  fisheries  this  year,  Mr.  Boss,  as  collector 
of  customs  in  Halifax  you  have  had  a  pretty  good  opportunity  of  observ- 
ing or  hearing  what  reiK)rts  are  made  of  the  state  of  the  mackerel  fish- 
ing, haven't  you? — A.  I  could  inform  myself  by  looking  at  our  exports. 
Q.  Well,  do  your  ships  come  in  here  and  report  the  state  of  things! 
You  have  a  way  of  hearing  these  reports? — A.  Sometimes  they  do. 
Q.  I  believe  the  other  day,  in  a  newspaper  published  here  called  the 
Chronicle,  it  was  stated  that  the  mackerel  fishermen  (I  think  this  was 
within  four  or  five  days)  came  in  and  reported  that  there  was  very  poor 
mackerel-fishing  in  the  bay. — A.  There  was  very  fair  maokerel-ttshing  iu 
the  month  of  June,  but  lately  I  think  that  the  mackerel-fishing  has  beeu 
slack. 

Q.  Well,  you  knew  that  fact;  perhaps  you  saw  it  in  the  newspaper!— 
A.  I  just  read  it. 
Q.  Didn't  that  correspond  with  the  information  you  had  ? — A.  The 
ion  I  got  from  our  own  people  was  that  there  was  plenty  of 
'  >v>t  thpy  didn't  bite. 
'  when  I  spoke  of  the  mackerel  I  did  not  refer  to  what  might 
rjc^an.— A.  1  have  peculiar  views  about  the  fish.    I  believe  the 
ci  ^        as  abundant  as  ever  they  were. 

loi.  .V.a't  think  any  of  these  causes  that  have  been  talked  of  have 
had  any  effect  in  diminishing  the  amount  of  mackerel  ?— A.  It  might  be 
injurious  to  the  fishing  interests  in  some  localities. 
Q.  But,  on  the  whole,  the  amount  of  mackerel  that  the  vessels  can 


infer- 


AWARD    OP   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


921 


}t  double  the  quantity 


n  the  newspaper!— 


lat  the  vessels  can 


get A.  I  think,  as  a  general  thing,  they  are  as  abundant  as  ever 

they  were,  fish  of  every  description. 

Q.  But  when  I  spealc  of  vessels  coming  in  and  reporting,  I  don't 
mean  the  number  in  the  sea,  because  that  they  can't  know  much  about, 
but  1  refer  to  the  mackerel  that  they  catch.  The  catcher  have  been 
bad,  have  they  not,  for  some  weeks  past?— A.  I  see  by  the  papers  that 
tbe  catches  have  been  light  lately. 

Q.  Is  not  that  according  to  your  own  observation  of  the  reports  you 
have  received  !  That  statement  has  not  been  contradicted  to  my  knowl- 
edge.— A.  No. 

Q.  Well,  is  it  not  true  that,  either  from  want  of  mackerel— I  don't 
care  how  that  is — or  from  their  not  biting,  the  catches  have  been  light? — 
A.  The  catch  has  been  light. 

Q.  Now,  as  to  the  transshipment  of  American  cargoes,  there  has  not 
been  much  of  that  done  within  the  last  few  years  in  mackerel,  has 
there? — A.  There  was  no  transshipment  on  the  coast  that  I  am 
ac(]uainted  with. 

Q.  Now!— A.  No. 

Q.  What  coast  would  that  be  ?— A.  From  Scaterie  to  Cape  North. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  there  never  has  been  any  transshipment  there, 
or  that  there  is  not  now  ? — A.  There  is  not  now. 

Q.  When  did  that  cease  ? — A.  It  was  never  carried  on,  I  think,  to 
any  extent. 

Q.  It  was  never  carried  on  biit  to  a  slight  extent,  and  has  that  ceased  ? 
And  as  far  as  you  know  as  to  the  rest  of  Novia  Scotia  and  Gape  Breton, 
has  not  the  transshipment  very  much  diminished  of  late  years  ? — A.  The 
transshipment,  I  think,  is  more  from  Prince  Edward  Island  and  the 
Strait  of  Causo. 

Q.  Well,  we  shall  have  witnesses  who  have  lived  there  to  speak  on 
that  point.  I  mean  to  speak  of  the  coast  that  you  are  acquainted  with, 
Halifax  and  its  neighborhood,  and  that  part  of  the  Island  of  Cape  Bre- 
ton that  you  are  familiar  with.  Has  not  the  transshipment  very  much 
diminished? — A.  I  have  said  it  was  never  done  to  a  very  great  extent 
on  the  coast  I  am  acquainted  with. 

Q.  Taking  what  you  know  through  your  official  position,  your  busi- 
ness, or  your  personal  observation,  is  it  not  true  that  it  hasdiniiu- 
isbed? — A.  You  know  the  vessels  that  would  come  to  Halifax,  the 
American  vessels,  would  not  transship. 

Q.  Why  not  ?— A.  They  are  near  home,  and  they  would  be  off  the 
fisbiug-grounds.  They  would  be  far  away  from  the  Ashing  grounds. 
The  object  of  transshipping  would  be  to  get  back  next  day  and  catch 
more  mackerel.  Now,  if  they  transshipped  in  Halifax  it  would  take 
several  days  before  they  would  get  back  to  their  former  position.  It 
would  only  take  them  a  day  or  two  more  to  get  to  the  United  States  with 
the  tish. 

Q.  It  would  not  take  them  as  long  to  transship  and  go  back  as  to  go 
to  tbe  United  States  and  return  ? — A.  Well,  they  would  not  come  here 
except  on  their  way  home. 

Q.  So  from  some  reason  or  other  it  has  not  been  done  here  from  Hali- 
fax I — A.  I  do  not  think  it  is  done  here. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  port  on  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia  or  Cape  Bseton 
where  it  exists  to  a  considerable  extent  to  your  knowledge  ? — A.  The 
principal  place  where  it  would  be  carried  on — of  course  I  can  only  speak 
from  report — would  be  Prince  Edward  Island  and  the  Strait  of  Canso.. 

Q.  Well,  perhaps  the  Commissioners  know  as  much  about  that  as  you 
do  yourself,  but  where  you  know  of,  it  is  not  done  ?— A.  No.   I  mentioned 


922 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


ia  my  evideuce  that  the  vessels  that  frequented  that  coast  would  cutne 
in  the  months  of  Angnst  and  September  and  October.  They  com  e  to 
get  fat  mackerel,  and  whatever  mackerel  they  would  have  in  or  catch 
they  would  then  be  on  their  way  home.  You  know  the  mackerel  clear 
out  in  the  fall  of  the  year,  and  the  Americans  follow  them,  and  follow 
them  from  the  north  to  the  south,  till  they  lose  them  on  their  home 
course.  They  don't  transship,  because  they  are  just  like  the  mackerel 
themselves.    They  follow  the  mackerel  and  go  home. 

Q.  Those  are  their  best  mackerel  t — A.  No  doubt  of  it.  The  mackerel 
are  getting  better  and  better  from  July  until  they  leave  our  coast.  Tliey 
get  fatter  and  fatter. 

Q.  Is  there  any  better  mackerel  anywhere  than  the  makerel  caught 
oft"  the  coast  of  New  England,  say  off"  Cape  Cod,  in  November  f— A. 
Those  are  our  mackerel  going  south.  Tbey  find  our  winter  uucomforta- 
ble  and  go  home. 

Q.  Don't  they  cease  to  be  Dominion  mackerel  after  going  into  our 
waters  Y — A.  I  should  think  they  would. 

Q.  Well,  now,  the  fat  ones  are  not  born  here.  They  come  up  in  the 
spring  from  the  south,  followed  by  the  Americans,  and  go  into  the  bay; 
you  get  them  about  Cape  Breton  in  October  and  the  first  part  of  Novem 
ber ;  then  they  go  south.  Now  I  ask  you  whether  there  are  any  better 
mackerel  in  the  world  than  the  mackerel  caught  otf  Cape  Cod  in  Novem- 
ber.   Your  answer  is  that  they  are  your  mackerel ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  we  have  disposed  of  that  as  not  being  a  well-founded  claim ; 
but  irrespective  of  that  question,  are  there  any  better  mackerel  thau 
those  that  are  caught  there  ? — A.  I  believe  they  are  the  same  mackerel 
that  we  catch  about  the  latter  end  of  October  and  the  first  of  Novem- 
ber—equally fat  and  good.  But  there  is  something  about  the  history  of 
mackerel 

Q.  Perhaps  that  will  not  be  necessary.  Do  you  aay  that  fresh  l);\it  is 
so  much  more  adapted  to  the  taste  of  the  cod  that  it  is  almost  impracti- 
cable to  fish  with  salt  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,do youknow  how  longitissincesaltbaithasbeen given  up  ?— 
A.  It  would  be  always  given  up  when  you  could  get  fresh  bait  to  use. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  have  an  answer  to  my  question.  Do  you  know 
when  they  began  to  substitute  fresh  bait  for  salt  IP — A.  I  think  tliere  is 
more  fresh  bait  used  of  late  years  than  formerly. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  the  Cape  Cod  fishermen  use  salt  bait 
altogether  on  the  Banks  still  f — A.  They  take  clams  with  them. 

Q.  What  else  f  My  question  was  this:  whether  you  did  not  know  that 
the  Cape  Cod  fishermen  still  used  salt  bait? — A.  Not  to  ray  knowledjje. 

Q.  You  may  have  heard  it.  You  know  it  from  information,  don't  you  ? 
— A.  It  altogether  depends  upon  where  they  fish. 

Q.  Well,  I  am  speaking  of  the  Banks.  We  will  say  the  Grand  Banks. 
— A.  The  Americans  go  down  to  Newfoundland  in  the  wmter  and  they 
use  fresh  bait  there  in  the  winter  season. 

Q.  Now,  I  ask  you  the  question,  whether  you  don't  know  that  they 
continue  to  use  salt  bait  T — A.  I  say  that  depends  upon  where  they  are 
fishing. 

Q.  On  the  Grand  Banks  ?— A.  If  they  fish  on  the  Grand  Banks,  I 
think  it  is  likely  they  use  a  large  quantity  of  salt  bait. 

Q.  You  have  heard  that  was  the  case  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  were  times  when  there  was  no  fresh  bait  used  for  the  cod, 
except  what  was  caught  on  the  Banks!— A.  We  always  used  tresh 
bait. 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


923 


r  winter  uucomfdrta- 
ifter  going  into  our 


le  Grand  Biinks,  [ 


Q.  Who  do  you  mean  by  "  we."  Were  your  people  fishing  on  the 
Banks  t — A.  No;  there  was  no  necessity  for  them. 

Q.  Then  your  answer  is  not  an  answer  to  my  question.  Now  we  have 
got  the  fact  that  you  know  very  little  about  transshipment  of  cargoes, 
that  you  have  heard  that  the  Cape  Cod  people,  for  some  reason  or  other, 
good  or  bad,  use  salt  bait,  and  that  formerly  salt  bait  was  used  almost 
altogether  for  codfish,  and  the  fact  that  it  was  not  used  by  your  people 
fishing  for  mackerel  and  out  of  boats  has  nothing  to  do  with  it.  Now 
you  say  that  when  you  were  in  the  Dominion  Parliament  you  opposed 
the  Treaty  of  Washington! — A.  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  suppose  that  treaty  gave  the  Americans  the  right  to  buy 
bait  in  your  ports ! — A.  I  suppose  it  gave  them  pretty  much  all  the 
privileges  they  enjoyed  during  the  Reciprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  Well,  can  you  answer  my  question  f  Did  you  suppose  that  that 
Treaty  of  Washington  gave  the  Americans  the  right  to  buy  bait  in 
British  American  ports  ? — A.  I  should  think  it  did. 

Q.  Did  you  at  the  time  you  opposed  iti— A.  Certainly. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  gave  them  the  right  of  procuring  supplies  ? — 
A.  Yes ;  just  the  same  as  they  did  during  reciprocity. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  gave  them  a  right  to  transship?  I  don't 
mean  merely  that  it  acknowledged  that  right  as  existing,  but  that  they 
obtained  it  under  the  treaty. — A.  I  think  they  had  the  right. 

Q.  You  think  they  had  the  right  before  ? — A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  treaty  gave  it  to  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  suppose  that  the  treaty  gave  it  to  them,  and  that  they 
iiad  not  the  right  to  buy  bait,  transship  their  cargoes,  and  purchase  ice 
and  supplies  ? — A.  No ;  without  the  treaty  they  could  not  do  it,  but 
M'ith  the  treaty  they  could. 

Q.  The  treaty  gave  it  to  them  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  know  at  the  time  you  opposed  the  treaty  that  the  treaty 
made  provision  for  compensation,  in  case  any  was  due  ? — A.  I  did.  1  did 
not  think  much  of  it  on  that  account. 

Q.  Well,  you  thought  you  would  not  get  anything,  perhaps  ?— A.  Noj 
but  that  what  we  would  get  would  be  very  little  compensation  for  what 
we  were  giving  away. 

Q.  Didn't  you  know  there  was  a  tribunal  established  to  do  justice  on 
that  point?— A.  My  argument  was  tliat  I  did  not  consider  tliat  any 
reasonable  money  compensation  would  be  equal  to  us  to  the  thorough 
protection  of  our  own  fishing  rights. 

Q.  And  the  great  advantage  the  Americans  got  from  the  treaty  of 
buying  bait,  ice,  supplies,  &c.,  all  these  put  together  tended  to  make  up 
your  judgment,  didn't  they  I— A.  Yes.  I  looked  upon  their  right  to 
fish  on  our  grounds  as  the  really  heavy  objection  that  I  had  to  the  treaty. 

Q.  You  did  not  want  the  Americans  to  fish  on  any  of  your  fishing 
grounds  I — A.  No,  indeed. 

Q.  On  any  terms,  whatever  money  they  would  give  you  ? — A.  No ;  on 
any  money  consideration. 

Q.  Then  you  differed  from  the  government  that  made  the  treaty  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  You  thought  the  treaty  ought  not  to  be  made,  didn't  you,  what- 
ever terms  \i ere  come  to,  tribunal  or  no  tribunal? — A.  1  thought  we 
should  have  received  larger  privileges  from  the  Americans  than  we  did. 

Q.  What  privileges  did  you  expect  in  return  ?— A.  Well,  what  would 
be  to  the  mutual  advantage  of  the  two  countries,  in  my  opinion,  would 
be  a  general  Eedprocity  Treaty. 

Q.  Well,  you  were  afraid  the  Washington  Treaty  would  prevent  a 


924 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Reciprocity  Treaty ;  yon  thought  the  Washington  Treaty  wouhl  prevent 
or  make  less  probable  a  general  Reciprocity  Treaty,  didn't  you  f— a. 
In  1853  and  1854  our  fisheries  were  protected,  and  then  the  Araericans 
came  seeking  reciprocity.  Now  we  gave  them  our  fishing  riglits  iiiid 
we  gave  them  all  they  wanteil.  I  considered  that  would  make  them 
indifferent  for  reciprocity  afterwards. 

Q.  Then  you  have  given  me  the  reasons  instead  of  answering;  tbo 
question.  I  would  like  to  have  you  answer  it.  You  thought  that  tbe 
Washington  Treaty,  if  adopted,  would  tend  either  to  prevent  or  delay, 
or  be  an  impediment  in  the  way  of  a  general  treaty,  didn't  you  ?  That 
was  one  of  your  objections — I  do  not  say  the  principal  one  f— A.  Yea. 

Q.  During  the  time  you  lived  at  St.  Ann's  you  didn't  yourself  fish  ?— 
A.  Not  personally. 

Q.  You  employed  boatmen.  Did  you  own  the  boats  f— A.  Some  of 
them ;  but  I  supplied  hundreds  of  fishermen. 

Q.  They  were  indebted  to  you,  and  you  really  owned  the  boats,  didn't 
you  ?  They  could  not  pay  for  them  T— A.  They  always  owned  their  own 
boats. 

Q.  I  thought  you  said  you  owned  them  !— A.  O,  yes ;  those  I  fur- 
nished with  crews. 

Q.  Yon  say  those  you  employed  to  fish  caught  in  youi'  boats?— A. 
Y^'es. 

Q.  Now,  during  that  time  you  were  largely  engaged  in  public  affairs 
a  great  many  years,  were  you  not  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  were  many  years  in  the  legislature  of  the  province.  You  were 
in  the  House  of  Commons  of  the  Dominion  and  in  the  Privy  Couucil  of 
the  Dominion.  That  required  your  absence  from  home,  didn't  it  ?— A. 
Not  during  the  fishing  season.    That  was  in  the  winter. 

Q.  But  it  required  your  absence  from  home.  Your  attention  had  to  be 
given  to  public  affairs.  You  had  elections  to  look  after  ? — A.  Very  few, 
fortunately. 

Q.  You  always  used  to  carry  them.  You  always  took  the  right  side  ?— 
A.  I  was  returned  three  times  to  the  Dominion  Parliament  by  acclama- 
tion.   That  was  a  pretty  fair  record. 

Q.  The  majority  of  the  voters  were  heavily  indebted  to  you,  were 
they  not  t 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  As  collector  you  can  tell  us  about  the  pilot  charges  on  American 
fishing- vessels,  can  you  not  ? — A.  The  pilotage  is  under  the  department 
of  marine  and  fisheries.    There  are  commissioners. 

Q.  Don't  you  hapi>en  to  know  about  it? — A.  All  we  have  to  do  is  see 
that  vessels  produce  their  receipt.  We  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
collection. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  whether  you  charge  a  fee  in  Halifax  on  all  the 
American  fishing- vessels  that  come  in  t — A.  That  is  a  matter  outside  of 
the  customs. 

Q.  Don't  you  see  their  receipts  7— A.  The  receipts  go  up  to  the  clear- 
ance office. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  how  it  is  ?  Don't  you  know  whether  the  Amen. 
can  fishing  vessels  that  come  in  here  are  charged  pilot  fees ! — A.  I  think 
they  are. 

Q.  You  know  it  ?— A.  There  are  commissioners  of  pilotage,  and  an 
the  vessels  that  are  by  law  subject  to  pilotage  get  their  receipts  before 
they  go  to  tbe  clearance  ofQcC;. 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


925 


boats?— A.  Some  of 


lebteil  to  you,  were 


\  go  up  to  the  clear- 


Q.  Now,  do  you  allow  American  fishing  vessels  to  go  out  of  this  har 
bor  without  paying  pilot  dues  ?— A.  1  don't  think  it. 

Q.  You  thiulc  they  have  to  pay  them  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Kvery  one,  whether  becomes  herein  in  distress  or  not—whether  for 
shelter  from  storm  or  anything  else!— A.  Our  own  vessels  have  to  pay. 

Q.  I  didn't  ask  yon  that,  but  whether  the  American  fishing  vessels 
bad  not  to  pay  it!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  amount  T— A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  You  are  at  the  bead  ?— A.  The  pilot  fees  are  not  collected  in  our 
otfire  at  all.    I  don't  know  what  it  is. 

Q.  Is  it  done  anywhere  else  except  in  Halifax  ?— A.  There  are  certain 
pilotage  regulations  made  and  acted  upon  wherever  they  apply. 

Q.  Is  it  the  practice  in  other  harbors,  in  any  of  tlieni,  to  charge  fish- 
ing vessels  pilot  dues  f — A.  There  are  no  regular  pilots. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  has  asked  you  with  regard  to  American  fishing  vessels 
Do  you  know  of  any  pilotage  regulations  that  are  not  common  to  all 
vessels,  Canadian  as  well  as  American  ? — A.  I  do  not.    Certainly  they 
apply  to  our  own  vessels  as  well  as  to  others. 

Q.  They  pay  nothing  more  than  our  own  pay  ? — A.  Certainly  not. 
If  one  of  our  own  vessels  would  come  in  in  distress — there  was  a  steamer 
came  in  the  other  day  and  she  paid  the  same. 

Q.  You  know  of  no  distinction  ? — A.  We  treat  the  American  vessels 
according  to  the  same  regulations  that  we  treat  our  own. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Haven't  you  taken  off  these  pilotage  charges  from  Canadain  fish- 
ing vessels  this  year  ? — A.  The  coasters  are  exempt. 

Q.  Haven't  you  exempted  Canadain  fishing  vessels  under  that  head  ? — 
A.  I  think  there  was  an  act  passed  last  session  that  exempted  them. 
Of  course,  Mr.  Smith  knows  more  than  I  do.  The  law  gives  the  com- 
missioners power  to  prepare  certain  pilotage  regulations.  These  regu- 
lations are  printed  and  are  sent  to  the  governor  in  council  to  be  ap- 
proved of.  When  they  approve  of  them  they  become  the  law  of  the 
land. 

(J.  I  do  not  doubt  that  it  is  done  in  the  most  regular  and  excellent 
way  possible,  but  the  result  is  that  every  American  fishing  vessel  that 
comes  in  for  shelter  in  distress  has  to  pay  pilot  dues,  and  you  take  them 
ottof  your  Canadian  fishing  vessels? — A.  1  think  so. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  The  number  of  American  fishing  vessels  that  come  in  here  is  very 
small  ? — A.  Very  limited.  They  come  here  in  the  tall  of  the  year,  in 
the  mouth  of  November.  There  is  a  large  number  that  come  in  here 
on  the  way  to  Newfoundland  and  get  supplied  here. 

Q.  And  in  the  other  ports  they  frequent  there  are  no  pilots  ? — A.  No. 
There  are  no  pilots  in  the  fishing  ports.  The  pilotage  is  a  matter  out- 
side of  my  duties  altogether. 

Q.  You  were  speaking  of  the  mackerel  going  sonth  from  your  coast. 
About  what  time  did  you  say  it  was  ?— A.  From  the  20tb  of  October 
up  to  the  10th  of  November. 

Q.  They  go  south  f— A.  They  clear  away  out  of  the  bay  altogether. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  they  stop  on  the  coast  on  their  way 
south  ?— A.  I  have  always  understood  from  American  fishermen  that 
those  were  the  fat  mackerel  that  they  caught  on  their  own  coast  in  the 
month  of  November. 


926 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHKBY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  yoa  know  firom  the  Americans  where  they  are  caught,  iiiMhore 
or  off  shore  f — A.  I  could  not  say  where  they  are  caught. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  long  they  remaiu  f — A.  They  are  gradually 
passing  farther  south.    They  only  catch  them  on  the  way. 

Q.  You  say  the  mackerel  they  catch  in  the  latter  part  of  October  and 
in  November  is  the  same  run  of  fish  that  you  catch  about  Causeau  and 
along  there  T— A.  They  are  the  fat  mackerel  we  catch  in  the  fall. 

Q.  You  were  going  on  during  your  examination  to  state  the  reason 
why  tlie  fresh  bait  was  not  UHed  altogether  on  the  Grand  Hank  ?— A.  A 
great  many  of  the  crews  of  the  American  cod-fishing  vessels  funiierly  be- 
longed to  our  place.  They  run  in  there  to  get  bait  and  see  their  friends 
at  the  same  time. 

Q.  Well,  but  I  am  asking  you  why  the  fresh  bait  is  not  used  alto- 
gether. Do  you  know  why  it  is  sot  Have  yoa  been  there!— A.  Yes, 
I  have  been  in  Newfoundland  several  winters  in  succession. 

Q.  Carrying  on  the  fisheries  f — A.  I  had  vessels  there. 

Q.  Well,  then,  |)erhaps  you  are  able  to  state  whether  fresh  bait  is  used 
for  codfish  .'  —A.  Tbe  American  vessiels  come  down  there  and  get  tlieir 
mackerel  [herrinfr!  frozen.  Tbey  loaded  right  up.  A  certain  quantity 
of  that  mackerel — this  is,  of  course,  from  my  conversation  with  the 
American  captains — a  certain  quantity  of  that  would  be  used  by  the 
vessels  that  went  on  the  George's  Ashing  in  the  winter.  The  rest  that 
would  not  be  required  would  go  to  tbe  market  and  be  used  for  fresh 
fish.  I  have  seen  several  American  vessels  loaded  with  hard-frozeu 
herrings. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 

Q.  It  was  herring,  and  not  mackerel,  yon  referred  to  a  moment  ago! 
You  said  "mackerel"? — A.  I  was  mistaken.    I  meant  herring  certainly. 

Witness  explains  that  his  information  about  pilotage  may  not  be  ex- 
actly correct,  as  it  is  a  branch  that  is  outside  of  his  own  department. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Y'^on  don't  see  the  receipts  for  pilotage  fees  in  the  customhouse 
department  yourself,  but  some  i>erson  controlled  by  you  sees  tbose  re- 
ceipts ! — A.  He  has  a  list  of  the  vessels  that  are  required  to  pay,  and 
he  sees  that  they  have  their  receipts. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  The  quality  of  the  mackerel  depends  simply  on  the  season  of  the 
year,  not  on  the  locality  1 — A.  No ;  I  think  it  depends  on  tbe  locality. 
Late  in  the  season  they  are  always  fat.  The  mackerel  you  take,  say  to- 
day, in  the  Gulf  are  fatter  and  better  than  those  you  find  even  on  the 
coast  of  Nova  Scotia.  The  farther  you  go  north  tbe  fatter  and  better 
are  the  fish.    They  get  fatter  earlier  tbe  farther  north  you  go. 

Q.  On  a  given  day  the  fish  farther  north  would  be  better  than  the  fish 
farther  south  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  your  view  of  it  ?— A.  That  is  my  view  of  it,  and  I  know  it 
is  correct.  I  will  tell  yoa  my  reason.  Americans  come  from  tbe  North 
Bay  to  our  place  and  show  us  fish  they  have  caught.  It  will  be  a  fort- 
night or  three  weeks  before  our  fish  get  as  fat  as  those  fish  caught  a 
little  farther  north. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  That  is  the  early  part  of  the  season  t— A.  In  the  spring  all  the 

mackerel  are  Nos.  2  and  3 ;  perhaps  you  might  catch  3,000  barrels  all 

No.  3,  and  yon  cannot  catch  Nos.  1  and  2  until  late  in  the  season,  when 

they  get  fat.    The  Americans  send  them  up  here  poor  and  they  get  fat. 


AWABD  OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 
No.  53. 


927 


Charles  Creed,  residing  at  Halifax,  gene-  \l  broker  and  se'^retary 
of  the  Halifax  Cbamber  of  Commerce,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  You  are  secretary  of  the  Halifax  Chamber  of  Commerce  I— 
Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  been  at  anytime  engaged  in  the  tisheries  ?— A..  Not 
lately.    I  have  been  in  years  gone  by. 

Q.  Did  you  fit  out  vessels  yourself  f— A.  I  did  at  that  time. 

Q.  How  long  ago  was  that?— A.  18 years  ago. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fit  them  out  to  tlsh  !— A.  We  fitted  a  great  many 
vessels  out  for  North  Bay  and  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Did  you  send  the  vessels  out  for  the  purpose  of  mackerel  fishing?— 
A.  Yes;  mackerel  fishing  generally. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  tonnage  of  the  vessels  ?— A.  Generally  from 
40  to  00  tons. 

Q.  About  how  many  barrels  to  the  ton  would  such  vessels  catch  ?— 
A.  We  calculate  that  small  vessels  under  50  tons  will  take  9  barrels  to 
the  ton. 

Q.  And  how  much  for  vessels  over  50  tons  ? — A.  Vessels  over  50  tons 
will  generally  run  from  OJ  to  10  barrels  per  ton.  It  depends  on  the 
build  of  the  vessels.  Vessels  that  are  broader  built  than  others  will 
carry  a  little  more  fish.  For  vessels  of  90  tons  we  calculate  10  barrels 
to  the  ton. 

Q.  Then  a  one  hundred  ton  vessel  would  carry  one  thousand  barrels 
if  she  got  a  full  fare  ?— A  Yes. 

Q.  The  vessels  you  fitted  out  were  for  fishing  in  Gulf  St.  Lawrence 
and  Bay  Chaleurs  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Did  they  generally  get  full  fares  ?— A.  That  depended  on  the  voy- 
age they  made.  Some  seasons  were  better  than  others,  but  our  vessels 
generally  got  full  fares. 

Q.  Where  were  the  fares  taken,  close  inshore  or  in  the  bodies  of  the 
bays  ? — A.  All  were  taken  inshore. 

Q.  Is  there  any  fish,  as  far  as  you  are  aware,  in  the  bodies  of  the 
bays? — A.  I  don't  think  so.    I  never  understood  so. 

Q.  I  suppose  you  would  be  a  good  deal  surprised  if  a  person  swore 
that  the  inshore  fishery  was  good  for  nothing  and  the  deep-sea  fishery, 
outside,  was  very  valuable  indeed  f — A.  I  never  heard  that. 

Q.  Would  you  believe  it  if  you  did  hear  it? — A.  I  would  not  think  it 
possible.  It  might  be  so,  but  what  I  state  is  according  to  my  knowl- 
edge. 

Q.  Take  Bay  Chaleurs ;  the  fishing  all  along  the  shore  there  is  with- 
in three  miles  of  the  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  mackerel,  as  a  fish,  inhabit,  as  a  rule,  the  deep  water  or  shal- 
low water  inshore  ? — A.  I  have  always  heard  that  mackerel  is  a  fish  that 
strikes  inshore.    When  mackerel  are  in  season  they  are  inshore. 

Q.  How  do  yon  account  for  that?— A.  I  think  the  fish  come  inshore 
for  the  purpose  of  getting  bait. 

Q.  They  come  to  feed  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  when  they  have  got  food  they 
go  out.    They  come  in  the  spring  of  the  year  qaite  poor  and  thin. 

Q.  According  to  your  idea,  they  come  to  the  inshore  ground  as  a  feed- 
ing ground  ? — A.  Yes.    In  the  fall  they  go  away  south. 
Q.  Are  you  aware  of  any  fisbingground,  except  the  Banks,  where 


928 


AWABD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


mackerel  can  be  taken  except  inshore  7 — A.  I  never  heard  of  any.  My 
experience  always  led  me  to  believe  that  except  on  Banks  they  co'uUl  no; 
be  caught  in  deep  water. 

Q.  The  water  is  shallow  on  the  Banks  !— A.  Yes ;  and  there  is  feed 
there.    They  may  stay  on  the  Banks  a  little  while  when  going  in  and 
little  while  when  coming  out. 

Q.  In  the  spring  they  may  be  taken  when  passing  over  the  Banks, 
and  also  in  the  fall  when  passing  over  the  Banks  f — A.  Yea. 

Q.  That  is  the  only  deep-sea  mackerel  tishing  f — A.  I  have  always 
been  led  to  believe  that. 

Q.  You  have  not  only  had  your  own  personal  experience  as  an  em- 
ployer of  schooners,  but  you  have  had  a  good  deal  of  experieuce  with 
mackerelers  who  come  and  trade  with  you  f — A.  Yes ;  I  know  all  the 
men  who  go  on  voyages,  and  I  generally  have  conversation  with  ihem 
about  fishing. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  underst;aud  from  any  one  that  the  inshore  fishery 
was  not  worth  anything  ? — A.  I  always  understood  that  the  inshore 
fishery  was  the  most  valuable.    The  men  have  always  said  so. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  person  who  did  not  consider  it  so  ?— A. 
No ;  they  have  a  practice  of  luring  the  fish  out.  They  grind  their 
bait. 

Q.  Will  you  describe  how  they  allure  the  fish  out  T — A.  They  come 
in,  throw  their  bait  out,  and  get  the  fish  outside.  They  grind  their  bait 
at  Port  Hood  and  Canso. 

Q.  If  they  had  not  the  privilege  of  coming  inshore  they  could  not 
allure  the  flsh  oat  f — A.  They  have  to  come  inshore  to  do  it. 

Q.  If  the  Americans  were  prohibited  from  coming  within  tlie  three- 
mile  limit,  could  they  successfully  carry  on  the  mackerel  fishery  in  the 
Gulf? — A.  I  don't  think  so ;  not  from  my  knowledge  of  the  facts. 

Q.  Could  they  carry  on  the  fishery  at  all  ! — A.  I  don't  think  so.  From 
what  I  have  heard  from  men  having  knowledge  of  the  matter  I  should 
iiot  think  so. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  since  the  Treaty  of  Washington  the  Ameri- 
cans have  been  in  the  habit  of  transshipping  cargoes  very  much  ?— A. 
Yes ;  they  have  transshipped  right  along.  They  have  been  sending 
cargoes  along  from  Canada  by  steamers  to  the  States. 

Q.  Is  that  a  valuable  privilege!— A.  I  should  think  it  is,  because 
they  have  a  chance  of  any  rise  in  the  market,  and  they  can  stop  and  lish 
while  their  cargoes  are  going  forward.  If  they  have  fares  of  300  or  400 
barrels,  they  can  transship  them  and  keep  on  fishing. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  fsict  that  they  don't  wait  always  in  the  hay 
to  get  full  fares,  but  get  as  n\any  as  convenient,  transship  them,  and  go 
right  back  to  the  fishing  ground  f — X.  Yes ;  I  have  heard  it. 

Q.  IJave  you  heard  that  they  do  not  make  a  point  to  get  full  fares 
before  they  transship? — A.  I  have  heanl  of  vessels  having  300  barrels 
forwarding  them.  What  their  instructions  were  I  don't  know,  but  1 
have  known  that  to  be  done. 

Q.  You  say  it  is  18  years  since  you  were  engaged  in  fishing  ;  during 
these  IH  years,  what  has  been  the  average  number  of  American  vessels 
in  the  Gulf  fishing  mackerel  ?— A.  From  what  I  have  been  able  to 
gather,  about  4iM>  vessels. 

Q.  Some  years  there  would  be  a  great  many  more,  I  suppose  ?— A. 
Yes ;  I  think  there  would  be  more  some  years. 

Q.  When  you  put  the  number  at  400,  is  that  a  high  or  low  averaj?e  ?— 
A.  I  think  that  is  a  fair  average. 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


929 


Q.  That  is  mackerelers  alone  !-— A.  The  Amerieau  vessels  which  come 
down. 

Q.  For  the  purpose  of  fishing  mackerel  ?— A.  Yes ;  that  is  about  the 
ouly  business  on  which  they  come  to  the  bay. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  tliat  some  come  down  for  cod-fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  some 
do,  but  only  a  few.    Tliey  generally  go  to  the  Banks  for  their  cod  fish. 

Q.  There  are  codfish  banks  in  the  hay  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  put  the  American  mackerelers  annually  in  the  Gulf  at  400  as 
a  fair  average  f — A.  Yes.  Prom  what  1  have  heard,  talkiug  with  one 
and  another  on  the  subject,  1  suppose  that  is  a  fair  average. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  average  tonnage  of  those  vessels  ? — A.  The 
American  fishing-vessels  generally  range  from  CO  to  80  tons — there  may 
be  a  few  over  thar.  There  are  some  large  vessels,  but  the  average  will 
be  about  what  1  have  stated.  Of  late  years  their  vessels  are  a  little 
larger  than  they  were. 

Q.  You  have  said  they  would  take  from  9  to  9^  barrels  to  the  ton  ? — 
A.  Yes;  you  would  have  to  deduct  a  little  for  American  tonnage — one- 
fiith,  I  think. 

Q.  What  would  be  a  fair  catch  each  trip  for  those  vessels  ?— A.  I 
think  400  barrels  would  be  a  fair  average.  Sometimes  they  would  make 
three  trips. 

Q.  And  sometimes  two? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  put  400  barrels  as  a  low  average  ? — A.  That  is  considered 
to  be  a  fair,  moderate  average. 

Q.  Then  a  season's  catch  would  average  at  least  800  barrels? — A. 
That  would  be  a  fair  average. 

Q.  You  have  had  a  good  deal  of  experience  about  the  matter,  both 
practical  experience  as  owner  of  vessels  and  from  dealing  with  fisher- 
men ;  is  that  your  idea  of  the  average  catch  ? — A.  That  is  my  idea  from 
conversations  I  have  had  with  fishermen,  and  I  have  had  a  good  deal 
of  conversation  with  them.  That  is  my  opinion,  based  on  what  they 
have  told  me  and  on  my  own  knowledge  of  the  business. 

Q.  Since  the  Treaty  of  Washington  the  Americans  have  been  in  the 
habit  of  transshipping  a  great  deal  ? — A.  A  good  deal  of  fish  is  trans- 
shijiped. 

(j.  You  are  aware  that  a  good  deal  of  cod-fish  is  caught  by  American 
fishermen  in  our  waters  along  the  shores  of  the  Gulf? — A.  Yes  ;  I  think 
on  the  Banks  there  is. 

Q.  To  what  Banks  do  you  refer;  the  Banks  off  the  coast  of  Nova 
Scotia  ? — A.  Some  otf  the  Banks  of  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  the  Banks  in  the  bay  ?— A.  There  are  some  Banks 
in  the  Gulf  where  cod  fish  are  taken,  but  I  don't  think  the  Americans 
carry  on  that  fishing  very  extensively.  The  George's  Banks  form  their 
])rincipal  fishing  place  for  cod. 

Q.  What  bait  do  the  Americans  use  for  that  fishery?— A,,  They  gen- 
erally try  to  get  fresh  bait,  if  possible. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait?— A.  They  use  herring  and  squid. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  the  bait?— A.  They  come  into  Prospect  and 
get  a  great  deal  of  bait  there. 

Q.  How  far  distant  is  that  place  from  here?— A.  About  25  miles. 
Tliey  go  in  there  for  ice  and  bait. 

Q.  Have  they  done  that  during  the  last  8  or  10  years?— A.  They  go 
in  there  every  year  they  come  round. 

Q.  They  get  large  (pnintities  of  bait  there?— A.  They  get  bait  and  ice. 
Some  weie  there  the  other  day. 
50  F 


930 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  they  come  into  ITalifax  for  bait  and  ice  ?— A.  They  get  very  lit. 
tie  here ;  they  do  not  find  it  so  convenient  as  the  ports  round  the  coast. 
They  And  if  they  come  to  a  city  they  expend  money  on  thin<js  wliicli 
they  could  do  without.  Besides,  they  can  keep  the  men  better  to^retlicr 
if  they  do  not  come  here.  There  is  no  inducement  at  Prospect  to  take 
the  men  away  from  a  vessel. 

Q.  They  generally  go  to  the  outports  for  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  the  Americans  carry  on  that  cod-fishing  without  having  tlio 
privilege  of  getting  that  bait! — A.  I  should  not  think  so,  because  if 
they  could  get  it  elsewhere  they  would  not  come  here  for  it. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  talked  witli  them  or  heard  them  speak  on  the  sub- 
ject t — A.  I  have  seen  American  fishermen  fitting  themselves  out  with 
bait  and  ice. 

Q.  And  without  bait  and  ice  they  could  not  carry  on  the  cod  fislicry? 
— A.  They  must  have  bait;  they  could  not  do  anything  without  it, 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  they  fish  for  bait  or  buy  it  T — A.  They  buy 
the  bait. 

Q.  If  they  were  denied  the  privilege  of  buying  ihe  bait,  they  would 
either  have  to  catch  it  or  do  without  it! — A.  They  might  use  salt  bait, 
bnt  1  do  not  think  they  would  get  as  good  a  fare  offish. 

Q.  Is  not  salt  bait  entirely  discarded  for  the  i>urpo8e  of  cod-fishiiig  ?— 
A.  \A^e  do  not  use  any  salt  bait  about  here. 

Q.  Could  fishermen  using  salt  bait  compete  with  those  using  fiesli 
bait? — A.  I  do  not  think  so.  Fish  will  take  fresh  bait  more  readily  than 
salt  bait.  If  they  have  Hobsou's  chr>ice,  and  are  hungry,  they  will  take 
salt  bait. 

Q.  Then,  if  the  Americans  were  prohibited  from  buying  that  fresh 
bait,  they  nmst  necessarily  tish  for  it,  or  do  without  it  altogether  ?— A. 
Yes ;  unless  they  can  get  it  from  their  own  coast. 

Q.  They  have  not  managed  that  yet? — A.  They  never  did  it,  that  I 
am  aware  of.  No  doubt  at  Canso  they  supply  themselves  with  bait  anil 
ice. 

Q.  liefore  the  Treaty  of  Washinjiton,  salt  mackerel  sent  from  liore  to 
the  United  States  was  subject  to  a  duty  of  $2  per  barrel  ?--A.  1  tbiuk 
$2  was  the  amount. 

Q.  Did  the  dealers  in  fish  make  as  much  money  with  the  duty  on  fish 
as  they  do  now  with  the  duty  removed  ? — A.  Yes.  The  consunier,  of 
course,  has  to  pay  the  duty.  There  would  be  a  proportionate  price 
charged  for  the  fish. 

Q.  Who  do  you  say,  in  the  case  of  mackerel,  pays  the  duty  ? — A.  It  is 
like  every  article  of  commerce  and  merchandii^e;  if  a  duty  is  put  on,  the 
consumer  pays  it. 

Q.  Are  the  best  mackerel  sent  to  the  American  market  ? — A.  Our  best 
fish  go  to  the  American  market. 

Q.  And  the  poorer  kinds  go  to  the  West  Indies?— A.  The  Americans 
sometimes  bny  large  No.  3.  They  are  buying  a  great  many  of  tliese  just 
now ;  but,  as  a  general  rule,  the  heavy,  fat  mackerel  go  to  the  Ameri- 
can market. 

Q.  Taking  either  the  American  coast  or  our  coast,  is  not  the  supply 
of  mackerel  always  limited  ?— A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  If  the  Americans  imposed  a  high  duty  on  mackerel  could  they  sup- 
ply the  demand  from  their  own  fisheries  ? — A.  They  never  did  it  that  I 
am  aware  of. 

Q.  Even  when  the  fishing  there  was  tolerably  good  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  they  have  good  or  bad  fishing  there  now: 
—A.  The  'latest  advices  we  have  from  the  United  States  say  that  the 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


931 


!»rket  ?— A.  Our  best 


9t,  is  not  the  supply 


fishing  is  bad;  that  there  has  been  a  short  catch.    The  price  of  fish  has 
gone  up  $1  per  barrel. 

Q.  For  .years  bacli,  has  there  not  been  a  short  catch  on  the  American 
coast?— A.  There  has  not  been  an  overcatch  of  maclserel  in  the  United 
States  fcr  several  years.  They  had  a  very  good  catch  last  year.  This 
year  it  h  is  been  a  bad  catch  ;  they  say  so  themselves.  We  cannot  now 
purchase  Ash  enough  for  the  demand. 

Q.  You  bay  whatever  duty  they  may  impose  the  consumer  pays  it  ?— 
A.  I  judge  that  will  follow. 

Q.  Would  you,  as  a  practical  man,  prefer  the  Americans,  as  a  mere 
matter  of  money,  excluded  from  the  fisheries  on  our  shores,  and  let  them 
put  on  any  duty  on  our  fish  entering  the  American  market  ? — A.  I  could 
hardly  give  an  opinion  on  such  a  broad  subject  as  that. 

Q.  Does  not  your  opinion  that  the  consumer  pays  the  duty,  involve 
that  ? — A.  I  cannot  give  an  opinion  on  that  subject. 

Q.  You  are  quite  prepared  that  they  should  impose  a  duty  of  $2  per 
barrel  ? — A.  We  were  quite  satisfied  when  that  duty  was  on ;  we  made 
good  sales  and  obtained  good  prices.  There  was  no  complaint;  the  fish 
sold  readily.  Practically,  all  the  fish  we  send  to  the  States  is  on  order; 
very  little  goes  on  consignment.  It  does  not  do  to  ship  mackerel  or 
other  fish  on  consignment  to  the  States. 

Q.  Why  '—A.  Those  who  have  tried  it  have  always  found  it  better 
to  ship  fish  on  order  to  the  States. 

Q.  Are  our  mackerel — say  No.  1  or  No.  2 — as  good  or  better  mackerel 
than  those  obtained  oft"  the  American  coast  1—A.  I  think  they  are  pretty 
much  the  same.  Our  mackerel  are  a  little  heavier,  I  think.  There  is  a 
little  diftcreuce  in  the  dressing  of  them.  When  American  fishermen 
dress  mackerel  they  rim  them,  which  makes  them  look  whiter.  Our 
people  do  not  do  that. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  rimming  them  ? — A.  It  takes  the  black  off 
tlie  fins  and  makes  the  fish  look  whiter.  The  opinion  among  our  peo* 
pie,  however,  is  that  the  fish  is  not  so  nice  when  thus  dressed. 

Q.  It  makes  the  fish  pleasant  to  the  eye  ? — A.  It  makes  the  fish  look 
better  and  more  marketable.  The  American  mackerel  always  bring 
more  than  our  mackerel,  by  half  a  dollar  a  barrel. 

Q.  Take  codfish  :  is  there  a  large  quantity  caught  inshore  along  the 
coast  of  Nova  Scotia  ? — A.  Yes,  a  great  deal  of  cod  is  caught  off  the 
shore. 

Q.  Within  one  or  two  miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

i}.  All  the  herring  taken  on  this  coast  are  taken,  I  believe,  within 
that  distance  oft' shore? — A.  All  herring,  except  fall  herring,  which  go 
off  to  the  Banks. 

Q.  The  spring  and  summer  herring  are  taken  inshore  ? — A.  They  are 
almost  all  taken  inshore. 

Q.  Is  halibut  taken  within  the  limits? — A.  They  do  not  catch  many 
halibut  within  the  limits;  they  are  generally  taken  on  the  Banks.  Had- 
dock are  taken  on  near  Banks,  but  come  inshore  sometimes.  Pol- 
lack and  haddock  are  inshore  fish,  and  are  generally  found  about  rocks ; 
they  like  to  be  in  the  sun. 

Q.  Are  large  quantities  of  herring  taken  on  the  coast  of  Nova  Sco- 
tia ?— A.  Large  quantities. 

(J.  Is  the  supply  of  herring  practically  unlimited  ?— A.  There  is  gen- 
erally a  very  fair  supply  of  herring  in  the  season. 

Q.  Are  mackerel  taken  along  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia  I— A.  Yes; 
inacktrel  are  taken  very  close  in.    The  harbor  is  full  of  them  now. 


932 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  do  t!i<«y  :)tay  here  all  the  season  ?— -A.  They  go  awaj-  in  tlie 
fall.    In  the  middle  of  October  they  begin  to  move  oft'. 

Q.  Along  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia,  I  believe,  mackerel  are  not  taken 
outside  of  two  or  three  miles  of  the  coast  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  It  does  not  difter  as  regards  that  from  the  gulf  and  Bay  Chaleurs ' 
—A.  No. 

Q.  Did  any  of  your  vessels  ever  fish  in  Gaap6  Bay,  or  did  they  not  go 
farther  than  Bay  Ohaleurs? — A.  Our  vessels  generally  stopped  in  Bay 
Chaleurs. 

Q.  Did  the  vessels  go  straight  to  Bay  Chaleurs! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  the  usual  practice  to  go  direct  to  Bay  Chaleurs  without  stop- 
ping at  Prince  Edward  Island  f — A.  Some  vessels  do  and  eome  do  not. 
Some  fishermen  slop  about  the  island  and  afterwards  run  up  to  the  buy, 
but  most  of  our  fishermen  go  right  up  to  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Those  which  stay  and  tish  about  Prince  Edward  Island  form  the 
exception  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  other  words,  the  Bay  Chaleurs  fishing  tleet  is  a  distinct  Hoet?— 
A.  Yes.  Some  men,  if  they  find  the  tish  scarce  iu  the  bay,  go  to  the 
island  and  endeavor  to  get  them  there. 

Q.  They  give  the  bay  the  first  chance! — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  How  many  years  have  you  held  your  present  position  as  secretary 
of  the  Halifax  Chamber  of  Commerce  ? — A.  I  have  been  there  five  years. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  before  that  time? — A.  1  was  at  pretty  niucli  the 
same  ihing.  We  reorganizetl  the  chamber  about  five  years  ago.  I  had 
been  keeping  the  Merchants'  Exchange  and  Beading  Room. 

Q.  Y<mr  chief  business  is  having  charge  of  the  Merchants'  Beading 
Room  ? — A.  My  chief  business  is  that  of  a  broker. 

Q.  A  broker  in  anything  ? — A.  In  anything.  1  buy  fish  and  send  it 
to  the  States  sometimes. 

Q.  Do  you  deal  much  in  it  ? — A.  Not  a  great  deal. 

Q.  What  sort  offish  do  you  buy? — A.  Sometimes  mackerel. 

Q.  Do  you  buy  codfish  ? — A.  Very  little  coil. 

Q.  How  much  mackerel  have  you  bought  within  the  last  five  years  to 
send  to  the  States  !  Take  first  the  present  year. — A.  I  suppose  701)  or 
800  barrels  a  year  would  cover  it. 

Q.  You  went  out  of  the  fishery  business  18  years  ago  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  go  into  then  f — A.  I  went  into  gold-mining. 

Q.  Had  the  fishing  business  be"n  successful  up  to  the  time  yon  loft 
it? — A.  Our  business  had  been  succesfeful ;  1857  was  not  a  very  success- 
ful year. 

(^.  How  many  years  had  you  been  in  the  fishing  business  yourself 
before  you  leii  it  to  go  into  gold-mining  ? — A.  Four  years. 

Q.  What  were  you  in  before  that  ? — A.  I  was  in  the  fishery  business  all 
my  life.  I  was  10  years  in  Newfoun«lland  supplying  fishermen  with 
goods.    I  was  brought  up  in  a  fishing-house. 

Q.  As  a  clerk  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Had  you  been  any  thing  more  than  a  clerk  up  to  the  time  you  came 
here? — A.  No. 

Q.  And  how  many  years  ago  did  you  come  here  t — A.  Twenty  years 
ago. 

Q.  Up  to  the  time  you  left  Newfoundland,  20  years  ago,  had  Amer- 
ican vessels  been  in  the  habit  of  coming  there  for  bait? — A.  Not  there. 

Q.  Nor  for  ice!— A.  Not  while  I  was  there. 

Q.  You  never  saw  them  there  for  that  purpose? — A.  No. 


AWAPD   OP   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


933 


f  aud  Bay  Chaleurs  ? 


buy  fish  ami  iseud  it 


Q.  Had  they  come  there  and  traflBcked  for  herring  with  the  inhabit- 
ants!— A.  At  the  part  of  the  ishmd  where  I  was  brought  up  nothing 
but  American  traders  came.  They  took  dried  fish.  I  was  brought  up 
at  Bonavista. 

Q.  They  took  dried  fish  ?— A.  All  kinds  of  dried  fish  and  oil. 

Q.  That  would  carry  you  back  to  1855)?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  would  be  during  the  existence  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  years  before  1859  had  you  known  that  trading  business 
to  have  gone  on  there? — A.  It  was  in  1848  I  first  went  to  serve  my 
time  at  the  business.  At  that  time,  when  I  was  a  boy,  at  that  place 
and  all  down  the  coast  the  people  expected  the  traders  to  come  every 
year. 

Q.  Did  they  buy  frozen  herring  in  those  days? — A.  Nothing  was  known 
ill  those  days  of  frozen  herring. 

Q.  But  American  traders  came  there  and  bought  the  dried  codfish 
from  the  fishermen  ? — A.  Yes;  from  the  inhabitants. 

Q.  Did  they  buy  them  from  the  planters  or  common  fishermen  ? — A. 
From  the  common  fishermen. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  firm  with  which  you  were  engaged  ? — 
A.  McBride  &  Kerr,  a  Scotch  house. 

Q.  Was  that  trade  by  the  Americans  with  the  inhabitants  very  inju- 
rious to  that  firm  ? — A.  I  tell  you  we  did  not  like  it. 

Q.  It  interfered  with  the  business  of  the  house  in  which  you  were 
employed  ? — A.  We  did  not  like  it.  It  was  also  injurious  to  the  fisher- 
men, because  if  we  found  they  traded  with  the  Americans  they  did  not 
get  anything  to  eat  that  winter.    That  was  all. 

Q.  Notwithstanding  that  disadvantage,  they  were  glad  to  buy  from 
people,  were  they  not  ? — A.  It  cured  itself  in  a  few  years.  The  Ameri- 
cans went  to  Labrador. 

Q.  Finally  you  starved  the  fishermen  down  to  it  ? — A.  These  men 
were  dependent  on  us  in  winter.  Tliey  never  came  in  with  sufficiently 
Sood  cargoes  to  pay  up  their  accounts.  It  was  not  starving  them  to  it, 
because  they  were  people  we  had  to  look  after.  These  firms  take  all 
tbe  fish  from  the  fishermen,  and  it  matters  very  little  whether  there  is 
a  debit  or  credit,  they  get  supplies  in  winter. 

(}.  They  fed  and  looked  after  them  I  suppose,  like  a  good  planter  in 
the  Soutli  did  his  slaves  !— A.  They  looked  after  the  fishermen  whose 
Ush  they  bought. 

Q.  Those  fishermen  are  still  poor  and  dependent?— A.  Some,  the 
more  industrious  and  careful,  get  above  that  position;  but  as  a  class 
tliey  are  pretty  poor  aud  dependent.  They  were  afraid  to  trade  with 
Americans,  because  the  firms  could  starve  them  out  if  they  did  it;  that 
is,  they  would  not  give  them  supplies.  After  we  had  supplied  them 
with  outfit  and  goods,  they  would  sometimes,  under  cover  of  night, 
take  their  fish  away. 

Q.  What  time  of  the  year  did  the  Americans  come?— A.  About  the 
beginning  of  August. 

Q.  At  that  time  were  the  fishermen  in  debt?— A.  Yes. 

il  And  they  were  in  debt  through  the  winter?— A.  We  had  always 
to  carry  a  large  amount. 

Q.  You  will  be  surprised  to  find  that  since  trade  with  the  Americans 
bad  increased  largely  the  fishermen  of  Newfoundland  have  grown  bet- 
ter off?— A.  I  was  this  year  at  the  place  I  have  spoken  of;  I  had  not 
been  there  for  18  or  19  years.  1  found  the  people  were  in  very  much 
better  circumstances. 


934 


AWARD  OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Did  they  have  a  frozen  herring  trade  there?— A.  No ;  that  was  in 
the  northern  part  of  the  island. 

Q.  After  you  left  Newfoundland,  you  were  four  years  in  the  fishing. 
business  here? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  those  four  years  how  many  fishing-vessels  did  your  firm 
fit  out  each  yoar! — A.  For  all  jHaces  we  fitted  out,  I  think,  about  150 
or  200  vessels  a  year;  that  is,  supplied  them. 

Q.  Then  did  you  not  fit  out  the  vessels  as  owners?— A.  No;  we  were 
merchants  and  supplied  fishermen. 

Q.  Were  some  of  those  vessels  American?— A.  They  were  all  our  own 
vessels. 

Q.  In  the  estimate  you  made  of  the  number  of  American  fishing  ves- 
sels in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence,  to  what  years  did  you  refer  f— A.  1 
referrfd  to  the  last  thv.a  or  four  years. 

Q.  What  had  been  your  means  of  knowfng  whether  during  those  three 
or  four  years  there  had  been  400  American  mackerelers  annually  in  tlie 
gulf? — A.  1  have  had  conversation  with  people  from  Canso  and  down 
that  way,  and  obtained  their  ideat.  as  to  how  many  had  passed  through. 

Q.  "We  will  take  thM  |'.s.  year.  1876,  what  is  your  estimate  for  that 

•T  300  v  ssels  last  year. 

Pretiy  much  the  same. 
.  icie  were  more  vessels  in  1874  than  in  1875, 


1 876  .  Ijp-e  were  400  American  mackerelers  in 
-  I.  \t.    o}    'cssels;  I  mean  American  ves- 
ibfo.aiation  from  the  people  down 


year? — A.  I  don't '.  u, 

Q.  In  1875,  how  iiu.i. 

Q.  In  1874?— A.  ltl\ii.v 
or  1876. 

Q.  You  think,  in  187.',    r  ' 
the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  ■ 
sels,  all  told.    I  have  gathered  voj 
there. 

Q.  If  Mr.  Thomson  understood  you  to  say  there  were  400  American 
mackerelers  in  the  gulf  each  of  those  years,  that  is  a  mistake  f— A.  I 
mean  400  American  vessels  of  all  descriptions.  The  bulk,  of  course, 
were  mackerel  vessels. 

Q.  How  much  transshipping  of  fish  cargoes  have  you  known  about 
yourself? — A.  The  way  1  come  to  know  about  that  is  by  the  steamers 
going  from  here  to  Boston.  They  call  in  at  Port  Hawkesburyan<l  take 
fish  there.  All  the  fish  coming  there  is  American  fish  passing  through 
to  the  States. 

Q.  When  was  the  last  occasion  you  personally  were  av/are  of  Ameri- 
can fishing  vessels  transshipping  their  cargoes  ? — A.  I  understand  they 
do  it  this  year.    It  came  under  my  notice. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  they  did  it  as  much  last  year  as  in  previous 
years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  don't  regard  the  mackerel  fishery  as  having  faller^  'iff  in 
the  gulf? — A.  I  don't  think  it  has  fallen  otf  very  much  during  the  last 
two  years. 

Q.  Has  it  within  the  last  five  or  six  years? — A.  There  was  one  year, 
about  three  years  ago,  when  there  was  a  short  catch. 

Q.  You  have  never  heard  of  a  short  catch  since  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Your  opinion  is,  that  during  the  last  four  or  five  years  the  mack- 
erel fishery  done  by  Americans  in  the  gulf  has  been  as  prosperous  as  it 
nsed  to  be,  and  about  as  much  fish  has  been  caught  ? — A.  Pretty  much 
about  the  same. 

Q.  Do  you  think  American  vessels,  for  the  last  four  or  five  years, 
have  averaged  a  catch  of  800  barrels  a  season  ?— A.  I  think  they  have 
on  an  average. 

Q.  You  think  an  average  catch  of  800  barrels  to  400  vessels?— A.  1 
thin'i  so.    From  all  I  cao  gather  I  should  think  m. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


935 


year  as  in  previous 


There  was  one  year, 


Q.  Have  you  had  any  great  opportunity  or  made  it  your  business  to 
ascertain  the  facts  in  that  matter  ?— A.  I  have  asked  one  and  another 
and  people  engaged  in  the  trade  down  that  way. 

Q.  And  that  is  the  result  f—A.  That  is  the  result. 

Q.  About  bait  for  codfish ;  did  you,  when  in  Newfoundland,  know 
anything  about  American  cod-fishing  on  the  Banks  f— A.  I  did. 

Q.  How  did  you  happen  to  know  about  that  ?— A.  That  was  when  1 
came  to  live  at  St.  John's. 

Q.  When  was  that?— A.  About  1850, 1  think. 

Q.  When  you  were  in  St.  John's  did  American  cod-fishermen  use  fresh 
bait  on  the  Banks  ! — A.  They  generally  went  down  to  the  Bay  of  Islands 
and  got  their  bait. 

Q.  Where  is  that  ?— A.  On  the  northwest  side  of  the  island. 

Q.  In  1850  they  went  there  ?— A.  They  used  to  go  there  and  get  her- 
ring  bait. 

Q.  Frozen  herring  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  they,  at  that  time,  get  squid  or  any  other  fresh  bait  ?— A.  They 
used  to  go  a  little  further  up,  nearer  St.  Pierre,  for  squid. 

Q.  Off  the  island  of  St.  Pierre  ?— A.  Off  the  coast  of  Newfoundland, 
aud  the  fishermen  there  sold  them  squid. 

Q.  They  began  that  buvsiness  so  long  ago  as  1850  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  Americans  bought  herring  also? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  year  did  you  come  to  Halifax  f— A.  About  185G. 

Q.  Was  this  trade  in  buying  herring  and  bait  going  on  from  1850  to 
1856  ? — A.  Yes ;  in  the  same  way. 

Q.  Did  you  know  about  the  practice  of  American  cod-fishermen  'i 
Were  you  aware  that  they  used  salt  clams  very  largely  ? — A.  I  knew 
they  used  salt  clams  when  they  could  not  get  anything  else. 

Q.  Did  you  not  know  that  some  American  cod-fishermen  never  used 
anything  but  salt  bait — take  those  from  Provincetown  for  instance? — 
A.  I  knew  those  from  Provincetown  used  salt  bait,  but  I  thought  it 
was  only  when  they  <50uld  not  get  fresh. 

Q.  You  never  knew  that  the  cod-fishermen  from  Provincetown  and 
Beverly  never  used  fresh  bait  but  always  salt  ? — A.  I  understood  that 
when  they  could  not  get  fresh  bait  they  used  salt  bait.  I  did  not  under- 
stand they  depended  solely  on  salt  bait. 

Q.  You  were  in  business  a  little  while  under  the  Reciprocity  Treaty? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  have  not  been  since  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  But  you  know  the  condition  of  things  in  the  interval  between  the 
Reciprocity  Treaty  and  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  do  you  ?— A.  I  was 
only  a  short  time  in  Halifax  under  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  and  it  made 
very  little  difference  in  Newfoundland.    I  came  here  in  1856. 

You  know  about  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  from  1856  to  1860  ? — A. 


Q. 
Yes. 
Q. 
Q. 
Q 


400  vessels  ?— A.  I 


You  were  living  here  then  ? — A.  Yes. 

You  know  when  the  Treaty  of  Washington  was  passed  ? — A.  Yes. 

The  imposition  of  the  duty  after  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was 
liked  very  much  by  your  people ;  they  found  it  a  very  good  thing,  and 
it  contributed  to  the  prosperity  of  the  fishing  interest? — A.  1  don't 
think  it  injured  them  any. 

Q.  Which  are  the  chief  fish-houses  in  Halifax  ?— A.  Reuben  I.  Hart, 
Allan  H.  Crowe,  Robert  Boak  &  Sons,  James  Butler  &  Co.,  John  Tay- 
lor &  Co.,  Bremner  &  Hart,  James  F.  Phelan  &  Co.,  George  P.  Black, 
F.  I).  Corbett  &  Co.,  J  Taylor  Wood,  M.  C.  Morgan. 


936 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMSIISSION. 


Q.  Does  Mr.  Morgan  do  a  pretty  large  business  T— A.  lie  buys  a 
great  deal  here. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  leading  house  !— A.  I  don't  know  about  its  bein^r  one 
of  the  leading  houses.  There  are  also  A.  G.  Jones  &  Co.,  Levi  Hart, 
W.  E.  Boak,  Lawson,  Harrington  &  Co.,  Daniel  Cronan,  West  &  Hor- 
don,  J.  T.  &  A.  W.  West,  John  Taylor  &  Co. 

Q.  Is  there  a  nmn  named  (Tiazebrook  ? — A.  He  is  only  a  vemlor  of 
iisb,  who  buys  from  the  ilshermen  and  sells  in  the  market. 

Q.  Who  is  William  Haysf — A.  Another  of  these  men. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Beazley  ? — A.  A  flsh  merchant  who  sells  in  the  city,  and 
buys  salmon  in  the  spring  and  sends  it  to  the  States. 

Q.  Are  we  to  understand  it  is  your  opinion  that  all  the  mackerel, 
so  far  as  you  know,  are  caught  inshore,  except  occasionally  ?— A.  Yes, 
that  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  Bank  Bradley? — A.  No,  I  don't. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  it  ist — A.  I  never  heard  of  it. 

Q.  You  have  heard  of  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  ever  there  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  they  catch  fish  there!— -A.  They  take  them 
inshore — all  inshore. 

Q.  And  in  regard  to  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence,  you  think  the  Ameri- 
cans never  catch  mackerel  in  the  body  of  the  gulf  f — A.  No,  that  would 
be  impossible  I  think. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  the  bay  to  what  do  you  refer  ?— A.  I  have  refer- 
ence to  Bay  Chaleurs,  and  about  Gaspt^  and  Shippegan. 

Q.  W^here  do  they  catch  mackerel  at  Gasp^  I — A.  They  do  not  catch 
niuch  mackerel  at  Gasp^.  They  generally  catch  cod  there.  The  mack- 
erel is  principally  caught  ofl'  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  What  is  the  size  of  Prince  Edward  Island! — A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  length  of  the  north  coast  within  5U  or  100  miles ! 
— A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  make  a  fishing  voyage  yourself! — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  use  of  seines  for  catching  mack- 
erel ! — A.  No,  1  never  used  them. 

Q.  Personally  yon  never  used  a  hand-line  except  for  amusement  ?— A. 
No,  except  for  the  fun  of  the  thing. 

Q.  You  don't  know  anything  about  seine  fishing! — A.  No. 

Q.  You  don't  know  whether,  when  seines  are  used,  vast  quantities  are 
taken  ! — A.  They  catch  mackerel  with  seines  at  Prospect. 

Q.  Where  is  Prospect!— A.  25  miles  from  here,  westward. 

Q.  Do  you  know  if  seining  for  mackerel  is  chiefly  done  inshore?— A. 
It  must  be  done  inshore  or  pretty  near  the  shore.  All  that  is  done  about 
here  is  inshore. 

Q.  Why  must  it  be  done  inshore  !— A.  They  generally  shoot  them 
alM)ut  the  coves. 

Q.  Y^'ou  don't  mean  purse  seines  !— A.  I  don't  know  anything  of  purse 
seines.    I  have  only  heard  of  them. 

Q.  Your  i)ersonal  information,  then,  is  all  eighteen  years  old  ?— A.  I 
have  always  been  in  communication  with  fishermen. 

Q.  There  is  here  no  merchants'  exchange,  except  as  the  name  of 
reading-room  1 — A.  There  is  a  stated  exchange ;  they  meet  there  every 
day. 

Q.  It  is  a  private  reading  room,  with  subscribers  ! — A.  They  meet  at 
a  stated  hour  every  day — twelve  o'clock. 

Q.  How  long  is  it  since  they  began  to  meet  regularly  at  noon  ?— A. 
Thev  made  another  commencement  this  week. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


937 


V  about  its  bein;:  one 
tea  &  Co..  Levi  Hart 
Croiian,  West  &  Hor' 


-A.  They  take  them 


for  amusetueut  ?— A. 


Q.  It  is  rather  a  lingering  affair ;  it  has  not  been  what  you  call  a 
really  prosiierous  institution  ?— A.  Tbe  people  don't  happen  to  go  into 
it  very  well.  Tlioy  meet  at  the  insurance  offices  ami  the  banks,  and  tbey 
don'r  fall  into  the  thing  very  well. 

Q.  Then,  although  you  are  secretary  of  the  chamber  of  commerce, 
that  is  not  a  very  large  portion  of  your  business?— A.  No. 

Q.  You  would  not  make  much  of  a  living  out  of  the  office!— A.  No. 
If  it  pays  expenses  that  is  all  I  care  about. 

No.  54. 

John  Dillon,  fish  merchant,  and  formerly  fisherman,  residing  at 
Steep  Creek,  Strait  of  Cnnso,  Gu.vsborough  County,  Nova  Scotia,  called 
on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  ex- 
uuiiued. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  You  were  formerly  a  resident  at  Whitehead,  I  believe? — 
Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  And  your  father  kept  the  light-house  there  ?— A.  Yes, 

Q.  For  how  many  years,  do  you  recollect  ?— A.  The  light-house  was 
bnilt  in  1857,  I  think.  My  father  took  charge  of  it  and  kept  it  until  his 
death,  nine  years  ago,  when  my  brother  took  charge,  and  has  it  yet. 

Q.  When  did  you  remove  from  there  ? — A.  It  will  be  two  years  in  De- 
cember next. 

Q.  You  have  been  doing  a  small  businesin  the  Strait  of  Causo  since  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  happen  to  be  now  in  Halifax  getting  supplies  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Mr.  John  Maguire? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  He  was  here  and  gave  evidence  before  the  Commission? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  s»e  him  before  he  tame  up? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  were  at  his  place  after  he  returned  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  see  some  American  fishing  vessels  in  the  strait  before  you 
came  up  here  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Some  vessels  that  had  gone  home  and  come  back  ? — A.  Yes. 

(i.  Do  you  know  about  how  many  ? — A.  There  were  three  I  am  sure 
of  which  had  come  back.    I  only  know  the  name  of  one. 

Q.  Did  you  converse  with  tl»e  people  on  board  ? — A.  Yes. 

(J.  llad  they  gone  liome  with  full  fares  ? — A.  Yes,  I  understood  from 
them  they  had  had  full  fares. 

Q.  They  returned  and  are  out  in  the  bay  fishing  for  the  second  trip  ? — 
A.  Yes.  There  is  one  at  Maguire's  wharf,  which  returned  after  he  was 
here  to  give  evidence.    The  schooner  is  called  Eastern  Queen. 

Q.  Did  Mr.  Maguire  find  that  vessel  there  when  he  went  home  ? — A. 
I  think  two  or  three  days  afterwards. 

Q.  A  (lay  or  two  after  he  returned  home  he  found  this  vessel  on  its 
way  back  to  the  States  ;  to  what  port  did  she  go? — A.  To  Gloucester. 

Q.  This  was  the  Eastern  Queen  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  had  they  been  in  the  bay  ?— A.  About  a  week,  I  think. 

Q.  These  three  vessels,  to  your  own  knowledge,  have  gone  home"  this 
season  with  full  fares,  i;!S'l  come  back  to  fish  here  again  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  from  them  b<»w  the  fisheries  were  on  their  own  coast 
this  year?— A.  I  understood  that  lioh  were  pretty  scarce  on  their  own 
coast,  thus  causing  them  to  come  down  here  to  tiie  bay. 

Q.  You  have  no  wharf  of  your  own,  and  you  do  not  trade  with  the 
Americans  yourself! — A.  No. 


938 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Yon  simply  trade  witli  the  country  people  T— A.  Yes ;  that  is  all. 
Formerly,  at  Whitehead,  I  traded  with  and  furnished  bait  auil  ico  to 
American  vessels. 

Q.  Were  thoy  oodflshing  vessels  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  flshinsr  there  t— A.  1  fished  one  season. 

Q.  Was  that  in  1807  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  on  a  larjje  or  small  vessel  f— A.  I  was  on  a  small  one. 

Q.  Was  she  an  American  vessel  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  mackerel  fishing  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  any  man-of-war  being  on  the  coast 
at  that  time  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  this  vessel  after  you  at  all  f— A.  Well,  these  vessels  wore  not 
after  us  exactly. 

Q.  Were  they  after  vessels  which  violated  the  treaty  ?— A.  I  suppose 
that  was  what  they  were  for. 

Q.  Was  your  captain  at  all  anxious  in  this  regard  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  outof  the  way  of  those  vessels  ? — A,  We  used  to  keep 
on  the  lookout  for  them. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  In  order  to  save  our  vessel  and  what  was  in  her. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  this  American  vessel  ? — A.  The  Swan. 

Q.  What  was  the  captain's  name  f — A.  Rich. 

Q.  You  kept  on  the  lookout  for  that  man-of-war? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  (\id  you  distinguish  her? — A.  I  do  not  know  as  I  could  my- 
self exactly  «tate  how  this  was  done. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  were  not  on  the  lookout  for  her  f — A.  No,  I  was  not. 

Q.  Who  was  the  person  on  board  of  your  vessel  that  was  able  to  dis- 
tinguish her? — A.  The  captain  and  some  three  or  four  others. 

Q.  Did  the  captain  know  what  vessel  the  steamer  was? — A.  lie  knew 
that  she  was  a  man-of-war. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  he  kept  out  of  her  way  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  did  he  do  so? — A.  For  fear  of  being  taken  if  he  was  found 
fishing  inside  of  the  limits. 

Q.  Were  you  working  on  shares  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  also  not  afraid  of  the  vessel  being  taken? — A.  I  was, 
certainly ;  but  I  had  nothing  to  be  afraid  for,  save  only  my  time.  The 
captain  owned  part  of  the  vessel,  and  I  suppose  that  this  made  him 
more  anxious  than  the  rest  of  the  crew  about  the  vessel. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  your  fish  ?— A.  Off  Port  Hood  and  Mar- 
garee. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ?— A.  Some  days  we  fished  within  one  mile 
of  the  shore. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  catch  all  your  fish  out  in  deep  water,  beyond  the 
limits,  and  then  yon  w«)ttld  not  have  been  afraid  of  any  vessel  ?— A.  We 
could  not  get  any  fish  out  there. 

Q.  Within  what  distance  of  the  shore  did  you  catch  your  flah  ?— A. 
We  caught  the  heft  of  them  not  farther  off  than  a  mile  and  a  half  tioiu 
the  shore. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  secure  the  balance  ? — A.  Some  of  them  we  got 
farther  out. 

Q.  Were  you  always  on  the  lookout  for  the  steamer  mentioned,  from 
the  time  you  went  out  to  fish  until  you  obtained  your  fare  1— A.  We 
were. 

Q.  During  the  whole  time  this  was  the  case  ?—A.  Yes ;  while  we 
were  fishing  inshore. 

Q.  Did  you  from  time  to  time  get  reports  respecting  the  position  ol 


AWARD  OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


939 


ished  witbin  oii«  mile 


Jome  of  them  wo  got 


this  steamer! — A.  We  nsed  to  understand  that  she  was  most  of  the 
time  about  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  You  used  to  find  that  out  from  other  vessels  ?--A.  Yes ;  there 
were  other  vessels  which  tished  inshore  as  well  as  our  own.  We  were 
not  the  only  ones  who  did  so. 

Q.  To  what  nationality  did  these  other  vessels  belong? — A.  They 
were  principally  American  vessels. 

Q.  Schooners? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  they  fish  in  the  same  place  where  you  did! — A.  A  preat  many 
of  them  did  so. 

Q.  Were  they  on  the  lookout  like  yourselves  ?— A.  I  should  think  soj 
they  had  the  same  cause  to  do  so. 

Q.  Where  did  they  get  the  most  of  their  fish  ?— A.  Inshore,  the  same 
as  wo  did. 

Q.  This  was  the  only  year  when  you  were  out  fishing? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  were  on  -an  American  vessel,  and  only  out  for  one  trip  ? — 
A.  That  is  all. 

Q.  What  was  the  size  of  this  vessel  ?— A.  About  40  tons,  I  think ;  I 
cannot  speak  positively  on  this  point. 

Q.  Were  you  born  at  Whitehead,  and  did  you  live  there  until  you 
went  to  the  Strait  of  Canso  ? — A.  I  was  not  born,  but  I  lived  there. 

Q.  Did  you  live  there  from  an  early  period  in  your  life  ? — A.  Yes ;  I 
was  pretty  young  when  I  went  there  in  1857. 

Q.  And  you  lived  there  until  you  went  to  the  Strait  of  Canso  ? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  come  from  to  that  place  ! — A.  The  town  of  Guys- 
borough. 

Q.  And  as  far  back  as  you  can  recollect,  from  the  time  when  you  went 
to  Whitehead,  did  you  see  these  American  vessels  passing? — A.  Yes; 
I  Lave  so  seen  them  during  the  whole  time  that  I  lived  there  and  ever 
since  I  can  remember. 

Q.  In  whirit  numbers  did  they  pass  ? — A.  I  am  sure  that  1  have  seen 
as  many  as  200  sail,  at  leaet,  passing  during  one  day ;  but,  of  course, 
this  was  not  very  often. 

Q.  These  vessels  were  ])assing  your  coast? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  would  you  constantly  see  them  passing  during  the  fishing 
season? — A.  Yes;  but  rot  always  in  the  number  I  stated. 

Q.  Would  you  see  them  when  they  first  came  on  the  shore,  coming  up 
towards  the  strait  ? — A.  We  would  constantly  see  them,  whether  they 
were  coming  up  or  going  down. 

Q.  And  you  recollect  having  seen  200  American  vessels  passing  in  one 
day? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  would  you  know  that  they  were  American  vessels  ? — A.  We 
could  always  tell  very  easily  by  the  appearance  of  the  vessels  whether 
tliey  were  Americans  or  coasters ;  we  could  do  so  by  the  look  of  the  vessels 
aiul  their  sails.  American  vessels  are  of  a  very  different  build  from  our 
coasters. 

Q.  Down  to  what  period  were  you  in  the  habit  of  seeing  them  pass 
there? — A.  They  would  come  on  the  coast  about  the  last  of  March,  and 
then  we  would  constantly  see  them  passing  until  November— along  about 
the  20th  of  that  month. 

Q.  Were  you  in  the  habit  of  seeing  and  conversing  with  persons  who 
were  on  board  of  these  vessels  ?— A.  At  Whitehead  ?    Yes. 

Q.  And  constantly  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  any  American  vessels  anchored  in  any  of  our 
harbors  ?—A.  I  did  at  Port  Hood,  the  year  I  was  there. 


940 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  many  did  you  seeT— -A.  We  judged  that  there  were  'M)  in 
the  fleet  which  was  at  that  place. 

Q.  Was  that  considered  to  be  the  whole  of  the  American  Heel  tlioii  iu 
the  bay  I — A.  No. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  this  tleet  was  it  ?— A.  It  would  not  be  oiuvlialf 
of  it.  Tliere  would  be  a  lot  of  them  up  at  I'rince  E«lward  Island  and 
the  Magdalen  Lslands. 

Q.  Was  this  the  opinion  of  the  Americans  themselves  f— A.  Yos. 

Q.  W' hat  would  you  think  would  be  a  fair  average  per  trip  for  their 
catch  ? — A.  This  would  depend  on  the  size  of  the  vessels  and  the  number 
of  the  men  on  board. 

Q.  Would  they  usually  take  full  fares,  or  was  this  uuusual  ?— A.  The)- 
usually  obtained  full  fares. 

Q.  Each  trip  ?  -A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  trips  a  season  have  you  known  them  to  make  ?— A. 
Four  is  the  greatest  number  I  have  known. 

Q.  Where  would  they  take  the  mackerel  which  they  caught?— A. 
They  generally  send  two  trips  home,  and  go  home  with  a  trip  theiiiselvi's 
iu  the  fall,  when  through  tishing. 

Q.  How  many  would  ihey  take  homo  when  they  made  four  trips?— 
A.  I  think  that  one  vessel  which  made  four  trips  took  two  ut  tbem 
home. 

Q.  What  was  her  name  ? — A.  I  do  not  exactly  know  it. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  anything  about  her  ? — A.  I  know  of  her  through 
hearing  of  her  in  the  Strait  of  Canso. 

Q.  ]3id  you  see  the  vessel  yourself! — A.  No. 

Q.  How  did  you  learn  anything  about  herf — A.  I  did  so  from  men 
who  ha<l  been  on  board  of  her. 

Q.  How  long  ago  was  this  f — A.  I  think  that  it  was  in  18G8,  or  aloug 
about  there. 

Q.  And  the  American  vessels  which  came  to  fish  in  our  waters  usually 
fllletl  up  every  trip  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  it  was  an  unusual  circumstance,  when  this  was  not  the  case  ?— 
A.  Yes ;  in  those  years. 

Q.  How  many  tri|)a  a  season  would  the  majority  of  the  American 
vessels  make  f — A.  About  three. 

Q.  How  many  trips  would  they  carry  homo  themselves  ? — A.  I  think 
none  save  the  last  trip  in  the  fall. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  as  many  American  fishing  vessels  on  the  coast  re- 
cently as  formerly  f — A.  I  think  that  there  are  as  many  as  used  to  be 
the  case  on  our  coast  this  year. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  case  previous  to  this  year  1 — A.  During  the 
last  two  years  there  were  not  so  many  as  there  are  this  year. 

Q.  Have  the  American  fishermen  told  you  that  their  own  fisheries 
were  not  good  this  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  did  business  before  you  went  to 
the  Strait  of  Canso? — A.  Y'as;  at  Whitehead. 

Q.  For  about  how  many  years  did  you  do  business  there !— A.  About 
five.    I  kept  men  fishing  besides. 

Q.  Were  you  iu  the  habit  of  seeing  American  fishermen  at  that  timet 
—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Who  bought  bait  and  ice  from  you  ?— A.  The  Americans. 

Q.  American  cod-fishers  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  often  during  the  season  would  they  come  in  from  their  fish- 
iog  grounds  for  bait  t— A.  Oa  their  way  down  from  Gloucester,  quite  a 
uumber  of  them  called  iu  there ;  they  obtained  more  of  bait  than  of 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHKRY  COMMISSION. 


941 


is  unusual  ?--A.  Tliey 
them  to  make  ?— A. 


ice;  some  would  require  ice  when  comini?  from  home,  and  others  would 
QOt;  hut  all  would  theu  want  bait. 

Q.  How  lonjj  did  they  remain  on  the  fishing  grounds  before  they  came 
bacli  to  refi.' ! — A.  Some  ten  days. 

Q.  And  would  they  then  return  to  the  grounds  ?— A.  Ye«j. 

Q.  And  would  t  ley  come  in  again  alterabout  the  same  length  of  time  n« 
you  have  mentioned  had  elapsed  f— A.  Ves;  they  di<l  so  until  they  had 
obtainetl  their  trip. 

Q.  What  would  they  do  with  their  fares  T—A.  These  they  took  home. 

'V  Where  would  they  go  when  they  took  their  faros  home  ?— A.  To 
icester,  I  suppose. 

Q.  Would  they  come  back  again  to  the  fishing  grounds?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  spoke  of  the  number  of  trips,  I  understood  that  you 
referred  to  mackerel*  ishing  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  when  fishing  for  cod  they  would  return  to  the  grounds  ? — A. 
Yes;  unless  cod-fishing  vessels  were  preserving  their  fish  fresh  in  ice, 
they  would  uot  make  four  trips  during  the  summer  season.  These  ves- 
sels are  generally  large,  and  they  come  up  to  remaiu  a  couple  of  months 
or  NO  at  a  time. 

Q.  Ilow  many  trips  would  they  make  for  cod  ? — A.  Usually  about 
three. 

Q.  And  how  ofteu  each  trip  did  they  come  in  for  bait  7— A.  Some  ves* 
sels  may  so  come  in  from  six  to  eight  times  duriug  a  trip. 

Q.  For  bait  and  ice  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tijey  would  not  come  in  that  way  often  ? — A.  No ;  some  would 

ot  come  in  more  than  3  or  4  times. 

I.  A  trip? — A.  Yes;  some  vessels  fish  between  Sable  Islaud  and 
itehead,  and  they  come  in  frequently  for  bait  and  ice. 

vj.  These  vessels  are  within  a  few  hours'  sail  of  the  place  ? — A.  Yes  ; 
between  Sable  Islaud  and  Whitehead  lies  what  is  called  the  Middle 
Ground. 

Q.  About  how  many  cod-ashing  vessels  would  procure  bait  and  ice  at 
Wliitehead  alone  f — A.  Scarcely  a  day  passed  from  the  time  when  they 
came  on  the  coast  in  the  spring,  until,  say,  the  2()th  of  November,  or  the 
mitUlle  of  November,  but  there  were  froiu  3  to  liO  vessels  iu  for  that  pur- 
pose. 

Q.  You  refer  to  cod  fishers  alone  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  this  also  the  case  at  the  place  where  you  are  now,  at  Maguire's 
wharf?  Do  cod-fishers  resort  there  ?— A.  Yes,  but  not  for  bait.  This 
is  a  place  where  bait  is  not  taken. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  do  they  come  there  ?— A.  For  other  supplies. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  any  other  place  where  they  obtain  bait? — 
A.  Yes ;  they  get  it  at  Canso,  Little  Causo,  and  lit.  Peter's. 

Q.  Do  American  vessels  so  come  iu  there  in  as  large  numbers  as  at 
Whitehead  ?— A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Did  the  Americans  consiiler  it  necessary,  iu  order  to  make  success- 
ful ttshing  voyages,  to  come  inshore  for  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes.  1  know 
that  the  captains  who  got  bait  at  Whitehead  were  very  uneasy  while 
their  vessels  were  laying  there,  for  fear  that  the  cutters  would  fall  iu 
with  them. 

Q.  During  the  period  you  so  supplied  them,  the  captains  were  very 
uneasy  f — A.  Yes ;  1  am  positive  about  that. 

Q.  Why  was  this  the  case  ?— A.  They  feared  lest  the  cutters  would 
come  in  and  seize  their  vessels. 

Q.  And  still  they  ran  the  risk  ?— A.  Some  did  so,  and  some  laid  to  off 


942 


AWABD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


the  coast,  sending  dories  in  among  the  fishing  boats,  and  buying  b 
from  the  fishermen. 

Q.  Was  it  their  practice  to  purchase  or  catch  bait  at  that  place  ?— . 
Some  of  them  set  nets  and  caught  bait ;  bat  as  a  general  thing  they  ( 
not  do  80. 

Q.  Of  what  period  are  you  now  speaking  t — A.  I  am  referring  to  t 
last  six  or  seven  years. 

Q.  Of  what  vessels  were  the  Americans  afraid  when  they  were  obtai 
ing  bait  T — A.  They  were  chiefly  afraid  of  Captain  Tory. 

Q.  What  revenue  cutter  did  he  command? — A.  1  think  he  was  on 
vessel  named  the  Ida  E. 

Q.  Did  he  capture  any  American  vessels? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  ?— A.  He  did  not  do  so  at  our  place,  though  he  came  ve 
near  it.    I  do  not  know  whether  he  was  aware  of  this  fact  or  not. 

Q.  Would  you  have  any  conversation  with  Americans  when  they  sa 
the  risk  to  which  you  have  alluded  or  sent  in  dories  for  bait  ? — A.  Ye 

Q.  Would  tliey  admit  to  you  that  they  were  then  committing  illegi 
acts  ? — A.  Yes ;  some  of  them  did  so. 

Q.  Did  yon  ever  mention  these  circumstances  to  Captain  Tory  ?— ^ 
No ;  1  dil  not.    I  never  but  once  saw  Captain  Tory  when  in  the  servic 

Q.  Did  you  mention  them  to  any  one? — A.  No;  the  inhabitants  an 
fishermen  generally  were  acquainted  with  them  as  well  as  myself. 

Q.  Was  it  understood  that  these  people  would  keep  dark  about  it 
Were  they  friendly  to  the  Americans  ? — A,  The  most  of  them  wei 
friendly  to  the  Americans. 

Q.  Would  they  be  likely  to  mention  those  facts  to  Captain  Tory  o 
others  ? — A.  I  dare  say  that  there  might  be  some  among  them  ^vb 
would  have  done  so. 

Q.  How  did  you  know  that  the  Americans  were  afraid  of  Captaii 
Tory  or  of  any  one  else  ? — A.  I  have  heard  them  say  that  this  was  tli 
case. 

No.  55. 

Thursday,  September  G,  1877. 
The  Conference  met. 

Marshall  I'AyiET,  farmer  and  fisherman,  of  Souris,  P.  E.  I.,  wa 
called  on  behalf  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn,  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  Are  you  a  native  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ?— Answer. 
was  born  there. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  fishing  business! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Uowlong  have  you  been  acquainted  with  it! — A.  From  18<>()  u| 
to  the  present  time. 

Q.  When  did  you  enter  the  fishing  businesis  ?— A.  In  1800. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  on  board  of  an  American  vessel  that  year  ?— A.  Yes 
I  was  on  the  Morning  Star. 

Q.  Where  did  she  hail  from  !— A.  Castine,  or  North  Haven,  Maine 
The  vessel  sailed  from  Castine,  but  was  owned,  I  believe,  in  Kort! 
Haven. 

Q.  Do  von  remember  her  captain's  name  ?— A.  It  was  Frank  Thomas 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  to  fish  in  1800 f— A.  In  the  bay,  and  the  Ba, 
of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  You  mean  the  Gulf  of  Saint  Lawrence!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  that  BeascMi  ?— A.  W«  caught  about  450  barrel 
of  mackerel. 


MMISSION. 


AWARD   OF   THE   IISHERY   COMMISSION. 


943 


g  boats,  and  buying  bait    I       Q-  How  many  trips  did  you  make?— A.  Two.  I  shipped  from  Souris, 
...  ■    P.K.I. 


A.  I  am  referring  to  the 


VY,  September  G,  1877. 


rd  Island  ? — Answer.  I 


Q.  Do  you  remember  liow  many  sail  of  American  vessels  were  then 
in  the  bay  1 — A.  Yes ;  there  were  about  500. 

Q.  Did  you  go  fishing  next  year  ?— A.  I  did  not  fish  for  mackerel  the 
next  year. 

Q.  Did  you  go  fishing  in  1862  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  ve-ssel?— A.  The  Maria  W.  Dodger,  of  Gloucester. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  her  captain  ?— A.  Joshua  W.  Dodger. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make? — A.  Two. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  of  mackerel  did  you  catch? — A.  About  475, 1 
think. 

Q.  Were  there  many  American  vessels  in  the  bay  that  year?-— A. 
Yes ;  a  good  many. 

Q,  How  many?— A.  About  500. 

Q.  Was  your  catch  that  year  above  or  under  or  about  the  average  ? — 
A.  It  was  a  little  above  the  average. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  450  barrels  would  be  the  average  that 
year  ? — A.  I  think  that  400  barrels  would  be  over  the  average. 

Q.  I  refer  to  the  catch  for  the  season? — A.  The  average  would  be 
over  300.    I  could  not  give  it  exactly. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  it  really  was  ?  Did  you  take  steps  to  inquire 
particularly  with  reference  to  it  ? — A.  No,  I  have  not. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  in  1803  ? — A.  No,  not  in  a  vessel.  I  was  boat  fishing 
tbiit  season. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  in  1804  ? — A.  I  then  shipped  from  Gloucester  in 
tlie  schooner  S.  A.  Parkhurst,  Captain  George  Hmith. 

Q.  What  did  you  take  that  year* — A.  950  barrels  of  mackerel. 

Q.  In  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make ! — A.  Three. 

Q.  Then  you  must  have  transshipped  ? — A.  VV^e  lauded  two  trips  in 
the  Strait  of  Canso,  and  shipped  them. 

Q.  Were  there  many  American  vessels  in  the  bay  that  year  ? — A.  Yes, 
a  great  number. 

Q.  How  many  were  there  ? — A.  Over  600, 1  think. 

Q.  Was  your  catch  of  950  barrels  that  year  about,  or  over,  or  under 
tlie  average  ? — A.  I  think  that  it  was  a  little  over  the  average. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  1865? — A.  I  was  for  a  short  time  in 
the  schooner  Jane,  of  Souris,  P.  E.  I. 

Q.  What  else  did  you  do  that  year  ?— A.  I  was  boat-fishing. 

Q.  But  you  went  for  a  little  while  in  the  schooner  Jane  ? — A.  Yes. 

(({.  Did  you  go  fishing  in  any  vessel  in  1866  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  was  in  the 
schooner  Lettie,  of  Charlottetown,  P.  E.  I. 

Q.  What  did  you  take  in  her  ?— A.  550  barrels. 

Q.  Were  there  many  American  vessels  in  the  bay  in  1866  ?— A.  Yes,  a 
great  many. 

Q.  At  what  number  would  you  put  them  ? — A.  I  could  not  give  any 
ditterent  number  for  this  year  than  for  previous  years. 

(■l  There  were  then  about  600?— A.  There  were  500  or  600  in  the  bay. 

Q.  Did  you  go  fishing  on  a  vessel  in  1807  ?— A.  No  j  I  then,  and  after- 
wards, fished  in  boats. 

Q.  I  understand  that  during  1800,  1862,  1864,  1865,  and  1866  you 
fished  in  vessels  in  the  bay  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  three  of  these  vessels  were  American  bottoms  i— A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  now  want  you  to  tell  the  Commission  what  proportion  of  the 
mackerel  caught  in  theso  vessels  during  the  years  you  were  fishing  in 


944 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


the  Gnlf  of  Saint  Lawrence  were  taken  within  throe  miles  of  the 
shore! — A.  I  would  say  that  fully  three-quarters  of  our  mackerel  were 
80  taken. 

Q.  Do  yon  think  that  yon  can  be  at  all  mistaken  about  tliis  ?— A. 
Taking  every  year  into  consideration,  I  do  not  think  that  this  is  possi' 
ble.  In  18G4,  1  think  I  may  say  that  sevent'ighthsof  our  D.jO  biirrcls  of 
fish  were  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  shore ;  yes,  and  perhaps  within 
two  miles  of  it. 

Q.  Then,  taking  the  whole  of  your  fishiug  experience  into  considpra- 
tiou,  you  would  say  that  at  least  three-quarters  of  the  fish  were  cauijbt 
within  three  miles  of  the  shore  t — A.  Yes ;  that  at  least. 

Q.  Will  you  kindly  state  in  what  portions  of  the  bay  you  fished  ?  Did 
you  fish  much  about  Cape  Breton  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Whereabouts! — A.  Near  Margaree,  Cheticamp,  Broad  Cove,  aud 
Limbo  Cove. 

Q.  As  to  the  shores  of  Cape  Breton,  am  I  right  in  saying  that  all  tlie 
fish  are  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  coast? — A.  All  I  ever  saw  taken 
there  were  so  caught. 

Q.  I  understand  that  a  large  portion  of  the  fish  there  is  taken  within 
one  mile  of  the  shore.  Is  that  a  fact  f — A.  Yes ;  we  got  one  trii),  iu  the 
S.  A.  Parkhurst,  perhaps  within  half  a  mile  of  that  shore. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  Cape  Breton  shore  would  you  state  in 
evidence  that  the  fish  are,  as  a  rule,  taken  » — A.  As  a  rule,  they  are 
caught  within  1^  miles  or  2  miles  of  it. 

Q.  About  what  parts  of  Prince  Edward  Island  have  you  fished  ?— A.  I 
have  fished  all  around  it,  on  the  northern  and  southern  parts. 

Q.  You  have  chiefly  fished,  I  believe,  on  the  north  and  east  of  the  isl- 
and ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  are  the  fish  taken  off  rrinee 
Edward  Island! — A.  Well,  between  1^  and  2^  milesof  if. 

Q.  Are  there  a  very  large  number  of  boats  engaged  in  the  pros'cntion 
of  the  fishery  along  the  shores  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  Ves;  a 
great  many. 

Q.  I>o  they  all  take  their  fish  within  2  or  3  miles  of  the  shore,  or  do 
they  go  out  l)eyond  this  distance  to  fish  f — A.  I  do  not  think  tluit  any 
boats  fish  for  mackerel  outside  of  two  miles  from  the  coast. 

Q.  And  from  year  to  year  while  boat  fishing,  have  you  seen  vessels 
fishing  there! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  American  vessels  come  inside  of  three  mil"'*  from  the  shores  of 
the  island  to  catch  fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  come  among  the  boats. 

Q.  Is  their  presence  among  the  boats  a  benefit  or  an  injury  i—\.  It 
is  decidedly  an  injury. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  along  the  west  coast  of  New  Brunswick  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Are  the  fish  caught  within  about  the  same  distance  from  the  shore 
there  as  is  the  case  ott'  Pri'ice  Edward  Island  ?— A.  They  are  there 
taken  about  2^  or  J  miles  from  th^«  shore,  in  shoal  water. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  have  fished  iu  the  Bay  of  Cha 
leurs! — A.  Yea. 

Q.  Did  you  do  so  for  more  than  one  season  !— A.  I  fished  there  one 
season  in  particular. 

Q.  Were  you  there  afterwards !— A.  I  was  there  during  three  yoars. 

Q.  Will  you  kindlv  tell  the  Commission  where  the  fish  are  taken  after 
you  get  into  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs!— A.  They  are  caught  oft"  Shii»pe},'au, 
Ctiraquette,  aud  the  coves  along  the  coast. 

Q,  I  speak  especially  with  reference  to  distance  from  the  shore  .—A. 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


945 


mp,  Broad  Cove,  aud 


ew  Uniriswick  ?— A. 


L.  I  fished  there  one 


from  the  shore?— A. 


Tliey  are  takeu  withiu  oue  and  a  half  miles,  and  sometimes  within  half 
a  mile  of  the  shore. 

Q.  And  uot  iu  the  center  of  the  bay  ?— Not  as  a  general  rule,  though 
a  few  may  be  caught  there.    Usually  they  are  takeu  close  to  the  shore. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  are  they  taken  abos^e  the  Bay  of  Ohaleurs, 
along  the  south  side  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence  If — A.  Perhaps  within 
150  yards  of  it. 

Q.  I  understand  that  all  the  mackerel  taken  on  the  south  side  of  the 
Gnlf  of  St.  Lawrence  are  obtained  within  one  mile  or  two  miles,  at 
the  outside,  from  the  shore;  is  that  the  case  '» — A.  Yes  ;  it  is  the  fact. 

i}.  Have  you  tished  near  Seven  Islands  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  fljHied  at  all,  or  tried  to  flsh,  ou  Banks  Bradley  and  Or- 
phan?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  will  tell  the  Commission  what  was  the  result.— A. 
I  was  there  in  the  schooner  Morning  Star,  and  we  remained  on  Banks 
Bradley  and  Orphan  for  five  or  six  weeks — this  was  in  18(50 — but  we 
got  no  mackerel  worth  mentioning.  We  did  not  catch  two  barrels  during 
the  whole  live  or  six  weeks. 

Q.  What  did  you  then  do  ? — A.  We  ran  over  to  Prince  Edward  Island, 
close  to  North  Cape,  and  fished.  We  got  450  barrels  of  mackerel  that 
season  between  the  West  Shore  and  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  conversation  with  American  captains  with  re- 
spect to  these  fisheries  and  where  they  catch  the  flsh  ? — A.  I  have  heard 
them  talking.  There  is  the  year  1806.  1  knew  ditt'erent  captains  from 
(Houcester,  and  would  meet  them  and  ask  them  how  they  got  along  and 
bow  many  mackerel  they  caught,  and  they  won  d  say  they  did  very  well 
every  chance  they  got  to  go  inshore,  but  it  was  no  use  outside,  they 
could  not  get  any  mackerel.    I  believe  that  was  iu  1860. 

Q.  Was  it  18GG,  18G7,  or  1868  !— A.  1866,  I  think. 

Q.  Was  it  after  the  treaty  expired  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  cutters  being  present  foi  the  protection  of 
the  tislieries  f — A.  I  do. 

i).  Can  you  state  to  the  Commission  what  effect  their  presence  had 
OM  the  Anunican  fleet  catching  mackerel  ? — A.  Wherever  the  cutters 
woulil  be  the  fishermen  would  not  fish  inside  the  three  miles  at  all. 

Q.  Would  they  evade  the  cutters? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  ? — A.  They  would  run  away. 

Q.  Then  the  presence  of  the  cutters  did  not  result  in  keeping  them 
clear  altogether  ? — A.  By  no  means. 

Q  You  can't  be  sure  about  the  year  this  took  place,  but  you  say  it 
was  atti*r  the  treaty  expired  ! — A.  O,  yes. 

(}.  Have  you  had  any  conversation  with  the  American  captains  with 
rt's[n'(!t  to  tliese  ejitters'?— A.  I  had.  They  said  they  could  not  do  any- 
thing while  they  were  round.  It  was  no  use.  There  was  no  fish  except 
;iroiiiid  the  shore,  and  all  they  could  do  was  to  get  a  chance  to  fish  when 
tliey  were  out  of  the  way. 

(}..  Su|)pose  you  heard  an  American  ca|)tain  say  he  caught  seven- 
eiglitlis  outside  and  that  the  inside  fishing  was  no  good.— A.  I  would 
not  believe  him. 

i).  Could  «ny  American  vessel  catch  a  fare  of  mackerel  if  she  was  ab- 
solutely prohibited  from  coming  within  three  miles?— A.  Not  iu  my 
opinion. 

Q.  Have  vou  any  doubt?— A.  They  could  not  get  any  at  all.  . 

C^.  There 'is  no  doubt  about  that  ?— A.  They  might  get  a  few,  but  uot 
ii  trip. 

il  1  believe  some  catches  have  been  made  on  Banks  Bradley  and  Or- 

60  F 


946 


AWABD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION 


phan  !— A.  They  have  in  1858  and  1859.  I  had  a  brother  in  the  ^[orn. 
ing  Star,  the  same  vessel  I  was  in  in  18(i0.  He  got  two  trips  there  that 
year  on  Bradley  ;  that  was  in  1858  or  1859. 

Q.  Is  that  a  rare  thing  f — A.  It  is  very  rare. 

Q.  And  practically,  according  to  your  opinion,  all  the  fish  are  taken 
within  three  miles  of  the  shore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  not  tished  in  American  waters! — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  of  our  vessels  going  there  f — A.  I  have  of  oue. 
Her  name  was  the  Lettie. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  "Where  have  yon  taken  mackerel  more  than  three  miles  from  the 
shore f — A.  I  can  scare  *ly  tell  you.  I  have  taken  them  on  Gie^ii  Biuik 
and  off  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  More  than  three  miles  from  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Any  other  place? — A.  Off  Perce.  There  is  a  bank  there  about 
Dine  miles  off.    We  get  some  fish  there  sometimes. 

Q.  What  other  places? — A.  We  get  a  few  between  the  Magdalen  Isl- 
ands and  Prince  Edward  Island  ;  not  a  great  many,  but  we  might  get 
a  few  as  we  go  across. 

Q.  What  other  places  f — A.  We  have  caught  them  between  Cape 
George  and  Souris.     We  have  caught  a  few  there  on  what  we  cull  Fish 
erman's  Bank. 

Q.  How  far  out  ? — A.  About  ten  miles.  (Witness  points  to  the  place 
on  the  map.) 

Q.  Now  are  there  any  other  places!— -A.  On  Bradley  Bank;  I  have 
caught  two  barrels  of  mackerel  there. 

Q.  That  was  in  186(>?— A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  was  the  year  l)efore,  or  two  jears  before,  that  your  brother  was 
in  the  same  schooner  which  made  two  fares  ' — A.  Yes,  chiedy  ott  tiiere. 

Q.  That  was  the  reason  why  the  captain  hung  so  long  on  that  Bank  f— 
A.  He  was  not  master  of  the  vessel  before  then,  but  he  was  in  the  same 
vessel. 

Q.  He  went  back  to  the  same  vessel  in  which  he  had  been  successful 
the  year  In* fore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  place  ? — A.  In  the  bend  of  the  island  I  daresay 
we  get  a  few  on  the  north  Nhore. 

Q.  Now,  what  is  the  farthest  out  from  the  shore  that  you  have  caught 
them  at  the  bend  ? — A.  About  five  miles,  I  think. 

Q.  Are  there  any  other  places  that  you  remember  ? — A.  Not  that  I 
remembt  r. 

Q.  in  the  Bay  Chaleurs  did  you  ever  take  any  in  the  body  of  the 
bay  ? — A.  1  did,  but  not  outside  of  three  miles. 

Q.  Then  yim  have  told  me  all  the  places  that  you  remember  where  you 
have  ever  taken  them  outside? — A.  As  far  as  I  can  remember. 

Q.  Have>ou  ever  fished  with  the  seine — with  the  purse  seine— for 
mackerel  ?— A.  I  have  helped  to  heave  the  seine  to  catch  some  mackerel. 

Q.  In  which  vessel? — A.  It  was  a  seine  belonging  to  the  shore. 

Q.  That  was  not  a  purse  selue,  was  it  ? — A.  They  made  a  purse  seiue 
out  of  it. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  with  that!— Bight  in  the  cove  I  belong  to. 

Q.  How  large  a  seine  was  that  ?— A.  I  guess  about  one  hundred  fath- 
oms long  and  eleven  fathoms  deep. 

Q.  And  yon  had  to  have  how  deep  water  to  use  it! — A.  I  guess  we 
caught  22  barrels  in  about  four  and  a  half  fathoms.  We  hove  it  twice. 
We  got  none  the  first  heave. 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


94T 


all  the  fish  are  taken 


a  bauk  there  about 


Q.  Did  any  American  vessel  in  which  yon  fished  have  any  of  these 
seiues  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  The  year  sixty-six  was  the  last  year  you  fished  in  an  American  ves- 
sel I — A.  Sixty-four  was  the  last  year. 

Q.  That  year  you  took  9oO  barrels,  which  was  quite  extraordinary. 
Now,  how  long  were  you  doing  that?  When  did  you  begin  and  when 
did  you  end  ? — A.  I  left  Gloucester  the  day  after  the  4th  of  July — uo^ 
the  10th  of  July,  and  I  left  her  on  the  13th  of  October. 

Q.  Those  were  caught,  then,  in  3  months!— A.  Yes,  about  that. 

Q.  Did  you  go  back  I— A.  No  ;  I  left  the  vessel  iu  the  Strait  of  Canso. 

i}.  I  wonder  if  you  could  tell  me  where  you  were  during  the  three 
trips  of  that  season  I — A.  Chiefly  I 

Q.  Well,  perhaps  the  easiest  way  would  be  to  give  us  the  course  of 
vessel  you  took  ? — A.  We  fished  around  the  island  when  we  first 
struck  in. 

Q.  Through  Canso  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  didn't  fish  about  Cape  Breton  ?— A.  No;  I  don't  think  we 
hove  to  there  at  all. 

Q.  Why  was  that,  do  you  know  ? — A.  It  was  early  in  the  season,  and 
we  did  not  suppose  there  would  be  any  mackerel  there  just  then.  We 
went  up  to  the  bend  of  the  island  and  fished  there  about  a  week,  and 
got  about  150  barrels  that  week,  right  along  from  East  Point  until  we 
got  up  about  Malpeque. 

Q.  After  that  week  where  did  yon  go? — A.  We  went  up  to  the  west 
shore. 

Q.  That  is  the  west  shore  of  New  Brunswick  ? — A.  It  is  the  east  shore 
of  New  Brunswick.     We  fished  ott"  there. 

Q.  Whereabouts  ? — A.  At  a  place  called  Pigeon  Hill.  We  didn't  go 
up  as  far  as  Miramichi. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  get  there  ? — A.  About  100  barrels,  I  guess. 
We  then  went  down  to  Magdalen  Islands  and  got  the  balance  of  the 
trip. 

Q.  What  was  the  balance? — A.  Fifty  barrels,  about.  Three  hundred 
and  ten,  I  think,  was  our  whole  fare. 

Q.  Well,  how  far  off  shore  did  you  get  them  at  Magdalen  Islands? — 
A.  Close  by  at  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q,  How  far  oft"  shore  on  the  west  shore  (that  is  the  east  shore)  of  New 
Brunswick  f — A.  I  won't  say.  The  wind  blew  from  the  westward,  and 
we  hove  to  as  close  as  we  could  go,  and  drifted  oft'  to  four  or  five  miles. 
When  we  would  get  clear  of  the  mackerel  we  would  go  in  again. 

Q.  How  near? — A.  A  mile  and  a  half.  I  don't  8upj)0se  we  would  go 
nearer;  it  was  shoal. 

Q.  How  much  did  she  draw  ? — A.  She  drew  about  twelve  or  thirteen 
feet  of  water. 

Q.  What  vessel  was  that  ?— A.  The  S.  E.  Parker,  Captnin  Smith. 
She  drew  ten  or  eleven,  perhaps  twelve  feet. 

Q.  Then  she  could  not  go  nearer,  you  say,  than  a  mile  and  a  half? — 
A.  She  couhl,  but  we  would  not  go  too  close. 

Q.  That  was  your  first  trip? — A.  Yes. 

<,).  Then  where  did  you  go  to  transship  ?— A.  Port  Mulgrave.  We 
landed  there. 

(i.  Then  from  Port  Midgrave  where  did  you  start  for  }  ir  second 
trip  ?— A.  We  caught  sonie  down  otf  Cape  Breton.  I  could  not  say  ex- 
actly how  many.  We  were  going  down  to  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and 
would  heave  to  now  and  again.  I  guess  we  got  75  barrels  before  we 
went  down. 


948 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  near  shore  did  you  get  them  about  Cape  Breton  ?— A.  Part 
of  it  was — about  25  barrels,  the  first  day  we  hove  to,  about  tliree  miles 
off— four  miles,  I  dare  say.  Then  we  went  inshore,  in  between  Marjja- 
ree  Island  and  the  main,  and  ^ot  about  25  barrels  more  there.  Then 
wo  hove  to  farther  alonj;,  1  could  not  say,  about  three  miles  off,  porliaps 
less,  perhaps  a  little  more.  We  got  75  barrels.  Then  we  went  down  to 
the  Magdalen  Islands  and  finished  the  trip,  all  but  25  barrels.  We  gut 
those  close  in  to  Cape  Breton,  coining  back. 

Q.  How  many  would  it  be  that  you  caught  at  Magdalen  Islands  ?— 
A.  Mear  2(M>  barrels  there. 

Q.  Of  your  second  trip  you  got  nearly  200  barrels  at  the  Magdalen 
Islands,  and  of  the  remaining  lOU  there  were  two  lots  of  25  barrels  that 
you  are  sure  were  caught  inshore  ? — A.  Yes ;  there  was  one  catch  I 
would  not  be  certain  about,  but  three  catches  were  got  inside. 

Q.  Of  those  IWi)  barrels,  you  got  200  on  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and 
25  of  the  other  100  three  miles,  more  or  less,  off  shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  your  fish  i — A.  We  landed  at  the  same 
place  and  fitted  again. 

Q.  Then  al>out  what  time  of  thei  year  had  it  got  to  be  when  you  began 
the  third  trip  ! — A.  It  would  be  September. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  then  ? — A.  The  first  mackerel  we  caught  then 
was  off  Cape  George,  on  the  Nova  Scotia  shore,  right  close  there,  in 
Antigonish  Bay  and  along  Cape  tJeorge. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  get  there  f — A.  50  barrels  the  first  day.  Then 
we  went  to  Magdalen  Islands  for  a  fortnight,  and  caught  no  mackerel  of 
any  account.  Then  we  returned  to  Cape  Breton  and  finished  our  trip 
there,  within  half  a  mile  of  the  shore,  I  should  think. 

Q.  Now,  go  back  to  1802.  You  made  two  trips  in  1862,  and  you  got 
475  barrels,  which  you  think  was  above  the  average  catch  for  that 
year? — A.  Yes;  above  the  average. 

Q.  Now  descril)©  those  two  voyages.  Where  did  you  begin,  and  at 
what  season  did  you  begin  the  first  trip  ? — A.  We  came  about  tiie  mid- 
dle of  July  into  the  bay.  I  shippe<l  at  Gloucester,  I  forget  exactly  what 
date.  It  would  be  the  middle  of  July  when  we  first  hove  to  for  mack- 
erel. 

Q.  Where  did  yoo  begin  to  fish  ? — A.  In  the  bend  of  the  island.  We 
commenced  at  East  Point. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  cat<di  there? — A.  Well,  we  only  got  small 
catches  right  along,  only  a  few  at  a  time. 

Q.  You  were  fishing  inshore  always! — A.  Yes;  down  to  Malpecjne. 
We  had  70  barrels  when  we  got  down  to  Malpetpie  in  a  week,  perhaps 
ten  days.  We  went  into  Malpeque  and  started  afterward  for  North 
Cape.  We  fished  aroumt  North  Caj)e  two  or  three  days,  and  caught  a 
few,  not  a  great  many. 

Q.  All  the  while  you  were  close  inshore? — A.  No;  sometimes  we 
would  go  off  outside,  but  as  a  general  rule  we  were  inshore. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  get  that  timet— A.  We  got  225  or  '2:\0 
barrels. 

Q.  Of  that  225  barrels,  what  proportion  was  caught  more  than  three 
miles  from  the  shore?— A.  Two  thinis  of  it. 

Q.  You  have  probably  misunderstood  my  question.    What  propor- 
tion was  caught  more  than  three  miles  from  the  shore  ?— A.  About  one- 
third  perhaps.  ,  .   ,    • 
Q.  Then  that  trip  you  caught  one-third  outside  and  two-thuds  ui- 

Bidet— A.  Y"es. 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


949 


agdaleu  Lslands  ?— 


be  when  yon  began 


ht  more  than  throe 


aud  two-thirds  in- 


balance  we  got 


Q.  What  was  the  whole  catch  of  the  first  trip  ?— A.  225  barrels : 
about  that,  I  think. 

Q.  That  leaves  250  barrels  for  the  next  trip  that  .year.  Toll  me  where 
you  caught  those  ?— A.  1  caught  a  few  down  jit  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  How  many? — A.  17  barrels. 

Q.  Where  else  ?— A.  From  otl  East  Point,  close  inshore  there,  we  got 
50  wash-barrels,  which  would  make  40  barrels. 

Q,.  That,  you  say, was  close  inshore  ?— A.  Yes.    The 
near  Port  Ilood,  on  the  Cape  Breton  shore. 

Q.  Of  the  balance,  how  much  was  taken  within  three  miles,  and  how 
much  outside?— A.  Well,  the  principal  part  of  the  balance  was  taken 
within  three  miles. 

Q.  Couhl  you  make  that  more  definite?— A.  Well,  1  could  not  say  for 
certain  what  amount  was  taken  inside. 

Q.  Tell  me  as  well  as  you  can  f — A.  Well,  I  will  tell  you  how  it  was. 
We  were  fishing  with  the  wind  off  the  land,  and  we  would  catch  a  part, 
a  few,  outside  and  part  inside.  It  would  be  very  hard  to  determine  the 
proportions. 

Q.  You  wouM  not  hazard  an  estimate  ? — A.  I  should  think  that  that 
trip  we  got  at  least  two-thirds  inside  of  the  three  miles. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  whole  trip?— A.  Y'^es,  right  there. 

Q.  Now,  is  it  your  general  judgment,  as  to  the  fishing  on  the  north 
side  of  Prince  Edward  Island  in  fishing  vessels,  that  on  an  average  you 
catch  two-thirds  inside  and  one-third  outside  ? — A.  I  think  two-thirds 
of  the  mackerel  around  Prince  Edward  Island  is  caught  within  two 
miles — perhaps  three-fourths. 

Q.  That  is  on  the  north  side  of  the  island  ? — A.  And  the  south  also. 

Q.  Go  back  now  to  the  year  18G0;  tell  me  where  your  fishing-trip 
was  that  year? — A.  The  first  thing  we  did  that  year  was  to  go  to  Brad- 
ley.   We  were  five  or  six  weeks  there. 

Q.  That  was  the  time  you  had  such  bad  luck  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  many  other  vessels  on  Bradley  ? — A.  A  few.  None  of 
them  hung  there  so  long  as  we  did. 

Q.  There  was  bad  fishing  there  that  year?— A.  There  was  nothing 
doing.  We  ran  into  Prince  Edward  Island.  The  first  mackerel  we 
caught  was  near  North  Cape.  We  followed  them  up  the  northwest  side 
of  the  island  and  got  to  West  Point,  close  inshore.  Then  we  went 
across  on  the  New  Brunswick  shore  there,  between  Point  Miscou  and 
Miramiehi. 

Q.  What  was  your  first  fare  in  I860?— A.  About  220  barrels. 

Q.  And  except  a  few  at  Bradley,  you  say  they  were  all  caught  off 
Prince  Edward  Island?— A.  There  was  a  few  caught  at  Green  Bank, 
off  Penre. 

Q.  Well,  how  many  were  caught  there?— A.  Not  many;  perhaps  30 

Q.  The  30  barrels  there,  and  17  at  Bradley,  is  47?— A.  Seventeen  at 
Bradley!    No,  we  only  get  two  barrels  at  Bradley. 

Q.  Was  it  at  Magdalen  Islands  that  you  got  17  barrels  ?— A.  No ;  that 
was  in  1862. 

Q.  Well,  of  that  first  trip  in  1800,  of  your  2(W  odd  barrels,  what  pro- 
portion in  your  judgment  was  taken  inshore  ?— A.  I  think  two  thirds 
were  inshore.     Perhaps  more.     Perhaps  three-fourihs. 

Q.  Does  that  include  what  you  took  at  the  Bank  ?— A.  It  takes  the 
whole  of  the  first  trip.  ^  .    j 

Q.  Now  take  the  second  trip  that  year  ?— A.  The  second  trip  we  fished 
in  the  bend  of  the  island. 


«60 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Altogetber  ?— A.  Cbiefly.  The  first  three  or  four  weeks  we  were 
in  the  bend. 

Q.  WheJpe  afterwards ! — A.  At  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  Take  your  second  trip.  What  portion  was  caught  within  three 
miles? — A.  Nearly  three-fourths,  I  will  say.  Between  two-thirds  and 
three-fourths  were  taken  within  three  miles.  Perhaps  more.  Perhaps 
seven-eighths. 

Q.  How  much  water  did  that  schooner  draw,  the  Morning  Star  ?— A. 
About  ten  feet. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 
Q.  I  have  just  one  question  to  ask  you.  When  you  speak  of  a  certain 
portion  of  your  Ush  being  caught  outside  you  have  described  your  mole 
of  fishing  to  be  that  you  commenced  fishing  inside  and  then  drifted  out, 
and  as  you  drifted  out  yon  say  a  portion  was  caught  out  beyond  three 
miles  of  the  land.  But  suppose  you  had  been  prohibited  from  goiti^  in 
at  all,  could  you  have  got  those  outside  ? — A.  I  don't  know.  I  don't 
think  it. 

No.  50. 

Babnaby  McIsaac,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Bri- 
tannic Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  Where  do  you  live  ? — Answer.  At  East  Point,  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island. 

Q.  What  is  your  age  ? — A.  Forty-seven,  about. 

Q.  You  have  been  connected  with  the  tisherles  a  good  deal  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  How  have  you  been  connected  ?  Have  ;ou  been  fishing  in  boats  and 
vessels  ? — A.  In  vessels. 

Q.  Have  you  tished  in  many  American  vessels  ? — A.  A  good  many. 

Q.  What  year  did  you  commence  lishiug  in  them  f — A.  1851.  I  was 
then  in  the  iiloomiield,  from  Boston. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  to  catch  fish  ?— A.  I  went  in  her  on  the  island. 

Q.  She  was  in  the  gulf? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  was  the  year  of  the  great  gale;  wore  you  caught  in  it  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  wrecked  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  were  you  wrecked  f— A.  At  Tignish. 

Q.  Had  you  caught  any  fish  before  being  wrecked  ? — A.  She  was  full 
the  day  she  went  ashore. 

Q.  That  finished  the  sea.son  I  suppose  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  those  fi.sh  ?— A.  Most  of  them  along  the  island, 
from  St.  Peter's  to  East  Point. 

Q.  How  far  ott"  shore  ?— A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half. 

Q.  Were  there  many  American  vessels  fishing  there  then  ?— A.  A 
good  many. 

Q.  How  many  do  you  mean  !— A.  I  suppose  there  was  foin*  or  live 
hundred  sail. 

Q.  Where  were  they  taking  fish,  the  same  as  you  ;  that  i.s,a  mile  and  a 
half  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  von  go  fishing  again  ?— A.  In  1857. 

Q.  The  gale  frightened  you  for  the  next  five  years  1— A.  Well,  I  don  t 
know.  I  went  then  in  the  C.  C.  Davies,  from  Gloucester,  Captam  Sin- 
clair. 


AWARD   OP   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


951 


Morning  Star  ?— A. 


rument  of  Her  Bri- 


t  Point,  Prince  Ed- 


?— A.  She  was  full 


m  n\ous  the  island. 


Q.  Where  did  yon  go  to  catch  flsh  in  her?— A.  We  fished  mostly  at 
the  islands,  Prince  Edward  and  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  catch  ?— A.  300 ;  about  that. 

Q.  How  far  off  shore?— A.  Most  of  them  inshore. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  "inshore"?— A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half 
to  two  miles. 

Q.  In  1858,  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  ?— A.  The  Ellie  Osborn. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make,  and  what  catch  ?— A.  We  made 
one  trip  and  got  250  barrels. 

Q.  In  1859,  what  vessel  did  you  go  in;  the  C.  C.  Davies?— A.  Yes; 
we  made  two  trii)8  that  year  and  got  G60  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  those !— A.  The  first  trip  we  caught  them 
to  the  northward  on  the  Canada  shore,  from  Cape  Kosiere  to  Ste.  Anne, 
the  south  shore  of  the  river  Saint  Lawrence. 

Q.  Did  you  get  all  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  did  you  catch  them  ? — A  I  suppose  not 
more  than  half  a  mile. 

Q.  I  believe  they  are  all  taken  there  within  a  mile  or  a  mile  and  a 
half?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  second  trip  ? — A.  We  caught  them  mostly  along  Margaree 
and  Prince  Edward  Lslund. 

Q.  How  far  off? — A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half. 

Q.  Those  two  trips  were  all  taken  inshore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1860,  what  vessel  were  you  in  ? — A.  L.  F.  Bartlett,  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  many  trips  T — A.  Two. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  get ! — A.  About  450. 

Q.  How  far  from  shore? — A.  We  got  100  barrels  to  the  northward, 
where  we  got  the  others,  by  Cape  Rosiere. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore? — A.  About  a  mile. 

Q.  You  made  two  trips.  Where  did  you  take  the  second  trip  ? — A. 
Off  the  Magdalens. 

Q.  The  rest  of  the  first  trip  you  took  at  the  Magdalens  ?— A.  Yes ;  and 
the  second  trip  between  Port  Hood  and  Margaree. 

Q.  I  have  one  general  question  to  ask  you :  How  far  off  do  you  catch 
all  your  flsh  between  Port  Hood  and  Margaree  ? — A.  About  a  mile 
and  a  half. 

(i.  And  when  you  speak  of  fishing  between  those  places,  you  mean 
always  between  a  mile  and  a  mile  and  a  half? — A.  Yes. 

q/Iu  1801,  what  vessel  did  you  go  In  ?— A.  The  same  vessel. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make!— A.  We  made  one  trip  and  got 
300  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  them  ?— A.  Off  about  the  island,  and  some 
at  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  What  proportion  did  you  catch  at  the  Magdalen  Islands,  how 
many  ?— A.  I  suppose  we  got  perhaps  100  barrels  or  so. 

(-1  And  the  rest  you  caught  at  the  island  ?— A.  Yes ;  Prince  Ed- 
ward. 

Q.  In  1802,  what  vessel  did  yon  go  in  ?— A. 

Q.  How  many  consecutive  years  did  you 
mers. 

Q.  That  wonld  be  1862,  1803,  1864,  1SG5,  1867,  and  1869. 
not  go  in  1866  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  What  was  the  captain's  nanie  ?— A.  Hardy.    She  was  from  Glou- 

Q.  in  1862,  how  many  barrels  did  you  take  ?— A.  I  made  two  trips 
and  got  something  over  600  or  640  barrels. 


The  John  Soames. 

A.  Six  sum- 


go  in  her  f 


You  did 


952 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  In  18(Ki,  how  many  ! — A.  The  average  was  about  the  saine. 

Q.  In  1864,  that  was  the  bij?  catch  ! — A.  Yes ;  we  made  three  triiis 
and  got  97r»  barrel8,  as  nearly  aa  I  can  give  yon. 

Q.  In  1805,  how  many  barrels  ?— A.  I  made  two  trips  every  year  ex. 
cept  18fi4,  and  then  I  made  three. 

Q.  Then  yon  took  the  same  number  of  barrels  every  year,  except  tlie 
big  fare  in  1864  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  any  hirge  fares,  much  larger  than  ym\\ 
were  taken  that  year  ? — A.  Yes;  there  were  large  vessels  with  lame 
crews,  that  took  a  good  deal  more.    Some  went  as  higii  asl,,UM)or  \,m. 

Q.  Now,  during  the  six  years  you  were  in  that  vessel  where  did  y.ui 
fish  f    The  eaptain  would  have  some  favorite  haunt,  woul«l  he  ?■— A.  We 
fished  mostly  all  over  the  bay— at  the  Magdalen    Islands,  Port  Hood 
and  the  island. 

Q.  When  you  say  "  the  island,"  yon  mean  Prince  Edward  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  IJay  Chideurs  ? — A.  No,  never  except  one  year. 

Q.  What  proportion  did  you  catch  within  f — A.  About  two  tliinls. 

Q.  Were  you  accustomed  to  tish  in  the  usual  way  coming  iiisinMi!  am! 
then  drifting  oftshore,  and  carrying  the  fish  with  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  tisli  would  dritt  off,  and  you  would  go  sometimes  beyond  the 
three  miles  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  goml  price  for  your  fish  during  that  time! — A.  Some 
years  a  very  good  price. 

Q.  W^hat  would  you  make  on  board  one  of  those  vessels  in  a  year  .'— 
A.  $tHH)  or  $i{(M>.    Some  years  more.    $.">10  was  the  most. 

Q.  What  price  did  you  get  for  the  ma<!kerel ;  do  you  remember  ?— A. 
I  could  not  say.    Some  years  as  high  as  $18,  $15,  or  $14. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  now  of  those  years  you  were  in  this  one  vessel.  You 
say  you  got  two-thirds  inshore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  large  numbers  of  the  American  fleet  there  then,  during 
those  years  T — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  What  would  you  put  them  at  ? — A.  Some  years  I  suppose  there 
were  seven  hundred  or  eight  hundred  sail. 

Q.  Was  yonr  experience  a  fair  average  experience  of  the  vessels! 
Was  the  catch  of  the  vessels  you  were  in  a  fair  average  for  the  rest  ?— 
A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Did  they  catch  their  fish,  as  far  as  you  could  see  ?  The  vessels 
within  your  sight,  were  they  fishing  in  the  same  waters  with  you  f— A. 
They  were. 

Q.  You  say  about  two-thirds  were  taken  inshore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  after  this  long  spell  that  you  remained  in  the  John  Soames, 
you  come  down,  I  think,  to  1870;  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  then  f— A. 
The  George  P.  Rice,  from  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  get  ? — A.  250. 

Q.  Did  you  spend  the  whole  season  in  ber? — A.  No. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  then  ? — A.  I  went  in  the  Restless. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  take  in  her  I — A.  About  250. 

Q.  That  would  l>e  about  500  for  the  season  i — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  were  those  taken,  take  the  Restless  first  ?— A.  We  caiiglit, 
our  last  trip,  about  North  Cape  and  Malpeque,  in  Prince  Edward 
Island. 

Q.  And  the  first  trip  ?— A.  We  got  about  half  at  Magdaleus,  and  the 
other  half  off  the  island. 

Q.  Of  those  caught  off  the  island,  what  proportion  were  taken  in- 
shore?— A.  Most  of  them  inshore. 

Q.  About  the  same  as  before  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


953 


that  time?— A.  Soi 


iu  the  John  Soaiiies, 
you  go  ill  then  !— A. 


Q.  You  mean  to  say  that  three-fourths  of  theiu  werecaugUt  iushore? — 
A.  Yea. 

Q.  Are  you  satisfied  with  that  ?— A.  Yes,  r  am. 

Q.  Talte  1871 ;  what  vessel  did  you  go  iu  J— A.  The  Thomas  Fitch, 
from  New  London,  Conn. 

Q.  Did  you  nutlie  more  than  one  trip  ? — A.  One  trip, 

{.i.  How  many  barrels  di<l  you  catcli  ?— A.  About  300. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catcli  them  ?— A.  Most  of  them  otf  Malpeque,  and 
between  North  Cape  and  West  Cape. 

Q.  How  far  otfshore  ?— A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half  or  three  quarters. 

t}.  Were  you  fishing  in  1872  ?  If  you  cannot  recollect,  can  you  recol- 
lect 1873? — A.  I  was  in  the  Kunice  P.  Rich,  lioatou. 

(}.  How  many  trii)s  did  you  make  in  her  ? — A.  Only  one. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  ? — A.  o(>0  barrels. 

Q.  Where  ?— A.  Along  the  island,  Prince  Edward,  and  along  the 
west  shore. 

Q.  How  far  oil"  the  shore  J— A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half  from  the 
shore. 

Q.  In  1874,  what  vessel  did  yon  go  in  ? — A.  The  Freedom,  from  Glou- 
cester, Captain  Hiltz. 

Q.  How  many  trips  ? — A.  Two. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage  H — A.  She  was  47  tons. 

(^  She  was  very  small,  then  ?  — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  would  she  carry  ? — A.  She  would  not  carry  much  over 
2(M>  barrels. 

Q.  "What  fares  did  you  catch  ? — A.  We  got  300  barrels  in  the  two 
trips. 

Q.  You  caught  very  nearly  your  fare,  then  ? — A.  Yes. 

i}.  Where  did  you  fish  for  those  three  hundred  barrels  ? — A.  Most  of 
them  around  Malpeque  and  Cascumpec,  close  in. 

Q.  How  far  do  jou  mean  by  that  f — A.  About  half  a  mile.  We  could 
uot  get  close  enough  to  catch  them  in  the  eel-grass. 

Q.  You  would  like  to  have  been  closer  ? — A.  Yes 

Q.  Then  to  sum  up,  from  1851  to  1874,  except  one  or  two  years,  you 
have  been  fishing  every  year  in  American  vessels  in  the  Bay  St.  Law- 
rence; can  you  give  us  an  idea  what  the  average  number  of  the  fleet 
was  during  those  years,  somewhere  about  it? — A.  There  was  a  large 
fleet  iu  there  at  times.  I  sui)pose  it  would  average  from  five  to  six  hun- 
ded. 

Q.  Now,  can  you  tell  me,  just  running  over  the  whole  number  of  years 
you  have  been  fishing  there — I  don't  speak  of  any  one  special  trip  or 
year,  but  as  to  the  whole  number — what  proportion  did  you  catch  within 
three  miles  of  the  shore?— A.  I  think  I  am  safe  enough  iu  saying  that 
we  got  two-thirds  of  them  inshore. 

Q.  Would  not  you  be  safe  in  saying  more  than  that  ?— A.  I  don't 
know.    I  will  say  that. 

Q.  You  will  swear  to  that  many? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  the  other  vessels  fishing  the  same  way  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Suppose  an  American  captain  were  to  say  that  the  iushore  fisheries 
were  no  good,  and  that  all  the  fish  were  caught  outside,  what  would  yoa 
say  ? — A.  I  would  say  it  was  false. 

Q.  Now  as  to  boat-fishing.  You  have  been  fishing  in  boats  since 
then,  have  you  ?— A.  I  have  this  summer,  that  is  all. 

Q.  How  is  the  fishing  this  summer?  Are  there  many  mackerel 
there  ?— A.  There  are  a  good  many  mackerel  there. 


954 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Have  the  Americans  come  down  to  our  coast  much  f — A.  Yes;  a 
good  many  seiners. 

Q.  Have  they  injured  the  boats  a  good  deal  ? — A.  The  mackerel  come 
close  in,  and  they  come  in  and  lee  bow  the  boats. 

Q.  They  are  close  in  this  year  f— A.  Yes ;  about  a  mile  or  a  milo  and 
a  half. 

Q.  And  they  come  in  and  injure  you? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  they  got  any  catches  f— A.  8ome  of  them  that  came  in  first 
have.    Some  took  180  barrels  a  day  right  inshore. 

Q.  Are  there  any  fish  outside  for  them  to  caccli,  in  deep  water  J-A. 
Ko ;  they  oan^t  get  any  in  deep  water. 

Q.  You  traussliipped  some  of  your  fish,  I  believe  ? — A.  Y»'«. 

Q.  Gould  you  have  made  those  three  trips  you  spoke  of  without  trans- 
shipping f — A.  No. 

Mr.  Dana.  That  is  not  material. 

Q.  The  boats  are  making  pretty  good  catches  ? — A.  Yea  ;  very  ;,'()oil. 

(j.  1  don't  know  whether  you  know  anything  about  codtisbiiit;  or 
Dot  f — A.  No,  1  don't  know  anything  about  that. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  When  a  vessel  goes  near  the  shore  and  throws  over  bait  and 
drifts  oil  with  the  wind  into  deep  water,  beyond  three  miles  of  laud, 
you  consider  all  the  fish  she  catches  after  she  has  got  outside  is  cauglit 
inside,  don't  you,  because  they  have  toled  them  off  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  take 
them  off,  of  course. 

Q.  Well,  are  you  always  certain  that  the  fish  they  catch  outside  are 
toled  off  by  them  from  inside  f — A.  1  could  not  be  positive.  Of  course 
there  are  mackerel  in  deep  water,  but  very  often  they  do  carry  tlieiuoff 
in  that  way. 

Q.  At  all  events,  if  they  come  in  and  throw  overboard  their  bait  and 
drift  outside,  whatever  is'  caught  outMide  you  call  an  inside  catch,  be- 
cause they  tole«l  them  off  f — A.  Yes,  they  do. 

Q.  And  that  is  the  way  you  made  up  your  account  ?  (No  answer 
heard.) 

Q.  Now,  you  have  had  a  long  experience  as  a  seaman  ;  is  it  tliftieult 
in  certain  states  of  the  atmosphere,  and  on  certain  kinds  of  cjast,  to 
determine  the  distance  at  sea  exactly  ? — A.  I  don't  know  what  to  say. 

Question  repeated. — A.  Of  course  there  are  places  where  the  laud  is 
high,  and  it  is  pretty  hard  to  tell,  but  where  the  laud  is  low  a  person  can 
easily  tell  the  distance  he  is  off. 

Q.  Does  it  not  de|>end  also  upon  the  weather,  and  if  there  are  any 
objects  like  trees  or  houses  on  the  land  i — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  state  of  the  atmosphere  makes  a  great  deal  of  dift'ereiice.  d 
it  not  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  on  land,  and  still  more  on  water,  thei 
certain  states  of  the  atmosphere  when  a  mountain  or  a  hill  will  seen,      v 
remote,  and  that  at  other  times  it  will  seem  as  if  you  could  almost  tuiKU 
it.    You  have  experienced  that  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  know  there  has  been  a  bad  catch  this  year,  dou't  you  ?— A. 
O,  there  are  some  pretty  good  catches  too.  Some  of  the  seiners  have 
done  pretty  well  this  summer.  , 

Q.  But  taking  the  catch  through,  you  know  it  is  a  bad  one  this  year  .- 

A.  Yes.  .  u  .    V 

Q.  Have  vou  known  any  Americans  go  home  with  a  full  freight  —A. 
I  heard  of  some  going  home;  1  don't  know  whether  they  had  a  full  height 
or  not. 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


955 


;couiit  f    (No  answer 


bad  one  this  year  ?— 


Q.  You  don't  know  whether  they  went  home  dissatistted  or  not  ?— A. 
I  could  not  tell. 

Q.  This  year,  then,  the  cntch  you  say  lias  not  been  good  ?— A.  Some 
have  (lone  pretty  well. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Do  yon  mean  to  say  that  the  boat  catch  has  been  bad?— A.  O,  the 
boats  have  done  well. 

Q.  Are  the  prospects  for  the  season  i;ood  or  bad  ?— A.  Good. 

Q.  For  boats  ?— A.  Yt's. 

Q.  And  the  mackerel  season  yet  lies  before  you  ?— A.  Yes. 

{}.  As  regards  the  dittlcnlty  of  telling  the  distance,  have  you  anv  such 
(litticulty  ott"  the  coast  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ?— A.  There  is  no  diffi- 
culty. 

Q.  You  always  can  tell,  as  an  experienced  man,  how  far  oil"  you  are? 
—A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  is  no  difficulty  at  all  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Now,  with  re>»pect  to  the  mode  of  fishing,  you  have  explained  that 
you  come  in  to  the  shore  and  drift  out?— A.  Yes. 
'  Q.  Well,  you  catch  all  your  fish  in  that  way  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  two-thirds  of  your  Hsli  being  caught  inside  and 
ouethird  outside.  Were  all  your  fish  caught  by  coining  inshore  and 
ilriftiner  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  catc  i  any  in  the  galf  without  coming  in  first  f — A.  Per- 
haps at  odd  times  we  w.nUd  get  a  spurt. 

Q.  But  do  they  aaiount  to  anything? — A.  No. 

Q.  So  that  all  your  fish  are  caught  by  coming  in  a:ul  drifting  out  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  Mr.  D.ina  asked  you  a  question,  supposing  you  came  in  and 
drifted  out  and  k  ^pt  the  fish  following  you,  did  you  call 

Mr.  Dana.  1  did  not. 

Mr.  Davies.  That  was  the  question  substantially.     I  will  put  thoi  ques- 
tion now  to  you  :  did  you  mean  when  you  said  that  two-thirds  were  taken 
insliore  to  include  the  fish  you  caught  four  or  five  miles  from  land  ? — A. 
Of  course. 

(J.  Why?  Do  you  understand  my  question ?  When  yon  said  two- 
tiiirds  were  taken  within  three  miles  did  you  intend  in  that  to  include 
those  you  got  four  or  five  miles  out  or  not  ? 

3lr.  Dana.  I  think  this  is  arguing  and  threatening  both. 

Mr.  Davies.  1  think  not.     I  think  you  misled  him. 

^\v.  D.vNA.  I  put  clean  questions  to  him. 

I'.y  Ml.  Davies: 

Q.  Explain  to  the  Commission  what  yon  meant  when  yon  said  you 
Inliev  tliut  two-thirds  were  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  land  ? — 
A.  Yi   ,  they  were  taken  two-thirds  inside. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  actually  caught  within  three  miles  of  the  land  ?— A. 
Inside,  of  course.     Inside  of  three  miles. 

Q.  Where  were  the  other  third  taketi  ?— A.  They  may  have  been 
taken  outside. 

Q.  Do  jou  mean  to  include  in  that  two-thirds  the  fish  that  you  caught 
beyond  three  miles  ? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  gave  Mr.  Dana  to  understand,  and  I  so  understood  your 
answer  to  him,  that  if  you  came  into  the  shore  and  drifted  out  you 
would  call  theui  uahore  fish  if  you  caught  them,  say,  four  miles  out? — 
A.  No. 


956 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  are  now  indoctrinated  sutUcieutly.  You  liave  answorci 
tain  questions  I  put  you,  and  I  believe  you  understood  my  quest io 
A.  :No,  sir:  I  did  not. 

Q.  Diiln  t  you  or  did  you  ? — A.  No  ;  I  did  not. 

Q.  You  answered   then  without  understanding  * — A.  Yes,  sir, 
pears  I  did. 

Q.  Is  that  ao  as  to  all  the  questions  1  imt  to  you  ?  Did  yon  u 
stand  any  of  them  f — A.  I  di«l. 

Q.  Now,  did  you  understand  Mr.  Davies'  questions  ?— A.  I  did. 

Q.  You  certainly  understood  him  the  last  time  he  put  theiii,  i 
you  f — A.  I  did. 

Q.  You  umlerstood  exactly  what  ho  meant? — A.  I  think  I  did. 

Q.  Now,  I  will  put  you  my  question  again.     You  say  a  vessel  c 
inside  antl  drifts  out  an«l  tolea  otl'  the  tish  ;  then  that  if  she  toies 
off  beyojid  three  nules  and  catches  them  there  you  consider  tin- 
caught  inside  the  line  because  they  were  inside  tlie  line  and  were 
outside  w  hen  they  were  caught.    Do  you  understand  me  now  ?- 
do. 

Q.  Well,  now,  you  said  you  counted  those  as  insi;le  because  they 
drawn  outside  by  the  vessel.     Do  you  say  that  now,  sir  ? — A.  Of  co 
Those  that  are  caught  outside  ary  caught  outsi<le,  but  those  thai 
caught  before  they  went  out 

Q.  What  do  you  say  about  those  that  are  drawn  outside  in  tlint 
do  you  count  them  among  tijose  caught  outsi<le  or  inside  ? — A.  1 1 
them  among  those  caught  outside. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  one-third  being  taken  outside  and  two  tl 
inside,  which  you  said  was  a  sort  of  average,  did  you  mean  to  iiu; 
among  those  caught  inside  those  toled  out  in  that  way  ? — A.  No,  si 

(^.  Now,  as  to  seeing,  you  told  me  there  was  great  difficulty  in  cei 
states  of  the  atmosphere  and  of  certain  kinds  of  land  in  determi 
the  exact  distances.  Now,  Mr.  Davies  asked  you  whether  there 
any  such  difficulty  during  the  mackerel  season  ;  you  said  no. 

Mr.  Davies.  I  said  in  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Mr.  Dana.  Now,  does  the  mackerel  season  make  any  differeiic 
your  ability  to  tell  where  you  are?  Can  you  not  tell  just  as  well  v 
it  is  not  the  mackerel  season  as  wheu  it  is  t  How  is  that  ? — A.  1 1 
understand  you  at  all. 

Q.  Well,  I  will  try  you  again.  In  the  matter  of  being  able  tc 
how  far  oft'  laud  you  are  oft  Prince  Kdward  Island,  does  it  nmke 
ditfereuce  whether  it  is  the  mackerel  seasou  or  not  I — A.  No ;  it  does 
make  any,  of  course. 

Q.  Well,  do  you  mean  to  say  Prince  Edward  Island  is  one  as  to  w 
you  can  easily  tell  the  distnuce  f — A.  Yes ;  the  la'id  is  low,  and  a  pe 
can  tell. 

Q.  I  was  going  to  ask  you  the  reason.    You  say  the  laud  is  low 
that  so  all  along  the  island  ?— A.  Yes ;  there  may  be  some  places  a 
higher  than  others. 

y.  Uow  is  it  oft"  Cape  Breton  !— A.  It  is  hard  to  tell  there  wlum 
land  is  high  ;  it  is  very  hard. 

Q.  And  oft'  the  west  coast,  I  think  you  call  it!— A.  The  land  is 

Q.  But  in  Prince  Edward  Island  you  think  the  laud  is  low  anil 
are  able  to  tell  better  f — A.  Y'ea. 

Q.  That  is  so  everywhere — wherever  the  land  is  low  you  can  tell 
terT— A.  Yes. 


COMMISSION. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


957 


t  to    you  ?      Did   yoH  lIllilCT- 


Q.  Is  that  the  view  held  by  all  seamen  ?— A.  I  should  think  so. 

Q.  Well,  even  with  low  land  in  certain  states  of  the  atmosphere  you 
would  not  like  to  make  oath  to  the  exact  quarter  or  eighth  of  a  mile  ? — 
A.  No. 

Q.  You  can't  tell  exactly  then  ?  You  know  the  difference  between 
one  mile  and  three  miles? — A.  Y^es. 

Q,  Does  it  not  take  some  little  experience  to  judge  of  distances  at 
sea! — A.  J  suppose  it  does,  of  course. 

Q.  Kxi>erien«e  in  observing,  and  that  sort  of  thing! — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Even  off  Prince  Edward  Island  you  can't  always  tell  to  half  a  mile  1 
You  could  not  in  certain  states  of  the  atmosphere  tell  whether  it  was 
two  and  three-quarters  or  three  and  a  quarter  miles  1  You  could  tell 
two  miles  from  three  miles,  or  you  could  tell  half  a  mile  from  a  mile,  but 
when  you  take  a  difference  of  half  a  mile  off  three  miles  from  laud,  of 
course  the  farther  you  go  off'  the  less  easy  it  is  to  distinguish  as  to  half 
a  mile — tor  instance,  between  nine  and  a  half  and  ten  miles.  How  is  it 
ns  to  three  miles,  even  with  a  flat  shore  like  that,  in  certain  states  of 
the  atmosphere  you  would  find  it  difficult  to  make  oath  as  to  whether  it 
was  jast  three  miles  or  a  little  more  or  less? — A.  A  person  could  go 
pretty  near  it.  Even  if  he  could  not  tell  he  could  go  pretty  near  by 
soundings. 

Q.  If  he  had  the  soundings  he  must  have  a  chart? — A.  Yes. 

(j*.  lie  could  take  soundings  if  he  was  stationary,  but  he  has  to  heave 
to  and  come  to  anchor,  and  then  compare  his  soundings  with  his  chart. 
It  he  did  not  go  through  all  that,  but  trusted  to  his  eye,  there  would  be 
some  difficulty  in  determining  in  some  states  of  the  atmosphere  ? — A. 
Yes. 

No.  57. 

Joseph  Tierney,  of  Sonris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  called  on  behalf 
o(  the  Government  of  Her  liritanuic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies: 

(Question.  Y'ou  are  master  of  a  vessel  ? — Answer.  Y'^es. 

i}.  Now  tlshing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  the  fishing-business? — A. 
Si  lire  KS(J2. 

Q.  And  have  you  been  master  of  a  vessel  long?— A.  This  year, 
tisliing. 

Q.  How  many  years  have  you  been  in  a  fishing- vessel  ?— A.  For  the 
las';  1(»  years. 

Q.  Fishing  around  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Gape  Breton?— A.  I 
was  lli  years  arountl  Prince  Edward  Island, 

().  hi  island  vessels  or  American  vessels?— A.  All  island  vessels  ex- 
cept one. 

(}.  VVhiit  was  the  name  of  the  American  vessel  you  were  fishing  in?— 
A.  The  Ellen  Francis,  Gloucester. 

().  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her  ?— A.  Two. 

<^  In  what,  year?- A.  In  1872. 

Q.  How  manv  barrels  ditl  you  get?— A.  390  barrels. 

(^  Where  did  you  take  them?— A.  Around  Prince  Edward  Island 
cliietly. 

il  How  far  off  from  shore  ?— A.  About  a  mile  and  a  half  to  a  mde. 

<i.  During  the  years  you  were  in  island  vessels,  can  you  give  us  the 
catehes  vou  made?— A.  About  400  barrels  a  year.         „  „,        , 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  those  fish  ?  -A.  Around  Prince  Edward 
It^laiul,  chiefly. 


958 


AWARD  OP  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  All  within  the  same  dintaDce f — A.  Tea;  all. 

Q.  Have  you  caught  any  fish  in  the  gulf?— A.  I  have,  somp. 

Q.  Where  f— A.  Off  Bradley  and  Orphan,  and  between  Magdalei 
IslandH  and  Gape  North. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  fish  are  taken  out  in  deep  sea,  and  what  pro 
portion  inshore  f — A.  In  my  experience  in  the  bay,  we  never  got  Id 
barrels  off  shore,  although  1  have  seen  vessels  that  have. 

Q.  All  the  rest  were  taken  within  three  miles  f—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  that  speaking  generally  of  the  vessels  with  which  you  have 
been  brought  iuto  contact,  or  of  which  you  have  ccurate  information  f- 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  result  as  to  them  f — A..  All  that  I  have  seen 
caught  their  tisli  inshore.  I  have  heard  of  some  that  got  good  catcher 
off  Bradley  Bank  and  Orphan. 

Q.  You  have  had  fifteen  or  sixteen  years  at  sea.  How  many  Aineri 
can  vessels  have  been  frequenting  the  bay  during  the  years  you  wenl 
there? — A.  Between  400  and  .lOJ  sail.  That  is  what  I  heard,  althoug 
1  never  saw  them  all,  of  course.  They  were  never  always  iu  one  phice 
The  most  I  have  seen  at  one  time  is  2oO.  We  used  to  Lear  tiiem  give 
a  rough  estimate  of  four  or  five  hundred  sail. 

Q.  What  were  the  average  catches  ? — A.  I  shonhl  say  that  an  aver- 
age of  500  barrels;  that  is,  up  t^)  1872.  Since  that  I  have  nut  been  iu 
the  bay.    I  understand  it  has  fallen  off. 

Q.  You  can  only  give  information  as  to  when  you  were  there  your- 
self. You  were  iu  and  out,  sailing  along  the  coast  of  Cape  Breton,  the 
West  Shore,  and  Bay  Chaleurs,  all  the  time;  now  tell  the  Commission 
where  did  you  see  these  Americans  catching  fish,  close  in  or  not>— A. 
Undoubtedly,  all  in. 

Q.  They  tell  me  you  have  some  difficulty  in  telling  where  you  were.— 
A.  Well,  they  didn't  seem  to  find  much  difficulty  when  the  cutters  were 
around.    They  ascertained  within  a  mile  or  so  then. 

Q.  lined  they  to  fish  inshore  notwithstanding  the  cuti'ers  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  would  run  the  risk  ? — A.  Most  undoubtedly. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  many  at  onetime? — A.  Y'^es.  When  tliey  saw  a 
suspicious  I(M)king  sail  they  would  run  out,  and  as  soon  as  she  was  out 
of  the  way  they  would  run  in  again. 

Q.  Have  you  any  difficulty,  then,  in  judging  the  distance  from  the 
shore  ?—  A.  Not  the  least. 

Q.  Taking  such  a  shore  as  that  of  Prince  K<lward  Island,  there  is  not 
much  fog  there,  is  there  much  dilticnlty  ?— A.  No.  Any  man  wh(»  hits 
been  at  sea  fifteen  or  sixteen  years  can  tell  within  a  short  distuinte. 

Q.  I  think  I  asked  you  what  proportion  of  the  fish  you  took  were 
caught  within  th«  limits  ?— A.  Yes;  I  sliould  say  threefourtlis  an.vhow. 

if.  From  the  infor  i  atiou  yon  have  gathered  from  American  captains, 
and  from  what  yon  have  seen  of  their  fishing,  what  proi»ortion  of  their 
fish  would  you  say  ? — A.  Five  hundred  barrels. 

Q.  But  what  proportion  of  those,  iu  your  opinion,  are  taken  within 
three  miles  i—A.  Well,  during  the  time  1  have  taken  I  never  saw  more 
than  10  or  15  sail  iu  t'ae  fleet  off  shore.  Whatever  was  taken  in  Ameri- 
can vessels  was  where  we  got  them  ourselves. 

(^  1  l)elieve  that  on  the  Cape  Breton  shore  there  can  be  no  (piestion 
about  the  distance?— A.  It  is  no  use  going  outside  of  two  miles  there. 

(^.  Prince  Edward  Island  is  nearly  the  same?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  been  in  the  Bay  Chaleurs?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  yoii  catch  fish  iu  the  body  of  the  bay  ?— A.  No;  at  the  sides. 


AMISSION. 


AWARD   OP  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


969 


the  tlisfance  from  tlio 


Q.  I  don't  know  whether  you  have  been  up  as  far  as  Seven  Islands?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  caught  much  there?— A.  No;  I  have  taken  a  good 
many  on  the  Shippegan  side  of  Bay  Chalenrs. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  at  Magdalen  Islands  f— A..  I  have  been  over  there 
looking  for  fish.  I  can't  say  I  fished  much.  I  could  not  get  theiu.  We 
never  found  good  fishing  there.  I  have  beard  theui  talking  of  good 
spurts  there.    I  never  could  find  them. 

Q.  No  fisherman  could  pretend  that  there  is  the  same  continuous 
fishing  there  that  there  is  around  Prince  Edward  Island  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Suppose  they  .ei<j  confined  to  Magdalen  Islands  and  those  parts 
of  the  gulf  that  ivere  outside  of  three  miles? — A.  There  never  would  be 
twenty-five  sail  go  for  mackerel.    They  would  give  it  up. 

Q.  Is  this  open  to  question  ?  Could  that  be  disputed  by  reasonable 
men  ?  Would  you  believe  any  man  who  swore  that  the  fish  were  caught 
outside — if  he  told  you  he  caught  all  his  fish  outside  and  very  few  with- 
in ? — A.  I  would  not  dispute  it.  I  have  known  some  few  men  that  did 
get  some  outside.  They  told  me  so  themselves ;  but  if  confined  to  those 
certain  places  I  don't  believe  they  would  go. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  of  any  Canadian  vessel  going  to  fish  in  Amer- 
ican waters  ? — A.  None  but  one.    Tiiat  was  the  Lettie,  I  believe. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  notice  that  your  average  catch  was  400  barrels  a  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  put  the  average  American  catch  at  oOO  barrels  in  1872.  Was 
the  class  of  vessels  you  were  in  smaller  than  the  Americans  ? — A.  They 
were  not  so  competent  to  prosecute  the  fishing  business. 

Q.  You  have  not  been  fishing  in  vessels  since  1872? — A.  I  have  been 
trawling  on  the  Banks  for  cod,  and  partly  seining  for  mackerel  on  the 
American  shores. 

Q.  How  many  trips  for  mackerel  have  you  made  on  the  American 
shores  ? — A.  Three  trips.    They  were  smau  trips,  averaging  150  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  those  ?— A.  Off  Block  Island. 

(,).  In  what  year,  1873  ?— A.  1874. 

i).  I  thought  you  left  the  gulf  in  1872  ?— A.  Yes,  but  I  was  trawling 
next  year. 

Q.  Block  Island  is  pretty  near  the  entrance  of  Long  Island  Sound  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  other  fishing  did  you  do?— A.  Trawling. 

(■i.  Who  was  your  captain  ?— A.  Charles  Muir. 

i}.  Had  you  ever  been  with  him  before  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Who  were  you  with  seiuiug  in  1873  ?— A.  Saul  Jacobs,  iu  the  S.  R. 
Lane. 

Q.  Where  did  you  seine  iu  1874  ?— A.  Down  east.  It  was  late  in  the 
fall  when  I  came  home  from  the  Banks.     We  went  off  Cape  Cod. 

Q.  What  luck  had  you?— A.  About  275  barrels.  She  had  been  out 
all  the  year,  but  1  was  not  in  her. 

(}.  Take  1875  ?— A.  I  did  not  fish  for  mackerel  in  1875  or  1876. 

Q.  Now  how  many  times  did  you  have  to  go  the  Magdalen  Islands?— 
A.  I  would  probably  go  four  or  five  times  in  a  season. 

i).  Did  you  ever  go  with  an  American  captain  ?— A.  Once. 

Q.  Who  was  he  ? — A.  Chivarie. 

Q.  What  year  ?— A.  1872. 

(i.  Did  ho  have  any  luck  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  That  is  the  only  timo  you  went  to  the  Magdalen  Islands?— A.  les. 

Q.  Did  you  also  have  poor  luck  on  Bradley  and  Orphan  Banks?— A 
I  uevor  caught  any  mackerel.    I  simply  tried  there.    It  lies  in  our  way 


960 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


Q.  Is  it  within  your  general  knowledge  that  a  good  many  good  fures 
have  been  taken  at  Bradley  a!»d  Orphan  ? — A.  No;  they  would  be  poor 
fares.    I  never  heard  tell  of  a  fare  taken  there  entirely. 

Q.  Haven't  you  heard  of  a  good  many  barrels  being  taken  there  at  a 
timet — A.  Some  few  vessels.    1  didn't  see  many  vessels  there. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  did  you  say  there  were  in  the  gulf  in 
1872 1 — A.  I  should  say,  by  what  I  have  heard,  6(K)  sail. 

Q.  How  was  it  in  1872,  the  last  year  you  were  there  ?— A.  Not  so 
many — I  don't  l>elieve  there  were  over  .'iOO  in  1872. 

Q.  Do  you  think  those  vesst'ls  in  1872  averaged  five  hundred  barrels 
for  the  season  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  they  averaged  in  1872! — A.  We  got  about 
400.    I  should  say  400  was  the  average.    We  did  not  hear. 

Q.  Since  then  you  have  had  no  personal  knowledge  until  the  present 
year.  How  many  American  mackerel  vessels  have  you  seen  this  year ! 
Tell  the  number  and  the  names  as  far  as  you  can. — A.  I  could  not  do  it. 
I  heard  them  talk.  By  what  I  l^ave  seen  myself  I  have  not  seen  over 
50  sail  in  one  fleet  this  year. 

Q.  When  was  that? — A.  That  was  about  three  weeks  ago.  I  spoke 
some  of  them ;  they  were  going  up  to  Bay  Chaleurs  and  around  tbe 
island. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  have  yon  seen  about  Prince  Edward 
Island  this  year? — A.  Taking  one  time  and  another — they  were  scat- 
terwl  round  considerable,  say  20  or  30  at  Georgetown,  15  or  L'O  at 
Souris — I  should  say  there  were  75  when  I  left  home. 

Q.  There  is  a  liability  to  count  twice,  is  there  not?  Do  you  think 
there  were  that  many  ? — A.  Yes  ;  around  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Are  they  seining  chiefly? — A.  No,  hooking. 

Q.  Where  are  they  from  ? — A.  Gloucester. 

Q.  You  could  not  give  us  the  names  of  the  75,  of  course.  Can  you 
give  us  any  considerable  number? — A.  No;  I  could  not  give  nuines. 

Q  It  is  within  your  general  knowledge  that  up  to  this  time  they  have 
had  no  luck?— A.  I  know  that  because  I  have  been  there,  except  some 
vessels.  Between  the  Ist  of  July  and  the  lOtli  there  were  some  good 
hauls  with  seines  between  East  Point  and  ten  miles  down  the  coast. 

Q.  Was  that  close  in  ? — A.  Some  would  not  throw  their  seines,  be- 
cause they  were  afraid  they  would  lose  them  on  the  rocky  bottom.  They 
can  take  mackerel  in  eight  or  ten  fathoms. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  do  you  »  ave  to  go  off  the  north  side  of  the 
island  before  it  is  ten  or  twelve  fathoms?— A.  In  some  places  yon  will 
get  ten  fathoms  within  300  yards.  Other  places  you  will  have  to  go  a 
mile  and  a  half. 

Q.  There  is  no  average  about  it  ?— A.  No,  it  is  irregular. 

Q.  But  you  think  you  can  estimate,  in  al'uost  any  state  of  the  weather, 
so  as  to  tell  within  a  quarter  or  Inilt  a  mil'  «'hat  the  distance  is  t—X.  I 
can  always  tell  it  within  three  miles.  I  have  been  often  outside  of  three 
miles. 

Q.  You  kept  in  generally  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  can  t*ll  tlnve  miles  from  three  and  a  quarter  .- 
A.  I  can  tell  it  by  observation  if  I  see  the  planets,  or  we  can  tell  it  by 
the  depth  of  the  water  by  referring  to  a  chart. 

Q.  Vou  can  ascertain  in  that  way.  But  when  you  are  simply  looking' 
at  another  vessel  do  you  think  you  can  judge  within  half  a  mile  accii 
lately  t — A.  I  can  when  three  miles  ott"  shore.  , 

Q.  Then  you  would  know  whether  a  vessel  was  two  and  a  half  miles 
or  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


961 


id  five  hundred  barrels 


two  and  a  half  miles 


Q.  Gould  you  tell  whether  she  was  two  and  three-quarters  or  three? — 
A.  I  would  not  like  to  say  within  a  quarter  of  a  mile. 

Q.  Within  three  miles,  or  thereabouts,  of  the  shore,  you  think  you 
can  tell  within  half  a  mile  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  if  yon  saw  250  sail  at  once — by  the  way,  when  and  where 
was  that  t  Was  it  in  the  bay  ? — A.  Those  were  to  anchor  in  the  har- 
bor. 

Q.  There  were  not  that  many  fishing.  How  many  were  there  fishinj;  t— 
A.  One  hundred  and  fifty,  I  should  say. 

Q.  Could  you  judge  with  accuracy  within  half  a  mile  where  all  those 
150  lay  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  you  say  your  vessel  belonjed?— A.  To  Souris,  Prince 
Edward  Island. 

Q.  Well,  now,  where  was  the  other  place  at  which  you  seined  mack- 
erel on  the  American  coast;  you  have  given  us  Block  Island? — A. 
George's  Banks. 

Q.  Any  other  places?— A.  South  Channel,  between  George's  Bank 
and  Cape  Cod. 

Q.  How  far  from  shore  was  that  ? — A.  About  five  miles  oflF  shore. 

Q.  How  far  out  is  Block  Island  ? — A.  Only  three  miles,  the  nearest 
part. 

Q.  But  part  was  more  than  three  miles  off  the  American  shore? — A. 
Yea ;  most  of  the  fish  is  taken  outside  of^three  miles,  on  the  American 
coast. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  is  a  difference  in  the  habits  of  fish  on  the 
American  coast  and  the  Canadian  coast,  as  to  where  they  come  in  and 
how  far  they  stay  out  ? — A.  I  do  think  so ;  in  the  bay  they  go  right  up 
to  their  spawning  waters,  right  up  to  shallow  water,  and  coming  down 
they  follow  the  coast. 

Q.  What  do  you  call  the  spawning  grounds  ? — A.  The  shoal  waters  of 
the  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  You  think  the  mackerel  resort  to  spawning  grounds  ? — A.  I  do. 

Q.  You  are  pretty  confident  about  that  ? — A.  That  is  our  general  be- 
lief as  fishermen. 

(J.  You  know  cod  do  not ;  they  spawn  wherever  they  feel  like  it. — A. 
I  don't  know ;  they  frequent  the  same  place  every  year. 

Q.  But  do  you  think  the  cod  have  spawning  grounds  inshore? — A.  I 
think  they  have  ;  at  least,  the  people  in  Newfoundland  have  been  tell- 
ing me  so. 

Q.  It  is  to  spawn,  and  not  for  food,  that  mackerel  go  inshore? — A. 
Yes ;  because  there  is  better  food  outside  for  mackerel,  a  green  stuff' 
that  grows  on  the  bottom. 

Q.  What  is  the  name  of  it  ?— A.  I  don't  know  any  particular  name  ;  it 
is  a  weed  that  grows  on  the  rocks ;  but  inshore  close,  there  is  no  food 
for  mackerel,  not  right  alone  the  rocks. 

Q.  They  go  in  to  spawn  and  go  out  afterwards  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  does  it  take  them  ?— A.  Some  five  or  six  weeks.  They 
keep  moving  out,  going  in  and  moving  out. 

il  That  is  exactly  as  I  understand  it.  Now,  how  far  out  do  they 
move  ? — A.  Well,  once  they  start  to  go  down,  some  go  across  to  North 
Cape  and  along  the  western  shore.    They  follow  the  island  down. 

Q.  They  come  into  the  shore  and  go  out  for  a  distance,  a  number  of 
miles? — A.  Yes ;  for  the  last  four  weeks  they  run  right  along  the  shore. 

Q.  But  their  usual  way  is  to  play  about,  moving  in  and  out  ?— A. 
Yes ;  they  come  in  to  four  or  five  fathoms  and  move  out  to  eight  or  ten 
fathoms. 
61  F 


d62 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  They  nre  not  such  devoted  subjects  as  to  keep  within  three 
miles  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  There  is  food  outside  !— A.  I  don't  say  outside  of  four  or  five  miles 
along  one  mile  or  a  mile  and  a  half.  ' 

Q.  Then  I  minnnderstood  yon.  Yon  think  it  is  about  a  mile  or  a  mile 
and  a  half  that  they  get  their  foo«!  f  Do  you  know  what  they  call 
brit  1— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  is  that  T— A.  Right  in  close. 

Q.  Do  they  find  it  away  out  at  sea  ?— A.  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  You  have  seen  spawn  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yon  have  had  it  come  up  on  your  lines  ? — A.  No ;  I  have  seen  it 
lying  on  the  bottom  where  a  vessel  wonld  not  float. 

Q.  Then  I  understand  you  think  there  is  a  difference  between  the 
habits  of  mackerel  up  here  in  these  waters  and  down  off  the  coast  of 
the  United  States  as  to  the  distance  they  keep  from  the  shore  If— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  And  you  think  that  off  the  coast  of  the  United  States  they  keep  far- 
ther off  f — A.  Yes ;  in  the  fore  part  of  the  season. 

Q.  And  how  in  the  latter  part  t — A.  They  move  in.  From  Gloucester 
and  the  State  of  Maine  you  go  pretty  close  in,  right  inshore. 

Q.  Are  there  any  mackerel  in  there? — A.  Yes;  the  best  fishing  is 
there,  from  this  out. 

Q.  From  Gloucester  north  to  Maine  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  thought  it  was  all  exhausted  t — A.  Well,  they  seem  to  think  so 
this  year.    They  don't  do  much. 

Q.  Nor  here  either ! — A.  I  believe  not. 

Q.  It  is  all  in  the  future.    It  is  what  you  call  prospective  f — A,  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  from  any  of  the  American  captains  bow 
many  vessels  there  were  down  the  bay! — A.  There  are  200  vessels  in 
the  bay  now.  I  have  seen  a  man  last  Friday  from  Gloucester,  his  name 
was  Davies ;  25  sail  left  with  him. 

Q.  What  vessel  was  he  in  f — A.  The  Joseph  O.  And  as  many  as  a 
dozen  captains  have  told  me  that  there  were  200  vessels. 

Q.  And  they  are  coming  still  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  expect  to  have  a  large  fleet  down  this  year  f— A.  There 
was  a  vessel  went  home  and  reported  poor  doings. 

Q.  As  a  rule,  is  the  fishing  poor  ? — A.  We  have  never  done  so  well  as 
now. 

Q.  The  mackerel  are  i)lenty  ?— A.  Yes ;  very  plenty. 

Q.  Am  an  experienced  fisherman,  do  the  indications  point  to  a  good 
season  or  not  I — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  How  soon  are  you  going  to  find  it  ?— A.  I  hope  they  have  by  this 
time. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  You  say  you  fished  in  an  American  vessel  off  Block  Island  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  How  far  off'  shore  t— A.  All  the  way  from  three  to  ten  miles. 

Q.  Beyond  ten  t— A.  Yes  ;  twenty-five  miles  out.  That  was  the  cap 
tain's  estimation.  I  don't  know  whether  he  knew  how  far  he  was  or 
not. 

Q.  Yon  were  out  of  sight  of  land  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  1  understood  what  you  stated  about  the  food  of  mackerel  as  Mr. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


963 


States  they  keep  far- 


hey  seem  to  think  so 


pospectire  f— A.  Yes. 


pe  they  have  by  tliis 


F  Block  Island  ?-A. 


I  of  mackerel  as  Mr. 


Foster  did.  Tou  don't  mean  to  say  that  the  food  is  a  stuff  that  grows 
outside  of  three  miles  ? — A.  I  never  found  any  outside  of  three  miles. 
That  is  the  stuff  we  iind  in  them  when  we  clean  them. 

Q.  Now,  you  have  never  seen  food  in  the  deep  sea  at  all  ?  What  is 
briti — A.  I  have  seen  it  in  the  mackerel  where  I  have  been  fishing.  I 
have  not  seen  the  green  stuff  where  I  have  been  fishing.  It  is  as  close 
in  as  a  boat  can  come.    I  have  never  seen  any  outside. 

Q.  Bow  many  times  on  an  average  has  a  trawler  to  come  in  for  fresh 
bait  during  the  season  ? — A.  It  depends  on  how  long  she  is  out  for.  If 
it  is  five  months,  and  she  has  to  come  in  only  four  times,  she  does  very 
well. 

Q.  Can't  she  run  home  for  bait? — A.  I  think  she  could  not  do  it.    I 
think  it  would  spoil  if  she  did. 
By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  You  start  from  Gloucester  with  one  lot  of  bait  ? — A.  Sometimes 
we  never  take  any. 

Q.  You  usually  start  with  bait,  don't  you  !— A.  Not  usually.  We  get 
bait  on  the  shores  of  Nova  Scotia. 

Q.  What  bait  do  you  use  ?— A.  Herring  and  squid. 

Q.  Do  you  use  the  squid  fresh  or  salt  ? — A.  Fresh. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  use  salt  f — A.  No. 

Q.  The  Provincetown  and  Beverley  use  it  salt  altogether? — A.  I 
believe  so. 

Q.  Those  vessels  that  fish  with  hook  and  line  from  the  State  of  Maine 
use  salt  bait  altogether  ?  They  don't  resort  anywhere  for  bait !— A. 
They  do,  yes.    I  have  seen  lots  of  vessels  the  last  time  I  was  down. 

Q.  Provincetown  vessels  ?    I  thought  Provincetown  vessels  used  salt 
bait?— A.  Tbey  did,  but  they  found  it  didn't  pay.    They  had  to  follow 
the  Cape  Ann  vessels. 
By  Mr.  Da  vies : 

Q.  What  harbors  did  you  buy  in  in  Newfoundland  ?— A.  Cape  Broyle, 
Fortune  Bay,  and  Bay  of  Bulls. 

Q.  You  said  you  would  make  four  or  six  trips  to  take  bait  either  on 
the  Nova  Scotia  or  Newfoundland  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  did  you  get  that  bait?— A.  Buy  it  from  persons  that  go  and 
catch  it  and  sell  it  for  so  much  a  barrel.  The  American  fishermen  are 
not  allowed  to  catch  their  own  bait  at  all.  Of  course  they  may  jig  their 
own  squid  around  the  vessel. 

Q.  You  think  they  are  not  allowed  to  catch  bait?— A.  The  natives 
will  not  allow  them. 
By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  What  would  they  do  if  you  tried  to  catch  bait?— A.  They  were 
pretty  rough  customers.    I  don't  know  what  they  would  do. 
By  Mr.  Da  vies : 

Q.  You  employ  them  and  they  go  and  catch  so  much  bait  for  you?— 
A.  Ves ;  that  is  "the  custom.    That  is,  out  of  Gloucester. 

No.  58. 

James  MoPhee,  of  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  fisherman, 
called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn 
and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  What  is  your  age?— Answer.  Thirty-five. 


964 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Yoa  have  been  aboat  twelve  years  eufcajired  in  the  flsheries !— a. 
I  have  been  fourteen  years,  twelve  years  in  Amerioan  fishing- vessels 
Then  I  have  been  boat-fishing  besides. 

Q.  Fishing  in  the  Bay  St  Lawrence  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  first  year  yoa  went !— A.  1862. 

Q.  What  vessel  T— A.  The  Fannie  R.,  from  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  she  make  f— A.  One  trip. 

Q.  What  catch  f~A.  180  barrels. 

Q.  Was  she  a  small  or  a  large  vessel  ?— A.  Ninety  tons.  It  was  only 
one  trip  I  was  in  her,  but  she  made  two  trips.  I  left  her  down  in  the 
bay  and  joined  another. 

Q.  Now,  where  did  you  catch  them  ? — A.  We  caught  most  of  tliein 
on  the  east  shore,  from  Norih  Cape  down  to  West  Cape,  and  betweeu 
that  and  Escuminac. 

Q.  How  far  off  from  the  shore? — A.  Along  the  shore,  I  would  my  a 
mile  and  a  half  to  two  miles. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  whole  catch  did  you  take  within  three 
miles  f — A.  I  should  think  of  the  180  barrels  we  took  130.  We  got  4U 
barrels  at  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Where  were  the  rest  taken? — A.  On  the  east  shore  of  Prince 
Edward  Island,  and  between  that  and  Escuminac. 

Q.  Within  three  miles? — A.  In  shoal  water. 

Q.  Within  three  miles  ? — A.  Yes ;  within  two  and  a  half  to  quo  and 
a  half. 

Q.  The  next  year,  1863,  what  vessel  did  you  go  in !— A.  The  Edward 
A.  D.  Hart,  Gloucester,  Captain  McMillan. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  get  ? — A.  700  barrels. 

Q.  How  many  trips  ? — A.  We  made  only  one  trip,  but  we  landed 
250  or  300  barrels,  and  took  all  home  in  the  fall. 

Q  Now,  where  did  you  catch  those  ? — A.  All  around  Cape  Breton 
and  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  all  around. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  any  of  these  at  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  Yes,  some. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  700  did  you  catch  within  three  miles  of 
the  shore  ?  What  proportion  of  the  7(K)  barrels  ? — A.  Well,  the  last 
trip  we  caught  all  inshore.  We  caught  them  at  Margaree  and  of!'  the 
north  shore  of  Prince  Edward  Island.  The  tirst  trip  we  caught  200  at 
Magdalen  Islands,  and  we  caught  some  on  Bradley. 

Q.  Was  the  proportion  400  to  300? — A.  Yes;  two  hundred  were 
taken  at  Magdalen  Islands  and  one  hundred  off  Bradley. 

Q.  Those  400  were  taken  close  in  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  Americans  were  there  in  the  bay  that  year? — A.  Four 
hundred  or  five  hundred  sail. 

Q.  Was  yours  an  average  catch  ? — A.  Ours  was  above  the  average. 

Q.  In  1804  what  vessel  did  you  gj  in  ?— A.  In  the  Julia  Parsons, 

oueester. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  ? — A.  1,000.    She  was  a  large  vessel  and  made 
pn. 

Q.  Where  did  you  t  .ke  them  ?— A.  Some  at  Bay  Chaleurs.  A  good 
deal  the  first  trip.  About  300  barrels  at  Bay  Chaleurs  and  200  at  Mag 
dalen  Islands. 

Q.  Where  then  did  you  catch  fish  ?— A.  At  Shippegan  and  Oara(iuet, 

right  close  in. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  any  at  Bay  Chaleurs  in  the  center  of  the  bay  ?— A. 
Seldom.  There  might  be  a  spurt,  but  no  continuous  fishing.  It  is  either 
one  side  or  the  other. 

Q.  Where  did  yon  get  the  other  500  barrels  ?--A.  On  the  Cape  Bre- 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHEUY   COMMISSION. 


965 


shore,  I  would  say  a 


east  shore  of  Prince 


arouud  Cape  Breton 


that  year? — A.  Four 


irge  vessel  and  umile 


pegan  and  Garaqiiet, 


i.  On  the  Cape  Bre- 


ton shore,  between  Margaree  and  Cheticamp.    We  got  a  few  by  Sydney, 
down  by  St.  Anns. 

Q.  How  far  offshore  were  those  taken  ?— A.  Along  shore.  The  usual 
places  where  they  flsh. 

Q.  How  far  off  are  they  ?— A.  About  two  and  a  half  miles.  We  caugh  t 
them  right  in  at  Margaree  Island.  We  got  100  barrels  right  in  withia 
a  half  mile  of  the  island. 

Q.  Were  there  many  in  the  bay  that  year  ?— A.  There  was  a  big  fleet; 
COO  sail. 

Q.  Was  yours  an  average  catch  that  year  !— A.  We  were  above  the 
average. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  good  price  that  year?— A.  We  got  $20  for  I's  and 
113, 1  think,  for  2's.  But  the  last  trip  was  $15  and  $12.  There  was  a 
good  many  mackerel  lauded  aud  they  kept  them  till  the  fall,  and  the 
price  fell. 

Q.  In  1865  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  ? — A.  The  Edward  A.  D.  Hart. 

Q.  Did  you  go  in  the  Julia  Parsons  more  than  one  year  ?— A.  Only 
one  year. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  in  the  Edward  A.  D.  Hart? — A..  500  barrels. 

Q.  In  18C6  what  vessel  ?— A.  The  Edward  A.  D.  Hart. 

Q.  What  catch!— A.  450  barrels. 

Q.  Whereabouts  ? — A.  On  the  same  grounds. 

Q.  Were  there  many  American  vessels  in  the  bay? — A.  About  400 
sail. 

Q.  In  1867  what  vessel  ? — A.  The  Colonel  Ellsworth,  Gloucester,  Rob- 
sou,  master.  We  made  one  trip  aud  got  450  barrels.  That  was  the 
whole  season. 

Q.  In  18G8  what  vessel  ? — A.  The  A.  M.  Wanson,  Gloucester,  Captaia 
Webber. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  ? — A.  We  made  two  trips  and  got  400  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  them  ? — A.  The  first  trip  on  the  Canada  shore — 
that  is,  off'  Bonaventure. 

Q.  You  were  up  in  the  river  St.  Lawrence  ?— A.  Yes,  the  south  side 
of  the  river,  off  Perce  and  along  that  ground. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  good  many  offshore  ? — A.  I  think  we  got  100  bar- 
rels offshore. 

Q.  The  mackerel  were  how  close  in  to  Perce  ? — A.  How  do  you  mean? 
Two  to  two  and  a  half  or  three  miles. 

Q.  Were  there  many  vessels  in  the  bay  that  year? — A.  Consider- 
able many  vessels  in  1868.    Four  hundred  sail. 

Q.  Then  you  caught  off  Bonaventure  all  inshore  ? — A.  No,  offshore. 
We  caught  100  barrels  about  the  first  trip  in  June  or  July. 

Q.  Was  yours  an  average  catch  ? — A.  I  think  it  was  rather  above  the 
average. 

Q.  The  next  year  was  '69.  What  vessel  did  you  go  in  ?— A.  I  was  in 
the  schooner  Eliza  It.  Bradley,  Richards,  Gloucester ;  made  two  trips 
and  got  170,  I  think,  the  first  trip,  and 80  barrels,  something  about  that, 
the  last  trip. 

Q.  That  was  a  good  deal  below  the  other  years  ?— A.  It  was  a  poor 
year. 

Q.  Were  the  cutters  in  the  bay  that  year? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Had  they  anything  to  do  with  your  small  catch  ?— A.  I  think  they 
bothered  us  considerable. 

Q.  Explain  how  they  bothered  you.— A.  Well,  in  our  inshore-fishery 
they  bothered  us  this  much,  that  if  we  would  go  inshore  and  raise  a 
school  of  flsh,  if  we  saw  a  suspicious  vessel  coming  along  we  would 


966 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMIISSION. 


hare  to  ran  »way  until  the  ontter  got  by  and  then  go  In  again.  It  was 
a  dread  all  the  time. 

Q.  You  didn't  dare  to  go  in  f— A.  We  had  to  keep  a  safe  distance. 

Q.  The  result  was  you  got  a  small  fare  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  it  have  the  same  effect  on  the  other  vessels  I — A.  With  tlio 
fleet  I  was  with  it  used  to  work  in  that  w.iy.  When  the  cutters  wore 
away  we  would  try  to  steal  in. 

Q.  In  1870  f— A.  We  didn't  do  much ;  about  the  same,  I  think ;  not 
so  much.    We  made  one  trip,  and  got,  I  think,  100  or  180  barrels. 

Q.  The  cutters  were  in  the  bay  then  too,  I  think  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1871,  what  vessel! — A.  I  was  in  an  Island  vessel. 

Q.  What  was  her  name! — A.  I  was  in  the  Octave,  and  got  GOO 
barrels. 

Q.  In  1872  f— A.  I  did  no  fishing  at  all. 

Q.  In  1873  T — A.  I  was  in  the  Charles  Shears,  Captain  Kenny. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  get  T — A.  500  barrels. 

Q.  Were  there  many  in  the  bay  in  1873  T—A.  There  were  considerable; 
I  should  think  300  sail,  anyway. 

Q.  In  1874  what  vessel  were  you  inf — A.  The  Victor,  Gloncestor, 
Captain  Daniels. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  T — A.  600  barrels — two  trips.  We  took  the  first 
trip  of  the  year  on  the  west  shore  between  Escumiuac  and  along  I'lince 
Edward  Island,  close  in.  The  last  trip  we  got  around  East  Point  and 
Margaree. 

Q.  Taking  the  whole  of  the  two  trips,  what  portion  was  caught  in- 
shore f — A.  Of  the  COO  barrels,  I  should  think  500  were  caught  inshore. 
We  never  caught  any  mackerel  in  deep  water  at  all ;  we  might  raise 
them,  but  not  catch  them  to  speak  of. 

Q.  Were  the  American  fleet  fishing  with  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Taking  them  in  the  same  places? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  all  these  do  you  think  were  taken  within  three 
miles? — A.  I  would  consider  three-fourths,  during  the  time  I  have  been 
catching,  have  been  taken  within  three  miles. 

Q.  That  extends  from  1862  to  1874?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  At  least  three-fourths  daring  that  period  ? — A.  Of  all  I  have  been 
connected  with  in  any  way. 

Q.  Or  what  you  saw  ? — A.  What  I  saw  with  my  own  eyes. 

Q.  Have  yon  heard  American  captains  talking  over  this  question  at 
all? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  What  is  their  opinion  ?— A.  They  would  say  they  could  not  do 
without  the  inshore  fishery.  They  would  say  they  wished  it  coiiKl  be 
settled  so  that  they  would  have  the  liberty  of  fishing. 

Q.  They  have  agreed  with  you  ?— A.  Yes.  There  have  been  some 
years  that  certain  vessels  would  fish  otf  Bradley  and  Orphau,  but  if  I 
were  fishing  I  would  not  go  unless  I  could  have  liberty. 

Q.  Do  you  think  any  prudent  man  would  fit  out  unless  he  had  lib- 
erty ? — A.  I  don't  think. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt?— A.  I  think  he  would  fail  altogether.  He 
would  not  pay  his  bills. 

Q.  You  have  l»een  fishing  in  boats  since  then  ? — A.  I  have. 

Q.  Where  do  the  boats  fish  around  Trince  Edward  Island  ?— A.  AN  ithia 
a  mile  and  a  half  of  shore. 

Q.  Has  there  ever  been  a  better  year  for  boats  T  Is  it  not  connted 
one  of  the  best  years? — A.  It  is  a  glwd  one.  I  have  a  brother  fishing. 
I  have  seen  him  go  ten  days  ago.    He  is  in  the  Jamestown,  from  Glou- 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


967 


cester — an  American  vessel.    He  says  be  thinks  there  are  180  American 
vessels  in  the  bay. 

Q.  Haven't  any  of  them  made  catches?— A.  They  hail  100  barrels  in 
four  weeks  in  the  bay. 

Q.  That  is  not  so  very  bad  I— A.  That  is  very  good. 

Q.  What  do  you  say,  as  an  old  fisherman,  is  the  outlook  for  this  year  ! 
—A.  Very  good.    I  think  they  are  going  to  do  well. 

Q.  Where  do  the  mackerel  feed  ?— A.  Along  the  shore  there.  There 
is  a  certain  brit,  or  little  kind  of  stuff,  they  feed  on. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  see  that  in  the  open  waters  !— A.  No. 

Q.  When  you  catch  mackerel  can  you  see  it  when  you  open  them  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  it  with  your  own  eyes  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  is  no  doubt  about  it  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  effect  has  this  fishing  of  the  American  ve-ssels  upon  the 
boats  when  they  come  in  f — A.  The  Americans  take  all  the  fish  away. 
They  drag  it  right  off.  Of  course  they  throw  more  bait  than  the  boats 
do. 

No.  59. 


V.  Of  all  I  have  been 


fail  altogether.    lie 


John  McDonald,  of  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  called  on 
behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Mnjesty,  sworn  and  exam- 
ined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  You  have  been  engaged  in  the  fisheries  a  good  many  years  if — 
Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  Fishing  in  boats  and  vessels  I  suppose  ?— A.  I  was  in  vessels  fif- 
teen or  seventeen  summers. 

Q.  In  American  vessels?— A.  I  was  about  fifteen  years  in  American 
vessels. 

Q.  Beside  that  you  have  been  in  boats? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  So  your  experience  extends  back  a  good  while  ? — A.  Yes.  The 
Evangeline,  from  Gloucester,  I  was  in  first  in  1853. 

Q.  What  fare  did  you  get  in  her  ?— A.  About  300  barrels. 

C^.  How  many  American  vessels  were  in  the  fleet  that  year  ? — A. 
There  were  five  hundred  or  six  hundred  sail. 

Q.  What  vessel  were  you  in  next  year?— A.  The  Flying  Eagle,  Glou- 
cester. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  ?— A.  300  barrels. 

Q.  Was  that  the  whole  season's  work  ?— A.  No ;  only  a  short  fall  trip. 

Q.  Were  there  many  sail  in  the  bay  that  year  ?~A.  About  the  same 
as  the  year  before. 

Q.  What  did  vou  say  that  was?— A.  500  or  GOO. 

Q.  In  1855  what  vessel  were  you  in  ?— A.  The  Forest  Queen,  from 
Belfast,  Maine. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  get  ?— A.  300  about. 

Q.  Was  that  the  season's  work  ?— A.  No,  I  was  two  months  m  her ; 
part  of  the  season's  work.  t  •    i. 

Q.  Where  were  you  then  ?— A.  Cod  fishing  in  an  Island  vessel.  I  just 
went  in  her  for  that  trip. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  American  vessels  in  the  bay  that  year  ?— 
A.  I  think  the  same  as  usually  went.  There  was  a  number  of  years 
that  the  fleet  averaged  the  same. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  catch  ?— A.  Our  catch  that  year  was  below 
the  average. 


968 


AWARD  OF   THE   FI8HEHT   COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  was  tbe  average  catch  that  year  f— A.  Some  made  two  trips 
and  some  made  mure.    I  have  no  idea  what  was  the  average. 

Q.  You  know  yours  would  be  below  itt—A.  Yes,  I  am  pretty  sure  of 
ir« 

Q.  In  1866  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  t— A.  I  was  in  a  British  vessel, 
the  Emerald,  in  1856. 

Q.  How  many  mackerel  did  yon  get  f — A.  300  barrels. 

Q.  How  many  codfish  f — A.  450  quintals. 

Q.  Was  there  the  same  number  of  Americans  in  the  bay  that  year  1— 
A.  Yes ;  I  think  there  was. 

Q.  In  '57  what  vessel  did  you  go  in  t— A.  I  was  in  the  John  Tiigh, 
from  Gloucester.    The  captain's  name  was  David  Bowen. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  getf— A.  400  odd. 

Q.  Was  the  Heet  about  the  same,  or  did  it  increase  T — A.  I  think  it 
was  about  the  same ;  perhaps  more. 

Q.  In  '58  where  did  you  go  t— A.  I  was  in  the  Pioneer,  another  Eng- 
lish schooner,  for  codfish  and  herring.    I  was  not  mackereling  in  her. 

Q.  In  *59  where  were  youT — A.  I  was  in  an  English  schooner,  tiie 
James,  mackereling.  We  got  300  barrels  in  her.  I  was  part  of  tbe  sea- 
son in  her.    I  left  her. 

Q.  Would  that  be  below  the  average  catch  for  the  season  ?— A.  I 
should  think  so. 

Q.  From  what  yon  know  of  the  catch  of  other  vessels  would,  yoii  say 
it  was  below  ? — A.  Yes ;  because  I  know  of  vessels  catching  more. 

Q.  Had  the  American  fleet  remained  the  same  or  increased  ?— A.  It 
was  about  the  same,  I  suppose. 

Q.  Did  you  go  the  next  year  f — A.  I  was  not  then  fishing  until  18C3, 

i}.  In  '63  what  vessel  did  yon  go  inT — A.  The  lanthe,  Portland,  Me. 

Q.  What  were  you  doing;  mackereling? — A.  I  was  codfish ing iu Ler. 
We  got  600  quintals. 

Q.  How  many  Americans  were  fishing  for  cod! — A.  Where  1  was,  15. 

Q.  How  many  were  in  the  bay  codflsbingf — A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Well,  did  you  go  mackereling  that  year  f — A.  Yes,  sir ;  iu  the  Argo, 
Portland. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  get? — A.  500  barrels. 

Q.  I  am  forgetting  to  ask  you  where  you  caught  those  mackerel  ?— A. 
We  got  500  barrels  along  the  bend  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  the  biggest 
part  of  them. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Bight  in,  from  one  to  two  miles. 

Q.  That  brings  us  to  1863— to  1864.  Where  were  you  then  ?— A.  I 
was  in  the  same  schooner  and  got  400  barrels.  We  caught  them  around 
the  island,  the  biggest  part  of  them.  About  three-fourtbs  at  tlie 
island. 

Q.  Within  a  short  distance? — A.  Yes;  close  iu — a  mile  or  a  mile  and 
half;  some  handier. 

Q.  Was  the  American  fleet  in  tliat  year?— A.  Yes ;  iu  about  the  same 
number  and  catching  at  the  same  places. 

Q.  In  '65  ? — A.  I  was  not  fishing. 

Q.  In  1866?— A.  I  was  in  the  Veteran,  from  Gloucester.  We  got 
700  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  them  ?— A.  Inshore ;  some  at  Prince  Edward 
Island,  and  some  at  Magdalen  Islands ;  some  at  Margaree. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  whole  700  were  taken  close  inshore  T— A. 
All  of  three-fourths. 

Q.  How  faroflf?— A.  Some  two  miles  and  some  one;  perhaps  some 
more  than  two  miles. 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


969 


srease?— A.  I  think  it 


or  the  seasou  f— A.  I 


iloucester.    We  got 


one;  perhaps  some 


Q.  How  many  sail  were  in  the  bay  then!— A.  I  suppose  500  sail; 
perhaps  600 ;  between  five  and  six  hundred. 

Q.  Did  they  catch  about  the  same  quantity  each  vessel ;  would  that 
be  about  the  average  T— A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Would  the  proportion  taken  by  you  inshore  be  a  fair  average  for 
the  American  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  think  all  caught  about  the  same  f— A.  Yes.  It  was  a  large 
fleet,  and  generally  tished  together. 

i^.  In  '67  what  vessel  I— A.  The  Laura  Seward.  We  got  550  barrels ; 
the  biggest  part  of  them  around  the  island  one  trip,  and  the  next  trip 
the  whole  of  them  at  Margaree. 

Q.  Those  would  be  all  inshore?— A.  Yes.  We  had  to  work  off  the 
ledge  three  times  in  one  dny ;  we  went  too  close  in. 

Q.  In  '08  ? — A.  I  was  in  the  Isaac  Rich,  Salem.  We  got  540  or  550 
barrels. 

Q.  What  projwrtion  inshore? — A.  The  biggest  part  inshore;  three- 
fourths;  that  was  in  the  vessel  1  used  to  fish  in.  Some  used  to  tlsh  in 
deep  water  and  some  inshore. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  were  in  the  bay  that  year,  in  18GS? — 
A.  Between  400  and  500  sail. 

Q.  Was  yours  about  an  average  catch  ? — A.  Yes,  about  an  average. 

Q.  Where  were  you  in  1860 1 — A.  In  the  E.  Hudson,  an  English 
schooner. 

Q.  All  the  season  ? — A.  No ;  I  was  only  in  her  a  spell. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch  ? — A.  We  caught  140  barrels. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  in  her  ? — A.  Five  or  six  weeks. 

Q.  You  did  not  stay  the  season  ? — A.  No. 

ii.  Where  were  those  taken  ? — A.  Around  the  island. 

Q.  Close  in  or  out  ? — A.  Close  in.  All  we  caught  in  her  was  about 
the  island.    We  caught  none  in  her  outside  the  limits  at  all. 

Q.  In  1870  ?— A.  I  was  in  the  Isaac  Rich  again.  We  got  450  barrels, 
taken  about  the  island,  some  at  Margaree. 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  outside? — A.  Not  in  the  Rich  that  year. 

Q.  In  1871  ?— A.  I  was  in  the  Rich  again.  We  got  4U0  barrels,  the 
biggest  part  about  Margaree,  close  in. 

Q.  Did  you  get  any  outside  at  all  ? — A.  Some. 

Q.  What  proportion  did  you  get  inside  ? — A.  A  few  outside ;  it  might 
be  one-third. 

Q.  In  '72  ?— A.  I  was  in  the  Ida  Thurlow,  Gloucester.  We  got  300 
when  I  was  in  her,  around  the  island. 

Q.  Was  that  the  lap'  vear  ?— A.  That  was  my  last  year  fishing.  I 
was  not  long  in  her  in  ' <2. 

Q.  Now,  during  the  twelve  or  fourteen  years  you  were  fishing  you 
wore  in  American  vessels  mostly.  You  fished  down  about  Cape  Bre- 
ton, Prince  Edward  Island,  the  West  Shore,  Bay  Chaleurs  ?— A.  And 
Gasp^. 

Q.  How  far  off  were  you  accustomed  to  fish  from  shore  ?— A.  From 
one  to  two  miles  generally. 

Q.  Was  that  the  custom  of  the  rest  of  the  American  fleet  ?— A.  Some- 
times they  fished  three  miles  out. 

Q.  They  would  drift  out,  I  suppose?— A.  Yes;  they  would  generally 
come  in  and  heave  to  and  drift  out,  and  then  get  under  way  and  work 
in  again. 

Q.  Why  did' you  run  in  shore  after  you  got  out?— A.  Well,  the  mack- e^ 
erel  slacked  oft"  biting,  and  we  would  beat  inshore  again. 

Q.  Taking  the  whole  catch  during  the  years  you  engaged,  could  you 


970 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


state  on  oath  what  was  the  fair  proportion  taken  within  three  miles 
A.  I  would  say  in  the  vessels  I  have  been  in  three-fourths  were  tti 
from  one  to  three  miles  of  the  land. 

Q.  You  swear  that  in  reference  to  vessels  you  were  in  whose  na 
you  have  fjiven;  can  you  give  the  same  statement  with  respecr  to 
other  vessels  you  saw  tishing  alon^rside  ?    Have  you  any  doubt 
the  result  was  the  same ! — A.  No  doubt  at  all. 

Q.  All  the  (ish  taken  were  in  the  same  proportions  I — A.  Yos. 

Q.  If  you  were  not  allowed  to  come  in  at  all,  could  you  catch 
outside  ? — A.  I  don't  think  it.    They  would  take  some  outside,  of  con 
I  have  heard  of  some  being  caught  outside  on  Bradley  and  Orphan. 

Q.  It  is  a  very  rare  exception,  is  it  not  f — A.  O,  I  have  heard  of  st 
catch'js;  a  good  many.  But  I  have  never  been  in  vessels  that  did  oii 
any  to  si^eak  of. 

Q.  You  have  been  there? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  been  unsuccessful,  haven't  you? — A.  No;  I  have  m 
good  trips. 

Q.  Hut  on  the  Hanks? — A.  O,  I  have  never  caught  anything  to  sji 
of  on  the  banks. 

Q.  What  is  the  general  opinion  of  the  American  captains  and  fisl 
men  of  the  relative  value  of  the  inshore  and  olishore  tisheries? — A. 
best  fishing  is  inshore.    The  biggest  part  is  inshore. 

Q.  Is  that  their  opinion  f — A.  It  is  of  .juost  I  have  heard. 

Q.  Were  you  there  when  the  cutters  were  there  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  IIow  did  you   get  clear  of  them  f — A.  We  watched  them 
cleared  out. 

Q.  You  would  run  the  risk  and  go  inshore  after  mackerel  ?— A.  Yi 
the  cutter  would  be  coming  around  a  headland  for  instance,  and 
would  be  hove  to  inshore.  We  would  see  hin)  coming  and  run  off,  ji 
when  he  was  far  enough  away  we  would  go  in  again. 

Q.  You  didn't  go  outside  and  try  to  take  them  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Why  ? — A.  VVe  could  not  get  them. 

(J.  You  have  been  fishing  some  years  in  boats.  Is  that  a  very  s 
cessful  fishery  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Has  it  increased  very  much  of  late  years? — A.  Yes;  very  nnv 
indeed. 

Q.  And  has  the  fishing  this  year  been  good  on  the  island  ? — A.  Not 
very  gooti. 

Q.  Have  you  known  of  mfiny  American  vessels  l)eing  down  in 
])ay  ?— A.  Mo'ne  time  since,  a  pers«)u  talking  to  me  said  there  wart  a  c 
siderable  n?imber  in. 

(/.  Do  you  know  how  many  there  are  now  ?  Do  you  know  if  any  li; 
taken  good  fares? — A.  He  has  done  well — that  is,  the  person  1  sin 
to,  Ca,i)t4i;:i  Lee.    He  had  300  barrels,  seining,  when  I  saw  him. 

Q.  That  is  not  ba«l  for  this  time  ?— A.  That  was  the  third  time  he  s 
his  seine.    He  had  3(M)  barrels. 

Q,  Supposing  the  American  vessels  were  not  allowed  to  come  witl 
three  miles,  do  you  thii.k  they  could  catch  fish  profitably  ontsitle  ?- 
I  doii't  think  they  wo"  id  go  mii<;kereling  at  all  if  that  was  ttie  case. 

Q.  You  don't  thir.ti  they  would  catch  any  fish  ?— A.  They  would  ea 
some. 

Q.  How  mui.y  ?— A.  I  don't  think  they  would  come  in  the  bay  if 
alloved  to  go  ujside. 

Q.  Why  t — A.  It  would  not  ,»ay. 

Q,  During  the  twelveor  fourteen  years  of  your  e.vjKMience,  threefonr 
were  always  talieu  inside? — A.  Yes. 


)MMI8SI0N. 


come  ill  the  bav  if  not 


'.vjwriericPjthrce-fttiirtlis 


AWAHD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


971 


Q.  I  believe  all  tbe  boat-fishing  is  done  within?— A.  Yea. 

Q.  It  is  still  so  f—A.  Yes ;  the  biggest  part  is  done  within  one  mile. 


No.  GO. 


The  Conference  met. 


Friday,  September  7,  1877. 

Thomas  R.  Pattillo,  fish  merchant,  of  Liverpool,  X.  S.,  was  o 
I  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  an 


on 
aminexl 


called 
and  ex- 


-Answer.  Yes. 
A.  Yes.    At  present  I 

They  are  used  for  the 


By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  Are  you  eugat-^ed  in  the  fish  trade  ?- 

Q.  Do  you  own  fishing  vessels  and  boats!— 
am  more  directly  engaged  in  trap-flshing. 

Q.  How  are  your  traps  set  ?— A.  On  the  shore, 
catching  of  bait. 

Q.  What  kind  offish  do  you  chiefly  catch  ?— A.  Mackerel  and  Sduid. 

Q.  Sqitid  are  used  altogether  for  bait,  1  believe  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  Americans  come  in  and  get  bait  from  you  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  make  a  constant  practice  of  doing  so  !— A.  They  do. 

Q.  At  what  seasons  of  the  year  do  they  come  in  ?— A.  Right  along 
from  the  time  when  the  traps  are  set.  Last  year  they  first  came  in 
al)out  the  first  of  August,  and  this  year  early  in  July. 

Q.  Do  not  the  herring  strike  in  earlier  than  the  1st  of  July  and 
Augnst? — A.  Yes,  but  we  were  not  in  a  position  to  put  traps  down 
earlier. 

Q.  Why? — A.  We  did  not  have  our  traps  rea<ly. 

Q.  But  the  fish  were  there  previously  ? — A.  Yes. 

ii.  When  do  the  Americans  generally  come  in  for  bait  in  the 
spring  ¥ — A.  The  earliest  period  that  they  come  in  where  we  are  is  the 
Ist  of  July. 

Q.  Whai,  do  they  get  this  bait  for  ? — A.  For  cod  and  halibut  fishing. 

Q.  They  come  in  and  give  their  orders  for  the  bait? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  cjnie  in  in  such  numbers  that  their  orders  have  to  bo  en- 
tered in  succession  on  the  book  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  serve  them  Ja  their  turn? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Eow  long  hjive  they  to  lie  to,  in  order  to  get  bait  ? — A.  This  year 
about  a  week  has  elapsed  after  their  arrival,  before  we  could  till  their 
orders.  The  bait  has  to  be  fresh  from  the  trap,  and  we  supply  them  in 
their  turn. 

Q.  Is  this  the  practice,  as  far  as  you  are  aware,  along  the  coast?— A. 
I  think  that  it  is. 

Q.  When  bait  is  takeii  for  the  Americans  in  nets,  it  must  be  caught 
after  the  order  is  given  ? — A.  Yes. 

i}..  The  fish  for  bait  cannot  be  kept  on  hand  in  nets  ?— A.  No ;  they 
soon  spoil  in  them. 

Q.  The  orders  are  given  beforehand,  and  afterward,  in  order  to  fill 
the  orders,  you  catch  rhe  herring  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  quantities  of  herrings  hi  this  \\ay  procured  for  bait  by  the 
Americana  in  your  neighborhood  ?— A.  I  can  only  say  this  about  it :  If 
we  could  have  obtained  the  bait  this  year  in  sufficient  quantities,  wo 
estimate  that  we  could  have  sold  2,000  barrels.  (Jails  tbr  it  were  made 
to  that  extent. 

(^  These  orders  were  given  beforehand,  and  the  fish,  after  the  order* 


J&^^^ 


were  given, 


were  tal'.en  ? — A.  Yes. 


;172 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


<>.  There  is  no  suoh  thing  as  a  supply  of  herring  being  kept  by  mer- 
chahts  for  the  purpose  of  selling  them  to  the  Americans  when  they  come 
in  1—A.  O,  no ;  not  with  us.  I  do  not  know  how  it  may  be  in  other 
places.    As  far  as  I  am  aware,  however,  it  is  not  the  case  on  the  coast. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  come  in  and  fish  themselves  inside  of  two  and 
three  miles  of  the  shore  f— A.  JJot  that  I  am  aware  of.  They  have,  how- 
ever, been  catching  some  mackerel  from  »heir  vessels  this  season  in  the 
harbor. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  For  bait  ?— A.  Yes. 

£y  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  You  have  mackerel  on  your  shores! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  strike  in,  with  you,  about  the  1st  September  ? — A.  They 
have  been  caught  there  this  year  all  through  August. 

Q.  Are  there  plenty  of  mackerel  on  your  coast f — A.  Yes;  that  was 
the  case  when  I  left  Liverpool  the  day  before  yesterday. 

Q.  Did  you  then  see  the  mackerel  in  the  harbor  T — A.  I  suppose  I  saw 
enough  mackerel  in  one  body  to  have  supplied  our  county,  and  iiiadc 
us  all  rich.  Apparently  they  extended  in  the  water  for  half  a  milo  and 
they  were  so  thick  that  they  did  not  seem  at  all  to  mind  the  boats  (^oin;:; 
amongst  them.  This  was  the  case  when  I  left  there.  This  is  the  tirst 
big  school  which  wo  have  seen  in  that  neighborhood  for  some  little 
time. 

Q.  The  mackerel  are  as  numerous  with  you  as  they  possibly  can  be  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  cod,  hake,  and  halibnt  taken  on  your  shores? — A.  Yes;  also 
pollock  and  haddock  and  all  descriptions  of  fish. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  are  they  taken  T — A.  They  are  caught  by 
our  own  fishermen  as  near  as  a  quarter  of  a  mile  from  it,  and  often  there 
is  very  good  fishing  and  good  net  moorings  close  by  the  shore.  Very 
good  catches  are  made  there.  I  knew  one  man  who,  this  season,  within 
200  yards  of  the  shore,  took  between  500  and  COO  codfish  before  noon 
in  the  day. 

Q.  Are  halibut  taken  inshore? — A.  Not  in  any  quantities;  but  occa- 
sionally they  are  so  taken. 

Q.  But  the  iK)llock  is  an  inshore  fish  ! — A.  Yes;  they  are  taken  quite 
close  inshore. 

Q.  Where  do  you  send  your  cured  cod  fish  f— A.  To  the  West  Indies 
principally. 

Q.  And  what  do  you  do  with  the  salted  cod  ?— A.  We  send  some  to  the 
West  Indies  nnd  some  we  consume  ourselves. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  imply  that  there  is  no  traffic  either  in  dried 
or  pickled  cod  with  the  United  Statos  T— A.  Our  trade  with  the  United 
States  in  this  respect  has  been  very  trifling,  and  lately  it  has  ceased. 
Some  two  or  three  years  ago,  however,  some  small  shipments  of  largo 
cod  were  made  to  the  States. 

Q.  Was  this  a  paying  business,  or  did  it  pay  better  to  ship  them  to 
the  West  Indies  and*  England  ?— A.  We  thought  it  was  better  to  send 
them  to  the  West  Indies.  The  only  reason  why  they  were  then  sent  to 
the  States  was  that  it  was  late  in  the  season,  and  the  fish  in  question 
could  not  be  cured.  The  fish  used  in  the  States  do  not  require  to  be 
dried  as  much  as  ours,  in  order  to  complete  their  voyages ;  and  so  we 
culled  out  the  large  fish  and  sent  them  to  the  States. 

Q.  Do  you  send  much  fish  to  the  different  iwrts  in  the  Dominion  - 
A.  So ;  not  a  groat  deal. 


AWARD   OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


973 


y  possibly  can  be  ?-• 
res?— A.  Yes;  also 


»Ve  send  some  to  tlio 


1  the  Dominion  ?— 


Q.  Do  you  chiefly  catch  them  for  your  own  consumption  and  for  the 
West  Indian  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  many  boats  engaged  in  fishing  in  your  neighborhood  ?— A. 
Yes ;  I  think  that  about  SOU  are  so  engaged. 

Q.  Within  what  distance  along  the  shore  do  you  place  that  300?— 
A.  In  Liverpool  Harbor  there  are  al^oui  200,  and  all  of  them  are  owned 
within  a  distance  oC  about  seven  miles. 

Q.  On  either  side  of  the  harbor  ?— A.  Yes ;  on  the  shore. 

Q.  Are  these  boats  engaged  in  all  kinds  of  fishing  ?— A.  Yes ;  they 
fish  for  mackerel,  hake,  cod,  halibut,  and  pollock. 

Q.  Why  do  the  Americans  come  in  and  get  the  bait,  which  they  sell 
them  ? — A.  In  order  to  use  it  in  fishing.  They  ice  the  fresh  bait  and  go 
to  the  fishing-grounds  with  it.    They  ice  the  bait  for  cod  and  halibut. 

Q.  Do  you  catch  squid  for  them  in  the  way  you  have  mentioned  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  prefer  squid  over  other  bait,  I  suppose  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q    ''"iiUl  they  carry  on  the  deep  sea  cod-fishery  if  they  could  not  so 

•mm  bait  ? — A.  They  could  not  do  so  so  well  as  is  now  the  case. 

Q.  Gould  they  do  so  at  all  successfully? — A.  No. 

Q.  llow  often  do  they  come  in  for  bait  in  the  course  of  the  season  ? — 
A.  W<^  hjMl  one  •  essel  in,  I  think,  five  times,  and  another  three  times^ 
and  .1.  third  tw  nt\ 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  This  season? — A.  Yes — so  far. 

n  V  Mr.  Thomson  : 

Q.  1  s;:pi>ose  that  this  is  a  sample  of  the  general  run  ? — A.  Yes. 
Others  hav^o  come  in  there  for  bait,  and  been  unable  to  secure  it,  and 
consequently  they  have  had  to  proceed  farther  for  it. 

Q.  ton  were  not  able  to  fill  the  orders  which  were  presented  ? — A. 
Yes ;  bait  was  not  sufliciently  numerous  for  the  purpose. 

Q.  Where  did  they  go  ? — A.  To  the  eastward  along  the  coast.  Nine 
vessels  left  there  in  one  day  last  week,  having  been  unable  to  get  bait, 
though  they  had  laid  at  the  place  for  5  or  G  days.  I  think  that  there 
were  about  17  vessels,  our  own  and  American,  in.  We  baited  what  we 
could,  but  9  of  them  so  went  away. 

Q.  Were  these  9  all  American  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Out  of  the  17,  how  many  were  Ainei  ican  ". — A.  I  think  13. 

Q.  They  could  not  wait  for  their  turn  :' — A.  No.  Bait  had  slacked 
off,  owing  to  an  east  wind  and  rough  Wc.itiK'i.  A  fortnight  ago  to-day, 
we  baited  5  Aiierican  vessels. 

ii.  How  many  barrels  each  ? — A.  One  rook  20,  and  another  15  bar- 
rels; but  I  forget  what  the  other  two  bought. 

Q.  1  suppose  that  you  have  conversed  with  American  skippers  ? — A. 
Yes. 

ii.  Did  they  ever  tell  you  that  they  could  not  carry  on  the  fishery  ; 
they  could  not  secure  bait  in  this  manner  ?— A.  They  told  me  that  thf  j 
could  not  do  so  successfully,  lacking  this  privilege. 

Q.  I  believe  that  none  of  your  people  go  to  the  American  coast  to 
fish  ? — Is..  Not  in  vessels,  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  They  do  not  send  either  their  vessels  (»r  boats  to  fish  there  ? — A. 
They  do  not,  from  our  i-ort. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  any  ot  our  people  anj,  wlu're  going  there  to  fish  ? — 
A.  No.    1  am  not,  personally. 

Q.  Then  in  your  opinion  the  privilege  of  fishing  in  American  waters 
is  of  no  value  to  us  at  all  f— A.  No ;  I  should  thinl:  not. 


m 


974 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  take  it  that  the  difficulty  you  experience  in  supplying  the  Amer- 
icans with  bait  is  rather  due  to  the  fact  that  you  have  not  sufticiently 
numerous  facilities  for  catching  flsb,  and  the  short  supply  of  tisb  ?— A. 
Yes ;  the  supply  has  been  short  at  times.  The  winds  often  intert'ere 
with  the  oat«h. 

Q.  If  Jt  was  not  for  the  fish  being  temporarily  driven  off  by  bad 
weather,  would  the  supply  at  your  place  be  abundant  f — A.  Geuerally— 
yes. 

Q.  As  a  rule,  unless  the  weather  interferes  with  the  catch,  there  will 
be  fish  enough  caught ! — A.  Yes.  It  largely  depends  on  the  number  of 
applications  for  it.  Sometimes  vessels  come  in  and  have  to  wait  a  little, 
or  they  find  that  we  have  not  a  sutlicienf  «xuautity  of  bait,  and  proceed 
farther  on. 

Q.  How  tnany  establishments  and  traps  are  there  there  1 — A.  Tsvo. 

Q.  Suppose  that  there  were  half  a  dozen,  and  that  you  were  to  extend 
vonr  business,  there  are  fish  enough  in  the  sea  for  the  purpose  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  The  only  trouble  is,  that  there  are  not  people  enough  carrying  on 
the  business  to  prevent  cnitomers  having  to  wait  fur  their  turn  ?— A. 
Yes;  that  is  it. 

Q.  These  vessels  which  come  for  bait  are  all  bankers  [  suppose  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  During  how  many  months  do  they  come  to  your  place  for  bait?— 
A.  I  caa  only  speak  from  experience  during  last  year  in  this  regard ;  and 
the  las'i  day  we  hauled  our  traps,  November  18,  or  the  day  previous,  ves- 
sels were  there  for  bait. 

Q.  They  so  come  from  July  to  November  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  how  many  vessels  did  you  supply  during  that  time ! — A.  Last 
year  I  think  we  only  su|>plied  14,  and  they  were  all  American  vessels. 

Q.  How  many  times  did  you  supply  them  ? — A.  Some  of  them  wo  sup- 
plied three  times. 

Q.  How  many  supplies  of  bait  did  you  furnish  them  all  ? — A.  I  think 
19. 

Q.  You  furnished  li)  supplies  of  bait  last  year? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  supplies  were  furnished  by  the  other  concern  ! — A.  We 
had  only  one  trap  la«t  year.  It  was  not  generally  knowu  at  the  time 
that  we  could  supply  bait. 

Q.  And  since  you  have  a«lvertised  in  the  Gloucester  papers,  your  busi- 
ness has  increased  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  have  you  this  year  supplied  up  to  the  present 
timef — A.  Twenty-two;  and  we  had  forty-three  a))plications,  which  we 
could  not  fill.  They  have  been  so  anxious  to  obtain  bait,  that  they  have 
even  rua  one  another  in  the  price.  Some  vessels  only  require  a  small 
quantity — 7  or  8  barrels — compared  with  others. 

Q.  Why  is  that  the  case?— A.  They  get  part  of  their  bait  from  what 
they  call  the  oftal  of  cod  and  hake,  on  the  halibut  grounds.  Tlu'.v  use 
this  to  catch  halibut,  and  get  their  first  supply  from  the  main  shore. 

Q.  Do  they  not  so  catch  cod  ? — A.  No,  only  halibut,  except  ou  the 
<irand  Hanks,  but  they  do  aiot  do  so  on  our  ordinary  banks. 

Q.  To  what  banks  do  the  fishermen  whom  you  supply  with  bait  re- 
port?—A.  They  chiefly  go  to  the  Western  Banks,  to  Barniuereau.  aii4 
to  oar  own  off-shore  lianks.  The  halibut  is  a  deep  water  fish,  ami  it  is 
taken  in  HU  fathoms  of  water  and  upwards. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  of  auy  inshore  halibut  fishing  done  by  Americans, 
which  auiounts  to  anything  f — A.  Not  inside  of  90  fathouis  of  watn. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


975 


cers  [  suppose  ?— A. 


em  all  f— A.  I  think 


er  papers,  your  biisi- 


Q.  Do  you  umlerstand  that  the  halibut  fishery  is  substautially  every- 
where  a  deep-sea  fishery  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Occasioually  a  halibut  may  be  caught  inshore  as  a  boy  may  catch 
a  codfish  oft  the  rocks,  but  pursued  as  a  business,  halibut  are  caught  iu 
the  sea? — A.  Yes;  in  deep  water. 

Q.  How  deep  did  you  say  !— A.  The  fishery  is  most  successfully  prose- 
cuted in  about  90  fathoms  of  water,  and  late  iu  the  season  in  as  much 
as  150  fathoms. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  your  herring,  when  you  cannot  sell  them  to 
the  American  fishermen  ? — A.  We  cure  them. 

Q.  In  what  way!— A.  We  salt  them,  or  supply  them  to  our  own  peo- 
ple, when  they  want  them. 

Q.  Do  you  smoke  any  of  them  ?~A.  Yes ;  bat  very  few. 

Q.  What  becomes  of  your  salted  herring? — A.  We  send  thera  princi- 
pally to  the  West  Indies. 

Q.  Do  any  go  to  the  States? — A.  None  of  ours  go  there. 

Q.  Is  this  business  just  beginning?— A.  Yes;  we  have  pursued  it 
during  two  years. 

Q.  We  have  had  hard  times  during  the  past  two  years,  and  business 
is  now  starting  up  in  new  channels  ? — A.  Yes  ;  1  have  been  interested 
in  seine  fishing  for  20  years.  1  have  had  three  seines  for  mackerel  and 
herring.    They  were  shore  seines. 

Q.  What  have  you  done  with  the  herriug  which  were  caught  iu  the 
seines  ? — A.  I  have  salted  them. 

Q.  What  have  you  done  with  the  mackerel  so  caught  ? — A.  The  fat 
mackerel  were  chiefly  sold  in  Halifax,  and  the  poor  ones  in  the  West 
Indies. 

Q.  if  sold  in  Halifax,  I  suppose  they  were  bought  to  send  to  the  States? 
— A.  Icannot  say. 

Q.  Have  mackerel  been  plentiful  in  your  vicinity  during  the  past 
few  years  and  uj)  to  the  present  time  ? — A.  Last  year  for  about  a  fort- 
night they  were  very  plentiful.  Duriug  the  first  half  of  September, 
they  were  very  abundant. 

Q.  Were  Americans  fishing  there  then ? — A.  No;  not  for  mackerel. 

Q.  Are  Americans  fishing  for  mackerel  there  now  ? — A.  Not  as  a  busi 
ness.    They  were,  however,  fishing  some  for  mackerel  the  other  day 
for  bait. 

Q.  During  how  many  years  have  you  known  of  any  considerable 
American  mackerel  fishing  being  done  in  your  vicinity? — A.  I  have 
never  known  a  great  deal  to  be  done  thero,  no  more  than  running  out 
sometimes  when  the  fish  were  found  schooling  in  the  neighborhood,  and 
up  on  their  way  home,  which  was  generally  late  in  the  fall.  If  the  fish 
are  going  westward,  the  vessels  go  out  and  meet  them ;  but  as  to  what 
•  liiaiititv  is  so  taken,  I  have  no  idea. 

Q.  No  consideral)le  ijuantity  has  been  ever  taken  ? — A.  No.  As  a 
general  thing,  when  these  fish  are  moving  along  our  coast,  they  will  not 
bite. 

if.  Has  there  been  any  purse  seining  done  by  Americans  iu  your 
vicinity  ? — A.  Not  that  1  am  aware  of. 

Q.  VViien  these  vessels  were  fishing  for  mackerel  the  other  day,  they 
Were  taking  bait? — A.  Yes. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  K(  Hogg: 
Q.  What  (Icyour  people  do  with  the  hake  they  take  ?— A.  They  ship 
some  to  the  V.  est  Indies  ami  some  to  Halifax. 
(•i-  Cured  :— A.  Yes;  dried. 


m^'' 


976 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


By  Mr.  Thomson : 


Q.  Do  the  Americans  buy  a  good  deal  of  Ice  from  you !— A.  Yes ;  they 
have  purchased  a  great  deal  of  it  this  year. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  How  many  ice  liouses  are  there  in  your  neighborliood !— A.  There 
are  a  good  many,  but  they  are  small  ones.  I  can  tell  the  quantity  of 
ice  better  than  the  number  of  ice  houses.  This  last  year  about  300  toii^ 
of  ice  were  put  up  there  for  the  purpose  of  selling  it  to  the  Americiuis 
and  others.    The  Americans  buy  the  greatest  part  of  it. 

Q.  This  is  a  business  which  your  people  solicit  and  desire ! — A,  No. 
The  Americans,  I  think,  come  of  their  own  accord  for  it. 

Q.  Has  the  fact  of  it  being  so  obtainable  been  advertised  in  Ameri- 
can paper  f — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  It  is  a  business  got  up  to  make  money  out  of  the  Americans  ?— A. 
I  cannot  say  that.    I  suppose  that  they  want  to  make  it  protitable. 

By  Mr.  Thomson  : 

Q.  They  sell  it  to  anybody  ? — A.  Yes.  I  want  it  to  be  understood 
that  I  myself  have  no  interest  in  this  ice  business.  It  is  put  up  by  otlier 
parties,  and  when  fishermen  apply  for  bait,  of  course  I  tell  thein  where 
they  can  procure  ice.  Vessels  come  there  from  other  ports  and  niii  in 
for  ice.  Instances  have  occurre<l  of  vessels,  on  passing  up  with  fresh 
halibut,  finding  that  their  halibut  are  spoiling,  and  coming  in  there  to 
procure  ice. 

Q.  To  save  these  cargoes  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  if  they  had  not  so  been  able  to  obtain  ice,  their  halibut  woiiltl 
have  spoiled  J — A.  The  halibut  would  then  have  soured,  of  course. 

No.  CI. 

John  K.  Macuonald,  fisherman,  of  East  Point,  P.  E.  I.,  was  calhd 
on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn,  and  ex- 
amined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  What  is  your  age  ? — Answer.  Thirty  two. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  fishing  ? — A.  About  17  yeari!. 

Q.  Are  you  engaged  in  the?  fishing  business  now  ? — A.  Yes;  I  am  so 
doing  business  in  New  London. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  f — A.  I  am  master  of  a  8tag<». 

Q.  What  does  that  mean  ? — A.  I  just  look  out  for  the  boats  and  have 
charge  of  the  whole  thing. 

Q.  That  is,  a  merchant  has  a  stage,  and  a  number  of  boats  employed 
to  catch  fish,  and  you  are  his  hired  man  there  f — A.  Yes.  About  forty 
men  are  so  engaged,  and  I  look  after  these  men  and  the  store,  and  the 
fishing  an<i  the  curing  of  the  fish. 

Q.  IIow  many  boats  have  you  ! — A.  Six. 

ii.  How  many  men  are  there  iu  each  boat  ?— A.  In  some  there  are 
four,  and  in  others  five. 

Q.  Do  these  boats  fish  right  oil"  New  London  Harbor  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  bt)ats  altogether  are  there  in  New  London  Harbor  ?— 
A.  I  came  there  this  spring  a  strancer  to  the  place ;  but  I  am  told  tliat 
there  are  about  155  boats  in  the  place. 

Q.  Previous  to  going  there,  were  you  fishing  in  vessels  !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  these  boats  catch  their  fish  ?— A.  Right  oil"  the  harbor. 

Q.  How  far  out  ? — A.  One  mile  or  two  miles. 


AWARD   OP  THE    FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


977 


you  f — A.  Yes ;  thoy 


r  the  boats  aud  have 


,  III  some  there  are 


Q.  Are  all  the  fish  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  shore?— A.  None 
of  the  boats  f;o  oat  as  far  as  three  miles. 

Q.  Then  all  the  flsh  taken  by  them  are  caught  within  three  miles  of 
the  shore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  average  catch  of  one  of  these  boats  of  yours?— A.  I 
could  not  tell  you.  We  have  got  six  boats,  and  we  got  19,000  flsh  during 
one  day. 

Q.  Can  you,  in  barrels,  give  an  idea  as  to  the  average  catch  of  one  of 
these  boats  during  the  season  ?— A.  1  know  what  we  have  taken  this 
year  with  these  six  boats ;  we  have  shipped  412  barrels. 

Q.  Already?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  this  a  good  fishing  season  ?— A.  I  think  that  it  is  very  good 
Tbe  first  part  of  it  was  very  good,  but  lately  there  has  not  been  mucL 
done. 

Q.  Aud  you  have  caught  412  barrels  already  ? — A.  Yes.  We  shipped 
tbem  about  the  26th  of  last  August. 

Q.  Would  you  call  this  a  good  fair  season  ? — A.  Yes ;  this  is  a  good 
average  season. 

Q.  Are  many  American  vessels  there? — A.  Yes  ;  a  good  many. 

(^  How  many  American  vessels  are  there  in  the  gulf '?— A.  I  could 
not  tell  you.  I  have  seen  perhaps  a  dozen  of  a  day,  aud  perhaps  twenty 
during  that  time. 

Q.  Fishing  off  New  London  Harbor  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  i — A.  About  one  or  two  miles. 

Q.  Is  that  the  distance  from  the  shore  within  which  they  usually 
lish  ?— A.  1  think  so. 

Q.  What  has  your  experience  been  in  this  respect? — A.  I  always 
found  the  best  fishing  within  two  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Have  you  been  a  master  of  a  vessel? — A.  Yes;  during  e'ght 
years. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  in  American  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  how  many  years? — A.  I  think  six  or  seven. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  names  of  these  vessels  ? — A.  The  first  one  was 
named  the  Fashion. 

Q.  When  did  you  go  fishing  in  her  ? — A.  Thirteen  years  ago,  I  think. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  captain's  name? — A.  It  was  Stapleton. 

Q.  Edward  Stapleton  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  knew  him  ? — A.  Y^es. 

Q.  You  were  one  of  the  hands  on  board  of  the  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  you  go  fishing  in  her  ? — A.  I  forget  the  time  when  we 
left  Gloucester,  but  I  think  it  was  in  July. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  good  catch  that  year  ?— A.  Y'es ;  we  did  very  well. 
We  made  three  trips. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  catch  ? — A.  I  thiuk  we  took  about  250 
barrels  the  first  trip. 

Q.  Did  you  get  full  fares  each  trip  ?-A.  Yes,  pretty  nearly,  except 
tbe  last  time. 

Q.  Her  full  fare  was  about  2o0  barrels?- A.  Yes;  she  was  a  small 
vessel. 

Q.  Was  Stapletou  then  an  experienced  man  ?— A.  I  do  not  thiuk  that 

he  was. 

Q.  Why  ?— A.  Because  I  had  to  take  charge  of  her  for  the  first  trip, 
although  1  was  not  master.    I  had  to  briug  tlie  vessel  down  to  the  bay. 

Q.  Did  he  understand  fishing  in  the  bay  when  he  came  down  ?— A. 
No,  I  do  not  think  that  he  did. 
62  F 


978 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Had  he  been  in  the  bay  previously  f— A.  1  do  Dot  think,  judging 
from  his  manner  at  the  time,  that  he  knew  anything  about  the  bay. 

Q.  By  what  route  did  you  come  ? — A.  We  came  through  the  Stiait  of 
Canso  and  around  Kast  I'oint,  and  up  to  the  Bay  of  Chalenrs.  I  ^ee 
that  be  has  made  a  statement  about  the  4th  of  July  which  is  very  iu- 
correct. 

Q.  You  have  seen  that  statement  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  your  fish  at  the  time? — A.  We  took  the  Jirst 
trip  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  ofif  Miscou. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  close  to  or  far  off  from  the  land  f — A.  We  Hshed  any- 
where along  shore,  within  2  or  3  miles  of  it. 

Q.  In  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  off  Miscou  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  obtain  the  second  trip  f— A.  Off  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island,  from  North  Gape  down  to  East  Point. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  catch  the  third  trip  ?— A.  Off  Port  Hood  and 
Margaree. 

Q.  Stapleton  gave  us  to  understand  that  these  fish  were  taken  some- 
thing like  8,  10,  12,  and  14  miles  off  the  shore,  just  within  sight  ot 
landf    Is  that  statement  correct? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  are  perfectly  certain  on  that  point?— A.  I'^es,  I  am  very  cer- 
tain about  it:  fur  I  had  charge  of  the  vessel,  L  may  say,  during  tbat 
whole  summer. 

Q.  And  you  know  the  special  locality  in  which  each  trip  was  made  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  these  fish  were  taken  within  2  and  .3  miles  ot  the 
shore  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  around  the  island,  and  off  Cape  Breton  !— 
A.  Y^es.  Bis  statement  on  these  points  is  incorrect. 

Q.  Were  you  with  Stapleton  more  than  one  year? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  next  American  vessel  in  which  you 
fished  ? — A.  The  Winged  Arrow. 

Q.  Where  was  she  from  ? — A.  Gloucester. 

Q.  What  year  was  that? — A.  I  do  not  precisely  recollect,  but  it  was 
the  second  year  after  I  was  with  Stapleton. 

Q.  That  would  be  12  years  ago  ?— A.  It  was  about  11  years  r.^G. 

Q.  Did  you  come  down  to  the  bay  in  the  spring  or  summer  i—A.  I 
think  that  we  left  Gloucester  on  the  4th  of  July. 

Q.  That  is  the  time  when  fishing- vessels  generally  leave  there  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  that  season  ?— A.  We  did  very  well.  We  made 
two  trips,  I  think. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  diu  you  catch  ?— A.  I  think  about  280  or  '500 
barrels,  on  the  first  trip. 

Q.  And  how  many  the  second  trip?— A.  I  think  about  the  same  mini- 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  them  ?— A.  We  brought  one  trip  into  the 
Btrait  of  Canso  and  shipped  it. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  them  ?— A.  All  along  Prince  Edward  Island ; 
we  also  took  some  at  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Did  you  get  many  there  f— A.  I  would  think  that  we  caught  about 
half  of  the  trip  over  there  and  the  other  half  off"  the  island  and  Margaree. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  next  American  vessel  iu  which  you 
were  1—A.  The  Sunnyside,  from  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her  that  season?— A.  I  tuiuic 
three.    She  was  a  small  vessel  of  about  45  or  48  tons. 

Q,  What  did  you  get  during  your  three  trips?— A.  We  caught  about 
250  each  trip. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


979 


ijich  trip  was  made  ?— 


y  recollect,  bnt  it  was 


Q.  You  got  full  fares  !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where !— A.  We  took  one  trip  off  Sydney  and  the  other  two  trips 
oil  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Margaree. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore?— A.  I  guess  about  2  miles.  However  we 
may  have  caught  a  few  perhaps  when  crossing  from  the  Magdalen  Isl- 
ands to  North  Cape  and  Bradley. 

Q.  About  how  many  did  you  catch  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit?— 
A.  We  took  most  of  the  tish  inside  of  three  miles  from  the  shore.  I 
may  say  that  we  got  them  all  inside  of  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  would  you  say  that  you  caught  outside  of  that 
limit? — A.  Perhaps  about  20  or  30  barrels,  on  Bradley  and  Orphan 
Banks.  When  making  the  passage,  we  might  perhaps  heave  to,  and  if 
the  day  was  favorable  we  would  catch  a  few  and  proceed. 

Q.  Was  it  customary  for  American  vessels  to  fish  in  deep  water,  or 
did  they  make  it  a  point  to  fish  close  in  to  the  shore  ?— A.  I  think  that  they 
made  a  practice  of  fishing  inshore. 

Q.  What  was  your  experience  ?— A.  My  experience  has  been  that 
they  made  a  practice  of  fishing  inshore.  This  was  the  case  with  all  the 
vessels  in  which  I  ever  was. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  next  vessel  in  which  you  were  ? — A.  The 
Corsair,  an  island  vessel. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  in  lier  i — A.  I  think  about  200  and  some 
odd  barrels. 

Q.  Was  she  a  small  vessel  ? — A.  Yes.    She  was  of  about  30  or  38  tons 

(i.  She  was  very  small  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  yon  catch  them  ? — A.  All  inshore,  along  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island  and  some  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Is  it  customary  to  fish  in  the  center  or  along  the  shore  of  the  Bay 
of  Chaleurs  ? — A.  We  fish  there  just  along  the  shore.  I  hardly  ever 
saw  any  one  fish  in  the  middle  of  this  bay. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  next  ? — A.  I  went  fishing  in  the  Octavia. 

Q.  An  island  vessel  ? — A.  Yes.  She  belonged  to  a  Mr.  Owens,  of 
Charlottetown. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her? — A.  Three. 

il.  Did  you  do  pretty  well  ?— A.  Yes ;  reasonably  well.  I  think  that 
we  got  290  barrels  the  first  trip  and  something  like  760  barrels  during 
the  three  trips. 

Q.  Did  you  confine  your  fishing  to  the  island  ?— A.  No.  We  made 
the  first  trip  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  right  close  inshore;  and  we  caught 
the  next  two  along  the  shores  of  the  island  and  off  Cape  Breton  and 
Xova  Scotia. 

Q.  All  close  inshore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  you  next  go?  In  the  Lettie  ?— A.  Yes;  and  I 
went  shore  fishing  at  Rustico  one  summer.  I  was  in  charge  of  a  stage 
for  Mr.  Hall. 

Q.  And  after  you  had  had  charge  of  this  stage,  what  did  you  do  ?— 
A.  1  went  fishing  in  the  Lettie. 

Q.  How  many  seasons  did  you  stay  in  her  *— A.  Two. 

Q.  Did  you  make  good  catches  in  her  ?— A.  Yes ;  we  did  very  well. 

(.}.  How  many  did  you  catch  ?— A.  I  think  about  ioO  and  480  bar- 


rels. 
Q. 

Q. 


Q. 


Each  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Where  did  you  catch  them  ?— A.  All  inshore. 

In  what  vessel  were  you  afterwards  ?— A.  The  George  S.  Fogg. 

An  island  vessel  ?— A.  Yes ;  she  was  so  then. 


980 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Was  she  a  small  or  large  vessel  f— A.  She  was  a  large  vessel— one 
of  about  103  tons. 

Q.  How  iiinny  trips  did  you  make  in  her!— A.  Two. 

Q.  How  many  fish  did  yon  catch?— A.  I  tliink  about  700  ami  miw 
odd  barrels. 

Q.  Where  were  they  caught  T— A.  All  inshore. 

Q.  In  what  part  of  the  Gult  f— A.  Along  Prince  Kdward  Island.  We 
got  very  few  outside  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Were  you  in  any  other  vessel !  Were  you  in  the  Little  liell  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  An  inland  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Of  how  many  tons  was  she  f — A.  I  think  about  38 ;  she  was  a  small 
vessel. 

Q.  And  what  did  you  catch  in  her  ? — A.  We  did  not  do  much  in  litr. 
We  got  120  or  UO  barrels. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  do  much  ?— A.  It  was  a  poor  season,  and  the 
mackerel  did  not  bite. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  take  the  fish  which  you  caught  ?— A.  We  made 
the  best  of  the  catch  in  Antigonish  Bay,  off  Cape  George. 

Q.  How  far  off  ? — A.  About  a  mile  off  shore. 

Q.  Having  been  for  a  good  many  years  in  the  bay  in  American  vessels, 
can  you  give  the  Commission  an  idea  as  to  the  number  of  Anu'ricaii 
vessels  which  came  down  to  fish  there  year  after  year,  off  and  ont— A, 
It  is  pretty  hard  to  tell  that.  1  suppose  some  years  there  would  bo  101) 
sail,  or  2(M),  or  300  sail.  I  suppose  that  I  have  seen  as  many  as  301)  ves- 
sels at  one  time  gathered  together  in  one  place  in  the  bay. 

Q.  And  you  cannot  tell  how  many  vessels  altogether  have  come  down 
to  the  bay  f — A.  No ;  but  I  have  seen  as  many  as  300  vessels  in  one  place 
at  one  time. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  experience,  when  you  were  fishing  on  British 
and  American  vessels,  as  to  the  distance  that  the  fleet  caught  their  lish 
off  shore? — A.  I  may  say  that  all  the  vessels  I  ever  saw  fishing  caufjht 
their  fish  inside  of  three  miles  of  the  shore ;  very  few  were  taken  outside 
of  that  limit. 

Q.  But  some  were  taken  outside  ? — A.  Of  course ;  they  might  get 
some  fish  on  Bradley  and  Orphan  Banks,  and  while  making  the  passage 
between  East  Point  and  the  Magdalen  Islands  vessels  may  heave  to 
and  catch  a  few  barrels. 

Q.  Some  catches  are  made  there,  I  believe  ?— A.  Yes ;  but  only  while 
making  the  passage. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  whole  catch  was  taken  inshore,  in  your 
experience. — A.  I  could  not  tell  you  that,  but  almost  all  the  fish  1  ever 
caught  were  taken  inshore,  inside  of  three  miles  oft'  the  coast. 

Q.  Do  the  American  fishermen,  when  they  come  to  fish,  injure  the 
boa^fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  ?— A.  This  is  due  to  the  fact  of  their  having  so  much  more 
bait  than  the  boats,  and  by  throwing  it  out ;  they  glut  the  appetites  ot 
the  mackerel. 

Q.  Do  the  boat  fishermen  like  to  sev«5  the  vessels  come  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  They  think  that  the  coming  of  these  vessels  injures  their  pros- 
pects?—A.  Yes;  last  week  the  vessels  did  a  great  deal  of  injury  to  our 
boats  off  New  London. 

Q.  How  ?—  A..  By  coming  in  and  lieaving  out  a  great  quantity  of  bait  • 
Our  boats  did  not  have  as  much,  and  the  vessel  fishermen  so  gUitted 
the  mackerel  that  they  would  not  bite. 

Q.  Si)eakiug  as  a  practical  fisherman,  if  you  were  not  allowed  to  come 


AWARD    OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


981 


Yes;  but  only  while 


es ; 
were 


uot  allowed  to  come 


within  three  inilea  of  the  shore  in  the  bay  of  St.  Lawrence  to  flsh,  would 
yon  invest  money  in  the  business?— A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  tlie  Americans  would  come  at  all  on  our  waters 
to  Hsh  if  they  were  not  allowed  to  flah  within  three  miles  of  the  shore?— 
A.  I  do  not  think  that  they  would. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  conversed  with  them  on  tiie  subject  ?— A.  Y( 
and  I  have  also  been  fishing  with  them  within  the  limit  wlien  we  W( 
not  allowed  to  fish  inside  of  three  miles  from  the  shore. 

IJ.  Were  cutlers  in  the  bay  at  the  time  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  the  American  vessels  do  then  ?— A.  When  they  saw  the 
cutters  I  suppose  they  would  leave. 

Q.  But  the  presence  of  the  cutters  did  not  prevent  them  from  slip- 
])'mg  inside  of  the  limits  to  fish  ? — A.  No ;  when  a  guu  is  fired,  it 
frightens  the  mackerel,  and  makes  them  descend,  and  after  such  a  thing 
happens  they  cannot  be  caught.  I  know  that  this  is  a  fact,  because  I 
was  witness  of  it  and  from  having  fired  guns  where  they  were. 

Q.  Will  thunder  have  the  same  effect  on  these  fish  f— A.  Yes  ;  just 
the  same  effect. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  said  that  the  statement  made  by  Captain  Stapleton,  of  the 
Fashion,  respecting  the  4th  of  July,  was  uot  true  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  it 
was  not  true. 

(i.  What  statement  did  he  make  respecting  the  4th  o£  July? — A. 
Whatever  statement  he  made  it  was  not  true,  for  we  were  up  in  the  Bay 
of  Chaleurs  on  that  4th  of  July ;  on  that  very  day. 

i).  Is  that  the  statement  he  made  respecting  it? — A.  It  is  in  that 
statement.    I  do  not  recollect  it  now,  but  I  saw  it  last  night. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  just  now  when  you  said  that  it  was  not  true  ? — 
A.  Of  course,  1  do  not  remember  it  very  well,  but  I  know  that  the  state- 
ment which  he  made  was  not  true. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  what  statement  he  made  ? — A.  Because  I  was 
with  him. 

Q.  When  he  testified  here  as  a  witness  ?— A.  I  saw  the  statement  last 
night. 

Q.  Where  ? — A.  I  had  the  statement  with  me,  and  I  read  it. 

Q.  Was  it  in  print? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  you  tell  us  what  it  was  that  he  said  ?— A.  1  forget  what  he 
said,  but  I  know  where  he  was,  for  1  was  with  him  that  very  day. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  you  were  on  the  4th  of  July  that  year? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  When>  did  he  say  that  he  was?— A.  I  forget,  but  I  know  where 
we  were.    We  were  that  day  off  Paspebiac. 

Q.  Did  he  say  at  all  where  he  was  on  the  4th  of  July  that  year  iu  the 
Fashion? — A.  Yes;  I  saw  it  in  the  statement  he  made,  and  it  is  very 
untrue.  There  is  hardly  one  word  in  his  statement  which  is  true,  for  1 
have  been  with  him,  and  I  ought  to  know. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  in  his  statement  relating  to  the  Fashion,  except 
a  very  few  words  in  the  early  part  of  it?— A.  There  is  hardly  one  word 
of  truth  in  it. 

Q.  In  the  whole  deposition  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  How  long  a  period  of  time  does  it  cover  ?— A.  It  relates  to  the 
year  when  he  was  in  the  Fashion. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  whole  deposition  relates  to  the  year  when 
he  was  in  the  Fashion  ?— A.  Yes ;  the  first  of  it  does. 

Q.  How  much  of  it  does  so  ?    A.  Here  is  his  first  statement.    He 


" 


^, 


'i^.y^o. 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


/> 


v.-% 


^0 


1.0 


I.I 


IA^12.8 

I 


2.2 


<Uui- 

18 


1.25   |||.4      1.6 

^ 

6"     

► 

^  > 


*V-^ 


'/ 


Photographic 

Sdences 

Corporation 


23  WIST  MAIN  STRUT 

WnSTIR,N.Y.  M5M 

(716)872-4503 


^ 


' 


^f 


^ 


'* 


982 


4WARD  OF  THE   FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


stated  that  we  cotnmenoed  flnhiof;  off  North  Gape,  bat  we  never  tried 
there  at  all. 
Mr.  DANA.  The  portion  of  the  deposition  in  question  is  as  follows : 

Q.  And  thirteen  yean  .m  70U  oommanded  »  Teeael  which  wm  eopifed  in  mackerel  fisli- 
ing' t— A.  Yes,  iibe  wa*  called  the  Fashion. 

Q.  She  was  from  Gloncestar  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  her  tonnage  t— A.  I  think  it  was  somewhere  about  46  tons.  She  was  a  HnmU 
vessel. 

Q.  Who  owned  her  t— A.  George  J.  Marsh  and  Frank  Holmes. 

Q.  During  how  manv  years  were  ron  in  herf— A.  I  wa  in  her  one  season. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  die  you  next  ship  f->A.  The  Laura  Mangan. 

Q.  Was  she  also  from  Oloncester  T— A.  Yes.  George  Marsh  owned  her. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  were  you  mackerel  fishing  T— A.  I  have  been  for  ten  years  master 
of  a  Teasel. 

Q.  In  what  year  did  you  make  your  laet  mackerel  trip  T— A.  In  187:). 

Q.  The  year  of  the  great  gale  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  wnsn  you  fished  for  mackerel  ?— A.  In  the  Bay  of  St.  Lawrence, 
around  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan. 

Q.  Generally  stale  what  courae  you  were  expected  to  pursue  when  yon  left  Gluuce^ter  on 
a  trip  to  catch  mackerel  T— A.  We  used  generally  to  run  down  the  Nora  Scotia  shore  and  go 
throuffh  the  Straits  of  Canso.  We  stopped,  however,  at  this  strait  to  get  wood  and  water, 
and  then  proceeded  up  to  North  Cape  in  sight  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  off  Bonaveti- 
tare. 

<j.  Where  did  yon  begin  to  fish  T— A.  We  generally  used  to  try  broad  off  North  Cape— 
nearly  northeast  off  North  Cape  on  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Off  which  part  of  the  island  f — A  Off  the  northwest  part 

Q.  Where  is  Bonaventure  ^— A.  It  is  over  off  the  G«sp6  coast.     It  is  just  outside  of  G»ipi>. 

<^.  And  how  far  from  the  land  did  you  begin  to  fish  off  the  North  Capef — A.  The  land  would 
be  just  in  sight 

Q.  And  how  far  off  Bonaventure  did  you  fish?— A.  We  used  to  run  so  as  to  see  the  hills. 

Q.  Is  there  a  bank  in  this  quarter  f— A.  Yes,  Bonaventure  Bank. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  land  is  it  sitaated  f— A.  I  ahould  think  that  it  is  twenty  miles  ofT 
■bore,  or  about  tliat 

Q.  Where  did  yon  go  from  Bank  Bonaventure  t — A.  Well,  we  went  down  off  the  west 
shore,  off  what  we  calf  the  Piceon  Hills ;  we  would  be  about  12  or  15  miles  off  shore. 

Q    Where  are  the  Pigeon  Hills  t— A.  On  the  Canadian  shore  at  that  point. 

Q.  How  far  would  you  ha  fttim  the  shore  t — A.  I  should  think  about  15  miles. 

9>  Would  yon  lie  oS  Shippegan  f — A.  We  would  be  broad  off  Shippegan. 

i%.  And  how  far  from  the  shore?— A.  From  15  to  Ifiar  17  miles. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  nextt — A.  About  the  1st  of  July  we  generallv  struck  up  along  the 
coast  and  across  to  Blagdalen  IsUinds.  We  generally  calculated  on  fishing  there  on  tlie  4tb 
of  July. 

Q.  Did  yon  understand  he  stated  that  he  was  in  the  Fashion  tbat 
year  off  the  Magdalen  Islands  f — A.  We  were  then  in  the  Bay  of  Cba- 
leurs. 

Q.  Did  you  understand  he  swore  he  was  in  the  Fashion  at  the  Mag- 
dalen Islands  on  the  4th  of  July  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  ^ho  told  yon  so  f — A.  It  is  in  this  statement. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  he  refers  to  the  Fashion  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  read  all  the  statement  of  Mr.  Stapleton  yourself  T— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Of  how  many  pages  did  it  consist  T— A.  I  could  not  tell  you. 

Q.  Did  it  consist  of  more  than  one  f — A.  T  cannot  tell  you  whether  I 
read  one  page. 

Q.  Did  you  read  one  whole  page  of  it  f — A.  I  do  not  know  as  I  did. 

Q.  Did  yon  read  two  pages  of  it  f— A.  I  could  not  tell  you  whether  I 
read  one  or  two  pages  of  it. 

Mr.  Dana.  There  are  ten  pages  in  this  deposition,  and  I  read  what  be 
says  about  the  4th  of  July,  but  there  is  nothing  in  it  about  the  Fashion, 
except  in  his  first  few  answers.  He  was  then  asked  about  his  ten  years' 
experience. 

Mr.  Dayibs.  Do  yon  state  that  to  the  Gommission  as  a  fact  f 

Mr.  Dana.  I  speak  of  what  is  here. 


IWABD   OF  THE   FI8EEKY  COMMI88ION. 


98S 


re  never  tried 


I.   8h«  was  a  HnmU 


or  ten  yean  master 


f  of  St.  Lawrence, 


off  North  Cape— 


n  at  the  Mag 


Mr.  Dayiis.  I  think  that  his  general  statement  inclndes  the  jear  when 
he  was  in  the  Fashion. 

Mr.  Dana.  That  is  matter  of  argument. 

Witness.  I  can  give  yon  a  better  statement  about  the  year  when  I 
wa8  in  the  Fashion.    I  can  jnst  tell  you  all  about  it. 

Mr.  Dana.  The  deposition  in  this  respect  is  as  follows : 

Q.  And  thirteen  years  ago  von  commanded  a  resell  which  wae  angaged  in  mackerel-fidi- 
infr  '—A.  Yes.     She  was  called  the  Fashion. 

Q.  She  was  from  Gloucester  t — A.  Yes. 

(I.  What  was  her  tonnage  t— A.  I  think  it  was  somewhera  aboat  46  tons.  She  waa  a 
jm  11  vessel. 

({.  Who  owned  her  T— A.  George  J.  Marsh  and  Frank  Holmes. 

Q.  Daring  how  nianr  years  were  vou  in  her  T — A.  I  was  in  her  one  season. 

q.  In  what  Tessel  dia  yon  next  ship  t— A.  The  Laura  Manna. 

Q.  Waa  she  also  from  Gloucester  t — A.  Yes.    Oaorge  Marsh  owned  her. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  wer«  yon  mackereUfishing  T— A.  I  have  baan  for  ten  years  maa- 
er  of  a  vessel. 

Q.  In  what  year  did  you  make  your  last  mackerel  trip  T — A.  In  1873. 

^.  The  year  of  the  Rre*t  sale  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  vou  flsh  when  you  fished  for  mackerel  T—A.  In  the  Bay  of  Saint  Lawrenca, 
around  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan. 

Q.  Generally  state  what  course  you  were  expected  to  pursue  when  you  left  Qloncestar  on 
s  trip  to  catch  mackerel  f — A.  We  used  generally  to  run  down  the  Nova  Scotia  shore  and 
go  tnrough  the  Straits  of  Canso.  We  stopped,  however,  at  this  strait  to  get  wood  and 
water,  and  then  proceeded  up  to  North  Cap*  in  sight  oif  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  off 
Bimaventure. 

Q.  Where  did  you  beein  to  BshT— A.  We  generallv  used  to  try  broad  off  North  Cape—' 
nearly  northeast  off  North  Cape  on  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Off  which  part  of  the  island  T— A.  Off  the  northwest  part. 

Q.  Where  is  Bonaventure  T— A.  It  is  over  off  the  Gasp^  coast.  It  is  just  outside  of 
Gagp6. 

Q.  And  how  far  from  the  land  did  you  begin  to  fish  off  the  North  Cape  f— A.  The  land 
would  be  just  in  sight. 

Q.  And  how  far  off  Bonaventure  did  you  fish  T— A.  We  used  to  run  so  as  to  see  the 
lulls. 

Q.  h  there  a  bank  in  this  quarter  t — A.  Yes ; 

Q.  How  far  from  the  land  is  it  situated  T— A. 
ihore,  or  about  that. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  from  Bank  Bonaventure  T — A.  Well,  we  went  down  off  the  west 
shore,  off  what  we  called  the  Pigeon  Fills  :  we  would  be  about  18  or  15  miles  off  shores 

Q.  Where  an  the  Pi^^eon  Hills  T— A.  On  the  Canadian  shore  at  that  point. 

(^.  How  far  would  yon  be  from  the  shore  7--A.  I  should  think  about  15  miles. 

Q.  Would  yon  lie  off  Shippegan  t— A.  We  would  be  broad  off  Shippegan. 

Q.  And  bow  far  from  the  shore  T— A.  From  16  to  16  or  17  niles. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  nextT — A.  About  the  1st  of  July  wa  generallv  struck  op  along  tba 
coast  and  across  to  Magdalen  Islands.  Wo  generally  oafouUUad  on  fishing  there  on  the  4th 
of  July. 

Q.  What  did  you  next  do  T— A.  We  always  finished  up  the  season  at  the  Magdalen 
Islands ;  and  along  late  m  the  (w\{  we  would  go  to  Margaree  and  Cheticamp.  We  would 
probably  stay  there  for  a  week  or  ton  days. 

i4.  During  hnw  many  years  did  you  successfully  follow  the  mackerel  fishery  T — ^A.  I  waa 
master  of  a  vessel  during  ten  seasons. 

Q.  And  during  these  10  seasons,  how  far  from  the  shore  did  yon  take  the  greater  part  of 
your  fiahf— A.  We  got  the  moet  of  them  onshore— 10, 12,  15,  or  16  miles  offshore. 

I  think  I  am  pssrfectly  correct  in  saying  that  this  is  a  general  stata 
ment,  and  I  don't  thinic  that  my  learned  brother  will  deny  it.  It  does 
uot  8i)ecify  the  Fashion. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  what  Mr.  Stapleton  did  after  he  left  the  Fashion 
dnriuf;  the  ten  years  that  he  was  master  of  the  vessel  f — A.  Ko. 

Q.  Yon  do  not  pretend  to  contradict  that  t — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  yon  yourself  read  any  of  this  printed  statement  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  any  statement  made  to  yon  as  to  what  he  had  statad  T— A 
No ;  I  saw  what  he  stated. 

Q.  And  yon  think  that  you  did  not  read  a  page  of  his  statement  f— 
A.  Yes. 


Bonaventure  Bank. 
I  should  think  that  it 


is  twenty  miles  off- 


984 


▲WARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


was  16  or  17. 
you  were  f— A. 


Q.  And  when  yon  tiay  he  did  not  speak  the  troth  about  the  4th  of 
July,  yon  meant  to  say  that  the  Fashion  was  not  oS  the  Maj^dalen 
Island  on  the  4th  of  July  f — A.  No ;  she  was  not.  1  know  as  well  as  1 
know  that  I  am  sitting  here  that  she  was  not. 

Q.  How  old  were  yon  when  yon  were  on  board  of  the  Fashion  f— A. 
I  suppose  that  I  was  about  17. 

Q.  On  what  fishing  voyages  had  yon  previously  been  f— A.  I  was  on 
a  vessel  owned  in  Boston,  and  on  an  island  vessel ;  I  know  that  this 
was  18  years  ago  this  summer.  One  vessel  was  called  the  Corsair. 
This  was  the  first  vessel  in  which  I  ever  was. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  in  her  f — A.  I  went  in  her  some  time  in  July, 
and  I  remained  in  her  until  September. 

Q.  You  were  in  her  for  about  two  months  f — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  t — A.  As  a  fisherman. 

Q.  And  yon  were  then  about  15  years  of  age  T — A.  I 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  next  vessel  in  which 
The  Idaho,  an  island  vesssel. 

Q.  Where  was  she  owned  T — A.  In  Gharlottetown. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  in  her  t — A.  About  three  months,  I  thiuk. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  f — A.  As  a  fisherman.  I  went  up  nor'ard  iti  her 
seining. 

Q.  Where  did  j^ou  go  in  the  Boston  vessel  f — A.  In  the  Bay  of  Cha- 
leurs,  and  all  around  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Did  you  return  to  Boston  in  her  t — A.  No ;  I  was  discharged  on 
the  island. 

Q.  And  then  you  went  mackerel-fishing  for  two  or  three  months  ia 
the  Idaho  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  leave  her  in  Charlottetown  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  ship  on  the  Boston  vessel  t — A.  At  Bustico. 

Q.  Then  you  had  about  two  months' experience  on  the  Boston  vessel, 
and  two  or  three  roonthh' ex|)erience  on  an  island  schooner;  now,  do 
yuu  say  that  under  these  circumstances  you  took  charge  of  the  Fash- 
ion f — A.  No ;  I  had  no  charge  of  the  Fashion,  but  I  had  to  take  charge 
of  her. 

Q.  Did  you  take  her  out  of  the  captain's  hands  f — A.  Yes ;  I  had 
to  so. 

Q.  Did  you  do  this  at  his  request  t — A.  We  had  to  look  out  for  our- 
selves and  do  the  best  we  could. 

Q.  Did  the  crew  ask  you  to  take  charge  of  her  f — A.  No ;  the  captain 
went  to  bed  and  we  had  to  take  charge  of  her. 

Q.  Were  there  other  people  on  board  of  her  from  the  provinces  ?— A. 
There  were  other  people  on  board  who  belonged  to  Qloacester. 

Q.  How  many  of  the  crew  belonged  to  the  provinces? — A.  I  cannot 
exactly  tell. 

Q.  How  many  were  on  board  altogether  t— A.  I  think  14;  14  or  15. 
I  do  not  think  that  there  were  any  on  board  from  the  island,  myself  ex- 
cepted ;  but  there  might  have  been  one  or  two. 

Q.  Were  you  the  oldest  man  on  board  t — A.  No. 

Q.  Were  you  the  youngest  f— A.  I  might  have  been. 

Q  Were  there  any  people  fh)m  British  America  on  hoard  besides 
yourself  f — A.  There  were  some  Nova  Scotia  people,  I  think. 

Q.  How  many  T— A.  I  cannot  say. 

Q.  Were  they  fishing  before  that  t— A.  Yes ;  I  think  so. 

Q.  Were  there  on  board  men  from  the  States  and  other  countries  f— 
A.  I  could  not  tell  you  where  they  were  from. 

Q.  And  they  did  not  ask  you  to  take  charge  of  the  vessel  t— A.  No. 


AWABD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


985 


Fashion  f— A. 


Q.  And  the  captain  did  not  do  so  T— A.  No ;  I  Itnow  that  the  first  day 
we  went  oat  he  went  to  be<1. 

Q.  Did  he  lie  abed  the  whole  trip  T— A.  Well,  he  fished  sometimes. 

Q.  When  did  he  turn  oat  f — A.  Perhaps  he  did  so  that  day  or  that 
night;  I  never  kept  any  coaiit  in  this  respect. 

Q.  But  yoa  were  on  board  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  captain  may  have  tamed  out  during  the  night  f — A.  Yes; 
for  all  I  know. 

Q.  Did  he  not  take  any  charge  of  his  vessel  after  that  night? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  do  yon  mean  when  yon  say  that  yoa  had  to  take  charge  of 
the  vessel  f— A.  Well,  I  brought  the  vessel  to  Canso. 

Q.  Did  yoa  navigate  her  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  yon  koow  anything  about  navigating  at  sea  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  yoa  know  anything  about  it  then  f — A.  No ;  I  navigated  her 
out  of  my  own  head.  I  took  a  table-fork,  and  breaking  off  the  third 
proDg,  made  the  voyage  with  its  aid.  We  had  no  dividers  on  the  ves- 
sel. 1  shipped  in  her  among  the  rest  of  the  fellows,  and  the  poor  fellow 
Stapleton  knew  nothing  about  the  vessel,  or  where  to  bring  her,  nor  did 
I  at  the  same  time. 

Q.  How,  then,  did  yoa  get  anywhere  f — A.  When  we  got  outside  I 
undertook  to  manage  her. 

Q.  And  then  you  knew  nothing  aboat  navigation? — A.  No;  nothing. 

Q.  And  yoa  did  not  have  a  pair  of  dividers  aboard  T — A.  No.  I  made 
a  pair,  however,  ont  of  a  three-pronged  fork,  and  brought  her  into 
Canso. 

Q.  Did  you  not  ask  any  of  the  other  men  to  help  you  f — A.  I  do  not 
know  that  any  of  the  crew  were  older  than  I. 

Q.  And  yoa  were  17,  at  the  most,  at  the  time  T — A.  I  suppose  that  I 
was  17  or  18. 

Q.  When  were  you  born  ? — A.  I  cannot  tell  you  exactly,  but  I  was 
32  years  of  age  last  June. 

Q.  Von  state  that  you  were  probably  the  youngest  on  board,  and  you 
(lid  not  ask  any  older  persons  to  help  yon  T — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  these  vessels  have  an  extra  master  called  the  mate  t — A.  No ; 
no  vessel  in  which  1  have  ever  been  has  had  one. 

Q.  They  have  only  a  master  and  man  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Who  keeps  watch  when  the  master  is  not  on  deck  t — A.  They 
fi;enerally  set  a  watch  of  two  men  at  a  time. 

Q.  Where  did  you  ship  on  board  of  the  Fashion? — A.  At  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  did  you  get  to  Gloucester? — A.  I  was  in  Virginia  that  win- 
ter, and  I  came  down  to  Gloucester  io  the  spring. 

Q.  What  were  you  doing  in  Virginia  ? — A.  Lumbering. 

Q.  Did  you  go  there  by  sea? — A.  Yes;  I  sailed  on  board  of  a  brig 
owned  in  Boston,  and  went  to  Baltimore. 

Q.  How  did  you  come  toGloacester  from  Virginia? — A.  By  train. 

Q.  How  long  were  yoa  engaged  in  lumbering? — A.  All  the  winter. 
I  was  working  at  a  place  called  Murray  Greek. 

Q.  To  what  port  did  the  ship  in  which  you  had  been  go  ? — A.  I  can- 
not say.  I  went  to  Baltimore  in  this  bark ;  I  left  her  there,  and  have 
not  seen  her  since.    I  went  from  Baltimore  to  work  at  lambering. 

Q.  How  fiir  were  you  then  tram  Baltimore  ? — A.  Forty  or  fifty  miles, 
I  think. 

Q.  Was  the  war  over  at  that  time  ?— A.  No. 

Q.  Were  yoa  in  the  lines  of  the  rebels  or  of  the  government  ? — A.  I 
was  employed  by  a  6ompanv  of  Charlottetown,  opposite  Boston.  I  was 
OD  the  northern  side  of  the  line. 


986 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY  COUMIBBION. 


Q.  And  on  coming  to  Glonoester  yon  shipped  on  this  vessel  f— A.  Yes; 
on  this  famoas  Fashion. 

Q.  Did  yon  make  any  observation  while  on  board  f— A.  No. 

Q.  Did  yon  ^et  the  sun  f — A.  No ;  we  did  not  want  it. 

Q.  Ton  did  not  know  how  to  do  so  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Gould  you  have  done  so  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Had  yon  ever  used  a  quadrant  or  sextant  f — A.  Yes;  a  qmadraot. 
I  did  not  know  how  to  do  so  before,  but  I  since  have  known  how. 

Q.  But  you  did  not  before  that  voyage  f — A.  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  And  yon  think  that  yon  could  have  used  one  and  found  the  suu  !— 
A.  I  think  that  if  it  had  came  to  a  pinch,  I  would  have  done  so. 

Q.  And  then  yon  think  that  you  would  have  found  your  place  on  tbe 
chart  with  a  quadrant,  which  you  had  never  previously  used  f — A.  I  did 
not  want  to  find  a  place  on  the  chart  with  a  quadrant. 

Q.  Did  you  not  want  to  find  your  latitude?  What  is  a  quadrant  used 
for  t — A.  It  is  used  to  take  the  sun,  and  to  learn  where  you  are. 

Q.  Which  way ;  north  and  south  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  learned  that  since  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  bow  to  use  a  quadrant  now  f — A.  I  think  that  I  do. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  consider  whether  you  are  willing  to  say,  under  your 
oath,  that  yon  took  charge  of  that  vessel,  and  navigated  her  from 
Gloucester  down  to  the  bayf — ^A.  Yes.  I  have  testified  to  that  now. 
I  brought  that  vessel  from  Gloucester  to  Canso,  and  fVom  Gauso  to  tbe 
bay,  and  back  home  again  in  the  fall. 

Q.  You  did  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  captain  doing  all  that  time  f — A.  He  was  in  bis 
bunk. 

Q.  During  the  whole  voyage  T — A.  I'es. 

Q.  Out  and  back  f — A.  That  is  near  about  it.  I  was  very  happy  to 
get  his  statement  when  I  got  here. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  During  how  many  years  have  you  been  captain  of  a  vessel ! — A.  I 
went  in  1870  as  master  of  a  vessel. 
Q.  And  have  you  been  master  of  a  vessel  ever  since  t — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  For  how  many  years  were  you  a  fisherman  before  you  became  a 
captain  T— A.  I  think  about  three  years. 

Q.  Y'ou  do  not  think  that  the  period  from  1864  to  1870  comprises 
three  years  T— A.  I  think  it  was  about  three  years ;  and  if  he  was  here 
to  day  I  do  not  supiwse  that  he  could  contradict  my  statement. 

No.  62. 

John  D.  Macdonald,  farmer  and  fisherman,  of  Souris,  Prince 
Edward  Island,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  BritaQoic 
Majesty  was  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  What  is  your  age  f — Answer.  I  am  about  39. 

Q.  Have  you  been  fishing  much  during  your  life  f— A.  Yes  ;  consid- 
erable. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  t— A.  Ten  or  eleven. 

Q.  Have  you  been  boat  or  vessel  fishing  t-»>A.  I  have  been  vessel- 
flsbinff. 

Q.  In  American  or  in  island  vessels  f— A.  In  both. 


AWABD  OF  TUE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


987 


He  was  in  his 


very  happy  to 


you  became  a 


Q.  In  which  did  yon  first  go  fishing  Y — A.  In  American. 

Q.  When  t— A.  In  1862. 

Q.  Id  what  vessel  did  yon  then  ship  f — A.  In  the  Fanny  B.,  of  Glou< 
cester. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  in  her  f— A.  Into  the  North  Bay,  the  Onlf  of 
St.  Lawrence,  and  British  waters.    I  shipped  from  Gloucester. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  malce  that  yearf — A.  One. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  catch  f — A.  180. 

Q.  Where  did  yon  fish  T — A.  At  the  Magdalen  Islands  and  up  on  the 
north  side  of  Prince  Eklward  Island. 

Q.  Did  yon  finish  the  season  in  herT — A.  No. 

Q.  What  did  yon  do  next  f — A.  I  shipped  in  a  vessel  called  the  Em- 
pire State  the  same  season. 

Q.  Was  she  from  Gloncester  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Who  was  her  captain  f — A.  Stephen  Smith. 

Q.  Did  yon  finish  the  season  in  her  f — A.  Tes ;  in  one  trip. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  yon  takef — A.  300. 

Q.  Where  t— A.  Oflf  Sydney,  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  f — A.  About  1^  miles. 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  outside  of  three  miles  from  the  shore  f — A.  No. 

Q.  I  understand  that  all  the  mackerel  taken  about  Gape  Breton  are 
caught  within  three  miles  of  the  shore.  Is  that  correct,  in  your  expe- 
rience ? — A.  Tes,  it  is.  All  the  fish  there  are  taken  handy  to  the  shore, 
within  1^,  and  perhaps  2  miles  of  it. 

Q.  Then  do  you  mean  to  say  that  yon  took  all  your  mackerel  within 
2  miles  of  the  shore  Y — A.  Yes. 

Q.  W^here  did  you  go  thenf — A.  I  again  went  in  the  Empire  State. 

Q.  What  did  you  get  T — A.  S:z  hundred  barrels  in  two  trips. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  T — A.  We  came  up  to  the  Bay  of  Chalenrs,  and 
ap  the  Kiver  St.  Lawrence.  We  took  the  balance  of  the  first  trip 
around  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Where  did  yon  secure  the  second  trip  t — A.  Off  Sydney. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  then  takef — A.  We  got  about  300  barrels  each 
trip. 

Q.  When  you  fished  in  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs  how  far  from  the  shore 
did  you  catch  the  fish  1 — A.  Between  two  and  two  and  a  half  miles  from 
it,  1  judge. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  in  the  center  of  the  bay  f — A.  No. 

Q.  During  the  years  you  have  been  fishing  have  you  been  much  in 
the  Bay  of  Chalenrs  T — A.  Yes,  considerably. 

Q.  When  there,  where  did  you  fish  T — A.  Along  about  1^,  2,  or  2^ 
miles  from  the  shore  on  each  side  of  the  bay.  We  generally  fished  on 
the  north  side  of  it. 

Q.  And  then  you  went  up  the  river  St.  Lawrence  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q-  Where  do  you  catch  the  fish  there  f — A.  Along  the  west  shore. 

Q.  Past  Gasp^  f — A.  Yes.  We  go  up  as  far  as  Magdalen  Kiver,  and 
catch  the  most  of  them  there,  between  that  and  Griffin's  Cove.  They 
fish  there  to  anchor  altogether. 

Q.  How  far  fh>m  the  shore  T — A.  About  one  mile. 

Q.  Around  that  coast  the  fish,  I  believe,  are  all  taken  within  a  mile 
of  the  shore.    Am  I  correct  in  so  stating  it  f — A.  Yes;  you  are. 

Q.  You  got  some  fish  at  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  the  others — where  t 
At  Sydney  f — A.  Yes.   We  made  the  last  trip  of  all  at  Sydney. 

Q.  And  you  oaugbt  all  the  fish  inshore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  what  proportion  of  the  first  trip  did  yon  obtain  inshore  1 — A. 
About  two-thirds. 


mmmmK. 


988 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Did  yoo  get  many  fish  At  the  Magdaleu  Islaods  f—A.  We  obtained 
over  100  barrels ;  aboat  150  barrels. 

Q.  Aboat  one-half  of  the  first  trip  was  taken  at  the  Mngdalen  Islands, 
and  the  whole  of  the  second  at  Sydney,  and  all  the  fish  were  caught  in- 
shore f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  many  American  vessels  in  the  bay  in  1863  f— A.  Yes ; 
a  good  many. 

Q.  How  many  f— A.  Between  500  and  600,  but  I  cannot  exactly  state 
the  number. 

Q.  Were  you  pretty  well  acquainted  with  the  vessels,  and  did  you  go 
much  among  their  captains  and  crews  f — A.  Yes ;  considerably. 

Q.  Is  it  not  customary  for  the  fishermen  to  compare  notes  of  their 
different  voyages  f — A.  Yes ;  this  is  done  very  often. 

Q.  I  believe  that  you  hardly  ever  meet  a  vessel  without  inquiring 
what  she  has  got^  and  what  her  oat«h  has  been,  &c.  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  yon  thus  enabled  to  state  somewhere  about  the  average  catch 
of  the  fleet  that  year  f — A.  I  should  judge  that  the  average  that  year 
was  about  500  barrels. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  yon  go  in  1864  f — A.  The  General  Burnside. 
What  was  the  captain's  name  f — A.  Saul  Frielich. 
Was  she  from  Gloucester  T — A.  Yes. 
How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  herf — A.  I  made  one  trip  ia 


Q. 
Q. 
Q. 
her. 

Q. 
Q. 


How  many  barrels  did  you  take  f — A.  About  320, 1  think. 
Where  did  you  catch  them  f— A.  We  got  most  of  them  on  the 
west  shore  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  between  the  North  and  West  Cape. 

Q.  Did  you  '^tch  any  off  Gape  Breton  f — A.  Yes,  about  fifty  barrels. 

Q.  You  do  not  seem  to  have  done  as  well  as  usual  that  year  f — A.  No, 
we  did  not. 

Q.  Why  not ;  1864  was  a  good  year  f — A.  We  fished  off  in  deep  wa- 
ter, or  did  so  at  first.  She  was  a  large  vessel,  and  the  captain  kept  out 
in  deep  water  on  Bnidley  and  Orphan  Banks. 

Q.  Did  you  do  well  there f — A.  No;  we  got  none  at  all  hardly  there; 
we  only  obtained  a  few. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  remain  there  T — A.  About  three  weeks. 

Q.  Did  you  remain  there  because  she  was  a  large  vessel  ?— A.  I  do 
not  know  that,  but  we  supposed  so. 

Q.  A  large  vessel  cannot  come  inshore  as  safely  as  a  small  one  f — A. 
No. 

Q.  Whatever  the  cause,  yon  kept  off  shore  on  Banks  Bradley  and 
Orphan  during  two  and  three  weeks,  aud  got  nothing  t— A.  Nothing  to 
speak  of. 

Q.  And  then  you  came  inshore  to  fish  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  your  oatch  below  the  average  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  A  long  way  below  it  1 — A.  Yes. 

Q.  W^hat  would  be  the  average  catch  that  year  f — A.  About  500  bar- 
rels.   All  the  vessels  did  well  that  year. 

Q.  And  do  you  attribute  the  fact  that  your  catch  was  below  that  ave- 
rage to  the  circumstance,  that  you  «taid  so  long  on  Banks  Bradley 
and  Orphan  f — A.  We  blamed  that  for  it  anyhow ;  and  we  got  no  fish 
there. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  you  go  next  year  t— -A.  The  Aphrodite. 

Q.  Was  she  fh>m  Gloucester  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  was  the  captain's  name  t— A.  B.  Macilonald. 

Q.  He  mast  be  an  island  man  f— A.  No ;  he  was  from  Liverpool,  N.  S. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  yon  take  t— A.  620  or  630. 


■IP 


▲WARD  OF  THE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSION. 


989 


A.  We  obtained 


I863f— A.  Yes; 
iot  exactly  state 


ral  Buriiside. 


lade  one  trip  iu 


I  hardly  there ; 


imall  ODe  f — A. 


.bout  500  bar- 


Q.  How  many  tript  did  yoa  takef — A.  Two. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  them  f — A.  Aronnd  the  island,  in  the  Bay  of 
CbalenrSf  and  off  Gape  Breton. 

Q.  What  quantity  did  yoa  take  inshore  and  how  mach  outside  f — A. 
We  took  about  two-thirds  inshore,  within  the  three-mile  limit. 

Q.  Where  have  you  taken  flsh  beyond  the  three-mile  limit  f — A.  On 
Bank  Bradley  and  broad  off  the  Magdalen  Islands,  say,  about  six  or 
eight  miles. 

Q.  And  about  two  thinls  of  the  flah  were  taken  inshore  along 
Prince  Edward  Island  and  iu  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs  and  off  Cape  Breton f 
—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  many  American  sail  in  the  bay  that  year  f — A.  Y'es ; 
a  great  many. 

Q.  Were  there  more  or  less  than  during  the  previous  yeart — A.  The 
Domber  was  about  the  same,  I  judge. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  would  you  say  were  there  f — A. 
About  500  or  600. 

Q.  And  you  caught  that  year  about  630  barrels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  a  fair  average,  or  was  it  above  or  uuder  a  fair  average  ? 
—A.  It  was  about  a  fair  average,  I  think. 

Q.  Where  were  you  in  1866  f— -A.  In  the  Colonel  Cook. 

Q.  Where  was  she  firom  f — A.  Gloucester. 

Q.  Who  was  her  captain  f — A.  George  Beers. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  take  in  herT — A.  Six  hundred  and 
twenty. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  ? — A.  Two. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  them  T — A.  We  took  the  first  trip  in  the  Bay 
of  Ohaleurs,  off  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  around  Prince  Edward 
Island.    We  obtained  about  100  barrels  oft'  the  island. 

Q.  Where  did  you  secure  the  second  trip  ? — A.  Around  Prince  Ed- 
(rard  Island  and  off  Margaree. 

Q.  Did  you  catch  your  second  trip  as  close  inshore  as  the  first  f — A. 
We  took  it  nearer  the  shore  than  the  first. 

Q.  Do  the  mackerel  come  quite  close  iushore  iu  the  fall  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  This  is  the  general  rulef — A.  Yes, 

Q.  And  are  fall  mackerel  the  best  mackerel  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  by  far  the  best  T — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  And  do  yon  think  that  all  the  fish  caught  by  the  fleet  on  the  sec- 
ond trip  are  taken  inshore  f — A.  1  think  so.  This  was  the  case  with  all 
I  ever  so  caught. 

Q.  Of  the  first  trip,  a  portion,  more  or  less,  is  taken  outside,  off  Bank 
Bradley  and  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  the  whole  of  the  second  trip, 
speaking  in  general  terms,  is  taken  inshore  ? — A.  Y'es. 

(^  In  what  vessel  were  you  in  1867 1 — A.  In  the  Batler. 

(I.  Where  was  she  from  f — A.  Gloucester. 

i}.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her  f — A.  Two. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  take  ? — A.  About  650. 

Q.  Where  were  they  caught  f — A.  Some  in  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and 
Bome  up  the  River  St.  Lawrence ;  some  near  the  Madeline  River,  and 
others  off  the  Magdalen  Islands,  Cape  Breton,  and  Prince  Edward 
Island.    In  fact,  we  were  all  over  the  ground  that  year. 

C^  Of  these  620  barrels  how  many  were  obtained  inshore  f — A.  I  can 
safely  say  that  about  two-thirds  were  so  caught. 

Q.  Were  there  many  American  vessels  in  the  bay  that  year? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Was  there  a  large  fleet  f — A.  Yes. 


990 


AWARD  OF  THB  FISHERY   COMMISSIOM. 


Q.  About  bow  many  wero  tberet — A.  500  or  600. 

Q.  Was  your  oatob  about  an  average  oatohf — A.  Yes;  we  did  fairly 
well 

Q.'  Where  did  yon  go  in  1868  f~A.  I  was  in  the  Gadette. 

Q.  Was  sbe  also  fh>Di  Olouoester  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  in  her  f— A.  Two. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  yon  oatch  f— A.  600,  more  or  less. 

ij.  Where  did  you  take  them  f — A.  Around  Prince  Edward  Island, 
and  off  the  Magdalen  Islands  and  Oape  Breton. 

Q.  What  proportion  were  taken  inshore  f — A.  About  two-thirds. 

Q.  Was  this  about  an  average  catch  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  the  years  when  you  were  Ashing,  of  course  you  saw  a  good 
many  American  vessels  fishing  alongside  of  you  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  they  catch  fish  in  the  same  places  which  you  frequented  f— A. 
Yes ;  they  did. 

Q.  And  at  the  same  distance,  as  a  rule,  from  the  shore  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Rave  you  seen  many  vessels  catch  fish  off  Bankn  Bradley  and  Or- 
phan 1  Do  many  attempt  to  do  so  t — A.  When  I  used  to  be  there,  we 
perhaps  would  see  fifteen  or  twenty  sail  there. 

Q.  Out  of  the  500  or  600  iu  the  bay  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  were  trying  to  catch  Ash  there f — A.  Yes;  that  is  about  as 
big  a  fleet  as  I  have  ever  seen  on  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphau.  These 
vessels  would  be  scattered  around. 

Q.  Would  they  remain  there  long  T — A.  No. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  experience  as  to  the  value  of  Banks  Bradley 
and  Orphan,  as  fishing  grounds,  compared  with  the  inshore  fisheries  ?— 
A.  I  do  not  call  them  g<M)d  fishing  grounds,  because  I  have  never  caught 
many  mackerel  on  them. 

Q.  I  have  heard  it  stated  here  in  evidence  that  some  vessels  have 
taken  catches  outside  in  the  bay  in  deep  water  T — A.  1  do  not  know  that 
this  is  the  case,  I  am  sure. 

Q.  It  has  not  come  within  your  knowledge  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  conversed  much  with  Americans  as  to  the  value  of  our 
inshore  fisheries  t  Have  you  heard  their  captains  speak  with  reference 
to  them  and  the  quantities  they  took  T — A.  No,  I  do  not  know  as  I  have. 

Q.  Were  you  here  when  the  cutters  were  on  the  coast  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit  all  the  time  f — A.  No ; 
we  did  not. 

Q.  What  used  you  to  do  T— A.  We  used  to  fish  inshore. 

Q.  And  when  the  cutters  hove  iu  sight  what  did  you  do  f — A.  We  then 
jogged  off. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  in  American  vessels  after  1868  f— A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you,  after  1808,  fish  in  English  vessels  !•— A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  vessels  f — A.  The  Margaretta  and  the  Adele. 

Q.  Where  T — A.  Around  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Was  the  Margaretta  a  small  vessel  ? — A.  Yes ;  she  was  of  about 
25  or  30  tons. 

Q.  And  when  you  fished  around  the  island,  did  you  catch  your  fish  at 
about  the  same  distance  from  the  shore  as  you  have  mentioned  ?— A. 
Yes ;  we  got  them  all  inshore. 

Q.  There  is  a  very  large  boat  fishing  prosecuted  about  Prince  Edward 
Island  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  the  boats  catch  their  Ash  f — A.  All  inshore. 

Q.  Taking  into  consideration  the  boat  and  vessel  and  all  the  fisheries, 
what  proportion  of  the  whole  catch  of  mackerel  is  taken  ipshore,  around 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


991 


t_A.  We  then 


e  was  of  about 


Prince  Edward 


Prince  Edward  lalftod.  Cape  Breton,  and  in  the  Bay  of  Gbaleurs  f— A.  I 
think  that  nine-tenthsi  anyhow,  are  taken  inshore. 

Q.  Would  yon  like  to  fit  oat  a  vessel  to  come  to  the  bay,  if  yon  did 
not  have  the  right  of  ooniing  inshore  at  all  to  fish  f — A.  No ;  I  would 
uot. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that 
circiiuistanGes t — A.  No; 


anybody  would  make  the  venture  under  such 
I  do  not  think  so. 


By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  notice  that  you  seem  to  have  gone  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  every 
year  when  you  were  in  American  vesHels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1862,  you  were  in  the  Fanny  B.  f— A.  Yes. 

(j.  What  was  the  name  of  her  captain  f — A..  John  Dicks. 

Q.  What  was  yonr  total  catch  at  that  time  f — A.  180  barrels. 

Q.  Did  yon  get  them  all  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  T — A.  No. 

(j.  How  many  did  you  catch  there  f— -A.  About  40  barrels. 

if.  Did  you  go  to  Hanks  Bradley  and  Orphan  that  yearf — A.  No. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  from  the  Magdalen  Islands  f — A.  To  Prince 
Hdward  Island. 

Q.  And  did  you  take  the  remainder  of  yonr  catch  there  T — A.  Yes. 

{}.  What  was  the  tonnage  of  the  Fanny  It.  f — A.  About  03. 

Cl.  And  do  you  wish  the  Commission  to  understand  that  all  the  mack- 
erel which  you  canght  in  that  vessel  of  05  tons,  off  Prince  Edward 
Island,  were  taken  within  three  mileM  of  the  shore  f — A.  Yes ;  I  think 
tbat  this  was  the  care. 

Q.  You  did  not,  by  any  accident,  get  any  outside  f — A.  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  How  far  out  was  the  farthest  distance  at  which  you  caught  any  of 
them  t — A.  Well,  I  do  not  know.  It  would  be  pretty  hard  to  tell  that. 
We  used  to  heave  to  about  a  mile  from  shore  and  drift  off,  when  the  wind 
was  off  the  land.  We  would  drift  off  to  about  2  or  2^  miles,  or  there- 
abouts, or  perhaps  as  far  as  3  miles  offshore.  We  would  then  lose  the 
school,  and  getting  under  weigh,  we  would  stand  inshore  again,  and 
drift  off  again,  if  the  wind  was  off  the  land. 

Q.  And  you  got  the  whole  of  the  fish  within  3  miles  of  the  shore  T — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  whole  of  your  second  trip  that  year  was  taken  off  Syd- 
ney!—A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  all  clone  inshore;  how  near  to  it  T — A.  Within  a  mile  or  1^ 
niileH  of  it. 

Q.  How  near  to  the  shore  could  you  go  in  that  vessel  T— A.  Within 
half  a  mile  of  it,  I  think. 

(^  What  was  the  tonnage  of  the  Empire  State  7 — A.  About  05. 

Q.  And  in  the  following  year,  1863,  you  made  two  trips,  and  went  to 
the  Magdalen  Islands ;  how  many  did  you  catch  there  f — A.  On  the  first 
trip  we  got  about  150  barrels  off  the  Magdalen  Islands,  I  would  think. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  more  than  once  that  year  T — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  3'ou  go  there  the  second  time  that  year  f — A.  While  on 
the  fall  trip. 

(j.  How  many  fish  did  yon  catch  off  the  Magdalen  Islands  on  the  fidl 
trip!— A.  None. 

(^  Did  you  go  to  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  that  yearf — A.  We  did 
daring  the  spring  and  first  trip. 

Q.  What  luck  did  you  have  f — A.  We  did  not  get  any  there. 

Q.  What  was  the  tonnage  of  the  General  Burnside  f — A.  About  145. 


992 


▲WABD  OP  THE  FI8HEBT  COMMISSIOK. 


Q.  And  voa  ny  that  her  captain,  Saul  Frielioh,  kept  offshore  more 
than  the  others  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  you  begin  to  fish  with  him  f— A.  In  July. 

Q.  And  where  did  you  flshf — A.  Off  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Did  you  go  straight  there  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Without  pausing  to  fish  anywhere  else?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  get  t — A.  We  took  no  fish  there  to  speak  of ; 
we  may  have  caught  15  or  20  barrels,  or  some  number  like  that. 

Q.  Did  you  try  fishing  off  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  t— A.  Yes ;  we 
Btmck  right  across  to  there. 

Q.  Did  you  get  nothing  there f— A..  Nothing  to  speak  of;  we  picked 
up  5,  6,  7,  or  8  barrels  in  a  day  for  a  fortnight  or  three  weeks. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  take  on  the  first  trip  with  Frielich  T— 
A.  320, 1  think;  we  then  only  made  one  trip,  and  we  carried  000  empty 
barrels. 

Q.  Back? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  try  everywhere  for  fish  ? — A.  Yes ;  on  Banks  Bradley  aud 
Orphan. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  from  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  ? — A.  We  weut 
to  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  there  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  All  the  time  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  stay  there  ? — A.  About  two  weeks,  I  suppose. 

Q.  How  many  fish  did  you  catch  f — A.  About  200  barrels. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  had  you  on  board  before  you  took  these  ?— A. 
Something  like  20  or  30  barrels. 

Q.  Why  did  you  leave  the  north  side  of  the  island ;  was  the  Ashing 
poor  T — A.  We  left  with  a  breeze,  a  northwest  wind,  aud  came  dowu  to 
Cape  Breton  and  fished  there  a  spell. 

Q.  How  many  fish  did  you  catch  off  Cape  Breton  T — A.  We  caught 
the  balance  of  the  trip  there. 

Q.  How  many  was  that  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  exactly ;  but  it  was  over 
100  barrels. 

Q.  And  what  was  your  total  catch  f — A.  320  or  330  barrels. 

Q.  And  you  caught  about  20  or  30  barrels  off  the  Magdalen  Islands 
and  on  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  comes  1805,  when  you  made  two  trips ;  how  many  did  you 
then  take  at  the  Magdalen  Islands?  You  were  at  the  time  in  the  Aphro- 
dite?— A.  Yes ;  we  took  about  100  barrels  there. 

Q.  During  the  first  trip?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  go  there  on  your  second  trip  ?— A.  Yes ;  and  we  got  about 
30  or  40  barrels. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  obtain  on  Bank  Bradley  ? — A.  None  at  all. 
We  caught  the  balance  of  the  trip  oft'  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  on  the  second  trip  ?— 
A.  No. 

Q.  In  180G  yon  made  two  trips  in  the  Colonel  Cook  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  then  go  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  often  ? — A.  Twice. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  get  on  the  first  trip  ? — A.  About  150  barrels. 

Q.  And  How  many  on  the  second  trip  ? — A.  About  30  barrels. 

Q.  What  did  you  get  on  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  during  the  first 
trip? — A.  Nothing. 

Q.  And  bow  mauy  did  you  catch  there  on  the  second  trip?— A.  Noth- 
ing. 

Q.  In  1867,  you  were  in  the  Eatler  ?— A.  Yes. 


AWARD  OV  THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


993 


)1— A.  Noth- 


Q.  Anil  in  her  you  say  yon  Ashed  over  all  the  ((rouad  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  did  you  begin  Ashing  in  her  ? — A.  In  the  Bay  of  Ghaleurs. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  there  T — A.  Between  60  and  100  barreU. 

(].  Where  did  you  go  nextT — A.  Up  the  river  St.  Lawrence  to  Mag- 
duleu  River. 

Q.  Where  is  that? — A.  Near  Gape  St.  Anne,  on  the  west  shore.  It  is 
situated  near  the  month  of  the  Quebec  River. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  there  on  tlie  south  side  of  the  St.  Law- 
reuce  f — A.  About  150  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  then  t — A.  Across  to  the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  there  f — A.  About  50  barrels. 

Q.  Where  did  you  next  got— A.  To  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Did  yon  not  stop  at  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  T — A.  We  tried 
there  as  we  went  along  and  as  we  were  crossing  over  to  the  Magdalen 
Islands  from  Magdalen  River,  but  we  did  not  take  any  mackerel  to 
8))eak  of;  we  would  heave  to  and  get  a  tew. 

Q.  Did  you  transship  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  f— A.  At  Charlottetown. 

Q.  When  did  you  commence  your  second  trip  ? — A.  About  the  last  of 
August  or  the  Ist  of  September. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  yon  biegiu  your  Ashing  there? — A.  No;  we  Arst  Ashed  on  Fish- 
erman's Bank,  on  the  south  side  of  the  islands,  and  then  we  Ashed 
around  East  Point  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  from  thence  we  went 
to  tiie  Magdalen  Islands. 

(}.  IJow  many  barrels  did  you  get  on  Fishcrman'8  Bank  f — A.  About 
30. 

Q.  Ilave  you  ever  been  to  Fisherman's  Bank,  that  year  cxce»>ted  ! — A. 
No;  tiiat  was  the  Arst  and  last  time. 

Q.  How  many  Ash  did  you  take  at  the  Magdalen  Islands? — A.  I  do 
not  know  exactly ;  but  we  did  not  get  many  there  that  trip.  We,  how- 
ever,  got  a  few — perhaps  35  or  30  barrels.  I  am  not  positive  about  the 
uuruber,  but  we  certainly  did  not  catch  a  great  many  there. 

Q.  Those  American  vessels  in  which  you  Ashed  had  pogy  bait  ? — A. 
Yes,  mostly. 

Q.  Altogether  ?— A.  Almost  altogether. 

(^  18G8  was  the  last  year  you  were  in  an  American  vessel  f — A.  Yes. 
I  was  in  the  Cadet,  from  Gloucester. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  in  the  Gadet? — A.  We  Ashed  round  the  island 
and  the  Magdalens. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  catch  at  the  Magdalen  Islands ! — A.  Of  the 
whole  year's  Ashing,  we  got  about  150  barrels. 

Q.  And  how  much  was  the  total  catch  for  the  year? — A.  About  600. 

(}.  Did  you  go  to  Bradley  and  Orphan  then? — A.  No;  wo  were  up  to 
Bay  Chaleurs,  though.  ' 

Q.  You  got  some  there?— A.  About  100  barrels. 

Q.  What  years  were  they  that  the  cutters  disturbed  you  ? — A.  The 
years  I  was  in  American  vessels. 

Q.  How  many  years? — A.  I  tbink  every  year  I  have  been  in  Ameri- 
can vessels. 

Q.  That  the  cutters  disturbed  you A.  No;  not  every  year ;  no,  no. 

Q.  What  were  the  years  you  were  in  American  vessels  that  you  were 
interfered  with  f— A.  Eighteen  hundred  and  sixty-three  is  one. 

Q.  What  cutter  troubled  you  then  ? — A.  The  English  cutter. 

Q.  What  was  her  name  f— A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Who  was  yonr  master  then  ?— A.  In  1803,  Stephen  Smith. 
63f 


994 


AWARD   OV   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  did  the  cutter  do  to  you  then  ?— A.  She  did  nothing ;  but 
\rhen  we  would  see  her  coming  we  would  have  to  keep  clear. 

Q.  That  was  in  the  Empire  State  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Yoa  are  quite  sure  you  saw  a  cutter  then  t — A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Well,  what  other  years  were  you  troubled  with  cutters  ?— A.  18(54 
and  1865. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  them  ! — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Who  was  your  captain  when  the  cutters  troubled  you?— A.  Saul 
Felix. 

Q.  "-Vhat  did  they  do? — A.  They  did  no  more  than  only  wlicii  we 
would  see  them  we  would  knock  off  fishing,  if  we  were  fishing  inshore, 
and  steal  oil'. 

Q.  Was  that  a  good  deal  of  inconvenience? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  interfered  with  the  comfort  of  the  voyage  and  its  succoas  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Was  the  fishing  disturbed  in  18G6  and  1867  ?  Do  you  remcmber 
the  cutter  those  years  ? — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  any  year  when  your  captain  had  a  license  ?~A. 
1^0, 1  don't  rememt)er  any. 

Q.  You  never  heard  of  it  ? — A.  I  heard  of  them. 

Q.  But  you  don't  know  whether  he  had  one  or  not  7-— A.  No ;  I  dou't 
know. 

Q.  Now,  are  you  as  sure  about  being  disturbed  by  cutters  in  1863, 
1864,  and  I860,  when  you  were  in  the  Empire  State,  the  General  Barn- 
side,  and  the  Aphrodite,  as  you  are  about  the  rest  of  your  statements  i— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  just  as  clear  as  that  you  caught  the  greatest  part  of  your 
mackerel  within  three  miles  of  the  shore f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  I  don't  want  to  catch  yoa,  but  if  yoa  hare  any  explanation 
I  wish  you  to  make  it.  You  have  stated  that  yoa  were  disturbed  in 
1863,  1864,  and  1865.  Now,  these  were  the  years  of  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty.  Mr.  Davies  will  tell  you  there  was  not  a  cotter  on  the  whole 
coast  of  British  North  America,  and  the  United  States  vessels  had  a 
right  to  fish  anywhere  they  pleased.  Just  think  a  bit  and  make  your 
explanation.  You  have  been  pursued  by  cutters,  according  to  this, 
three  years  under  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  when  the  United  States  bad 
a  right  to  visit  inshore.  Now,  yoa  did  not  dream  that.  Explain  it  t— 
A.  There  were  cutters  there.    There  was  one. 

Q.  What  was  she  doing?— A.  She  was  keeping  the  fishermen  oft'  the 
shore-fishing. 

Q.  All  those  years ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  sure  of  it? — A.  I  am  certain  of  it. 

Q.  Yon  are  just  as  sure  of  that  as  you  are  as  to  where  you  caught 
your  mackerel  t — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Were  you  ever  in  the  hands  of  a  cutter  at  all,  your  vessel  ?— A. 
No. 

Q.  You  are  only  speaking  of  what  you  recollect,  and  you  thought  you 
saw  them  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  evidently  mistaken.  Do  yoa  still  think  there  were  cut 
ters  there  then  f— A.  There  were. 

Q.  During  those  years  you  were  in  the  Empire  State  in  1863  and  the 
following  years,  in  the  General  Burnside  in  1864  and  1865,  you  have 
already  stated  that  you  oaoght  year  fish  in  around  the  shores  those 
years?— A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


995 


d  yon!— A.  Saul 


r— A.  No ;  I  (lout 


i  fishermen  off  the 


where  you  caught 


Q.  So  that  if  the  cotters  were  there  they  did  not  disturb  you  then  T — 

A.  No. 

No.  63. 

rivrEU  S.  Richardson,  of  Cheater,  in  the  county  of  Lunenbnrfr,  N.  S., 
fl.shernian,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Crovernment  of  Iler  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined : 

15y  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

(Question.  You  have  been  a  {^ood  many  years  in  American  fishing  ves- 
sels?—Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  During  what  years  ? — A.  As  nearly  as  I  can  judge  from  1860  up  to 
1871,  along  there,  and  after. 

Q.  I  took  down  a  list  from  yon  of  the  vessels  yon  have  been  in — about 
twenty  altogether? — A.  Y'es,  sir. 

Q.  You  might  give  me  the  names,  if  you  recollect? — A.  The  first  ves- 
sel 1  was  in  was  the  Benjamin  FranKlyn. 

Q.  The  Diamond  was  the  first  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1860  you  were  in  the  Diamond,  in  1861  in  the  Nebraska,  in  1863 
the  Mesina  and  the  Corporal  Trim,  in  1864  in  the  Prince  of  Wales  and 
the  Harvey  C.  Mack,  in  1867  in  the  Everett  Steele  and  the  Carrie  S. 
Doyle,  in  1868  in  the  Sam  Crowell  and  the  Sea  (^ueen,  in  1869, 1  doD*t 
know  that  I  have  the  vessel  yon  were  in  that  year? — A.  The  Sultana. 

Q.  Ill  1865  you  were  in  the  llenry  A.  Johnson,  in  1866  in  the  Sonny- 
aide  and  Rattler,  in  1869  in  the  A.  J.  Franklyn,  Elisha  Crovell,  and  the 
William  J.  Dale,  in  1876  in  the  Massasoit  and  the  Ernest  F.  Norwood. 
You  are  not  quite  certain  wlih  regard  to  the  dates  f — A.  No. 

Q.  But  as  nearly  as  you  can  recollect,  is  that  correct  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  were  in  those  American  fishing  vessels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  believe  one  of  yonr  vessels  was  captared. — A.  The  A.  J.  Frank- 
lyn ;  she  was  captured  in  1869  by  Captain  Tory. 

Q.  Yon  were  fishing  for  mackerel  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Had  you  oomplet«d  your  fare  when  jou  were  taken  ? — A.  We 
were  on  our  passage  home,  at  the  Strait  of  Canso. 

Q.  He  had  overhauled  you  somewhere  previously. — A.  Y'es;  he 
boarded  us  before ;  about  eight  days  before. 

i}.  You  had  escaped. — A.  Y^'es. 

Q.  And  on  yonr  way  home,  when  you  were  at  the  wharf,  he  went  on 
board  ? — A.  We  were  lying  in  the  stream. 

Q.  I  believe  yon  thought  it  was  not  quite  fair ;  he  gave  you  no  warn- 
ing; you  were  asleep  at  the  time  you  were  taken  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  before  that  had  he  seen  you  f— A.  About  eight  days. 

Q.  Did  you  go  on  fishing  f — A.  Y^es;  we  went  on  fishing. 

(i.  You  went  away  on  coast  of  Cape  Breton. — A.  Y'es. 

^^  You  ran  over  to  Prince  Edward  Island  ?— A.  Yes. 

(}.  Now,  during  any  of  those  years  that  were  mentioned  had  you  any 
license  ?— A.  Not  that  I  remember. 

Q.  You  don't  remember  having  any  license  at  all ;  did  you  ever  hear 
of  them  T—A.  Yes ;  I  heard. 

(^  Why  did  you  not  take  them  ? — A.  Because  I  thought  we  would 
catch  our  trip  without  them. 

Q-  The  next  year  after  the  Franklyn  was  taken,  what  vessel  were 
you  in? — A.  As  near  as  1  can  judge,  the  Sea  Queen — excuse  me;  I 
made  a  mistake ;  the  next  year  after  the  Franklyn  was  seized,  I  went  in 
tbe  Elisha  Crowell.    I  was  master  of  her  myself. 

Q.  You  went  back  to  Qloncester  after  your  vessel  was  seized  in  I860, 


996 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


to  the  owners,  Whalen  and  Allen,  a  Gloucester  firm,  and  engaged  to 
oome  out  into  tbe  gulf  as  master  of  their  American  vessel,  the  Klisha 
Orowell.  Now,  I  suppo.3e  they  knew  your  vessel  had  been  seized !— A. 
I  expect  they  did. 

Q.  What  directions  did  they  give  you ;  did  they  tell  yon  to  keep  out 
three  miles  f— A.  No ;  but  they  told  me  to  mind  and  not  let  1113  self  be 
taken  by  a  cutter. 

Q.  So  you  came  down  ?    Did  .you  get  a  good  fare  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  trips  ? — A.  I  came  down  late  and  only  made  oue  trip. 
I  came  down  on  the  28th  day  of  August. 

Q.  Did  you  see  a  cutter  ! — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q>  How  did  yon  manage  to  escape  T — A.  Hoisted  sail  and  left. 

Q.  How  often  did  you  see  her! — A.  I  could  not  rightly  say  how  often. 

Q.  I  only  want  to  know  whether  you  saw  her  onceT — A.  I  can  safely 
swear  I  saw  her  once. 

Q.  She  did  not  seize  you  ? — A.  No,  because  she  never  caught  us  iu 
the  act  of  stealing. 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  your  fish  f — A.  We  got  them  wherever  we 
oonld  catch  them. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  whole  period  from  1860  down,  were  you  always 
fishing  for  mackerel  iu  American  bottoms? — A.  Always  in  American 
bottoms. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  your  llsh  during  these  years — near  the  shore 
or  outside  f — A.  I  should  not  liko  to  swear  to  the  quantity  we  caught 
inshore  or  offshore ;  but  as  near  as  I  can  judge,  where  we  caught  oue 
offshore  we  caught  twenty-five  inshore. 

Q.  Where  did  the  American  mackerel  fieet  usually  fish,  inshore  or 
offshore  f — A.  That  dei)end8  upon  the  season  of  the  year. 

Q.  I  know ;  but  I  am  speaking  now  of  every  year  and  generally  !— 
A.  They  generally  fish  inshore,  by  what  I  have  seen. 

Q.  All  that  you  saw  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  close  ? — A.  I  never  measured  the  distance,  but  I  suppose  I 
could  make  a  judgment.  Sometimes  three  miles  and  sometimes  a  little 
more ;  sometimes  not  quite  so  far. 

Q.  Well,  I  want  to  know,  generally,  where  they  were.  Were  they 
outside  of  three  miles!— A.  Iu  general,  where  we  have  got  big  catche.s 
of  mackerel,  we  have  got  them  inshore. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  inshore — four  miles  t — A.  O,  yes ;  within  a 
mile  and  a  half  or  two  miles. 

Q.  There  is  where  you  get  your  catches!— A.  The  largest  ever  I 
helped  to  catch  were  caught  there. 

Q.  When  you  say  that  when  one  mackerel  is  caught  outside  twenty- 
five  are  caught  inside,  where  do  you  mean  by  inside  t — A.  I  mean  a 
range  from  a  mile  and  a  half  to  five  miles. 

Q.  I  want  something  a  little  more  definite  than  that.  I  want  to  know 
what  proportion  you  caught  witliin  three  miles. — A.  I  could  not  begin 
to  describe  the  quantity  that  was  caught  inside  of  three  miles. 

Q.  I  only  want  to  know  the  proportion  of  the  mackerel  you  caught  iu 
side,  to  the  best  of  your  opinion. — A.  I  would  siiy  nine-tenths,  to  the 
best  of  my  opinion,  inside  of  three  miles. 

Q.  Now,  previous  to  your  being  captured,  had  3'on  been  aware  of  tbe 
cutter's  being  on  the  coast  f — A.  I  ought  to,  sir. 

Q.  Constantly! — A.  We  ought  to. 

Q.  How  did  you  guard  yourself  against  being  taken  before  that  ?— A. 
I  ran  away  from  them. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  a  lookout!— A.  We  always  watched. 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


997 


eeu  aware  of  the 


Q.  Did  yon  keep  a  roan  constantly  washing? — A.  No;  everybody 
watched. 

Q.  All  the  fleet  T  They  all  flshed  inside. — A.  Well,  when  we  watched 
we  did. 

Q.  If  you  were  fishing  inside,  you  watched  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  mean  to  say  that  they  were  all  in  the  habit  of  rnnning 
the  risk  of  being  caught  f — A.  Yes  ;  nine  out  of  every  ten  vessels  ran 
the  nsk, 

Q.  You  frequently  met  the  skippers  of  other  vessels  and  conversed 
together  t — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  What  did  they  say  T — A.  I  would  not  like  to  use  their  language— 
certainly,  not  here. 

Q.  I  only  want  to  know  the  general  tenor  of  their  talk. — A.  Well, 
they  did  not  like  it ;  that  is  the  amount  of  it.  That  is  as  near  as  I  can 
give  it. 

Q.  Were  they  aware  that  they  were  running  the  risk  T — A.  They 
knew  that.    They  understood  that  much. 

Q.  Why  did  they  run  the  risk  T — A.  Because  they  wanted  to  fish. 

Q.  Why  could  they  not  put  up  with  fishing  outside  ? — A.  Because 
they  did  not  get  enough. 

Q.  Now,  would  it  be  worth  while  to  fish  if  they  were  confined  to  fish- 
ing outside  of  three  miles  from  the  land  f  Would  you  do  down  to  Gloa* 
cester  for  a  vessel  T — A.  No,  I  would  not. 

Q.  Would  you  go  on  board  as  sharesman,  if  so  confined? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  one  that  would  T — A.  That  I  cannot  say.  I 
would  be  very  sorry  to  say  whether  I  knew  one  or  not. 

Q.  If  there  is  one,  you  don't  know  him  f — A.  I  don't  know  him.  I 
never  heard  of  him  ;  only  I  can  give  my  own  judgment  that  I  would 
not  go. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  for  mackerel  alone f — A.  Yes,  with  some  exceptions; 
we  caught  a  few  codfish — very  few. 

(.}.  That  is  when  on  the  mackerel  grounds  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  lUit  when  in  those  vessels,  did  you  go  on  a  mackerel  trip  alone  T — 
A.  When  I  went  into  the  bay  I  went  on  a  mackerel  trip  alone. 

i}.  Give  us  some  of  the  catches  you  took  tor  the  season. — A.  I  have 
taken,  or  helped  to  take,  as  high  as  1,500  barrels  in  one  season. 

Q.  That  was  a  large  catch  T — A.  Yes ;  that  was  the  largest  catch  out 
of  the  port. 

Q.  W^hat  vessel  was  thatT — A.  The  Rattler. 

Q.  Now,  were  there  any  other  large  catches  f— A.  1  have  been  ship- 
mate when  we  had  a  good  many  good  catches,  but  not  so  large  as  that. 

Q.  Uow  large  f— A.  Well,  700, 1,000,  600,  and  400,  down  as  low  as 
300,  for  one  trip  only. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  the  season  ? — A.  Well,  we  never  took  less  than 
500  for  the  whole  season  ;  not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  That  would  be  how  many  tripswhenyou  took500?— A.  Only  one; 
but  we  would  land  and  reship  from  Ganso. 

A.  I  mean  to  Eay,  how  many  fares  f — A.  That  would  be  a  fare  and  a 
lialf  for  one  of  those  medium-class  vessels. 

Q.  Yon  would  come  in  with  half  a  fare  ?— A.  Yes,  we  would  do  so 
both  tiroes. 

Q.  Then,  in  all  cases,  have  you  confined  your  season  when  in  those 
vessels  to  fishing  for  mackerel  alone f — A.  Yes,  sir;  in  general. 

Q.  Wonld  you  go  on  a  cod-fishing  trip  Y  Did  you  ever  t — A.  Where  t 
In  the  bay  t 

Q.  I  mean  theOulf  of  St.  Lawrence,  anywhere  T— A.  Well,  so  far  as 


998 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHEKY    COMMISSION. 


it  is  called  the  bay.  I  have  been  between  Cayte  North  and  Bird  Rocks, 
five  voyages  in  different  seasons ;  that  is,  on  the  southwest  side  of  the 
Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence. 

Q.  When  f — A.  I  can't  rightly  say.    It  is  within  ninu  years. 

Q.  Five  different  trips  in  different  years  ? — A.  One  trip  a  year. 

Q.  Then,  during  these  same  years,  you  were  fishing  mackerel  f— 
A.  Yes,  some  years.    We  wonld  go  the  first  of  the  season. 

Q.  In  the  same  vessel  T — A.  Yes.  We  would  leave  home  in  the  spring 
when  the  ice  would  be  out,  so  that  we  could  go  to  Magdaleu  iHlaodtn  for 
bait  and  leave  there  in  June.  We  got  our  bait  at  Magdalen  Islands  or 
probably  on  the  Cape  Breton  shore.  Then,  after  getting  our  cod,  we 
would  go  home  and  land  them,  and  fit  out  for  a  mackerel  voyage.  That 
is  the  way  we  used  to  work  the  trip. 

Q.  Is  that  usual  with  the  mackerel  catchers? — A.  It  used  to  be  then. 
I  don't  know  now.  It  used  to  be  the  plan  to  have  the  codtlsh  trip  in 
the  spring,  and  after  that  the  mackerel. 

Q.  What  kind  of  bait  did  yon  use,  salt  f — A.  No ;  fresh. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  use  salt  baitt — A.  Never,  to  any  amount. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  know  with  regard  to  the  procuring  of  bait,  do  you 
know  of  the  men  aboard  your  vessel  (the  crew)  assisting  in  catching 
itf — A.  No.  I  have  never  been  shipmate  with  the  men  assisting  to 
catch  bait,  unless  it  was  squid.    That  was  in  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Ha\e  you  known  of  that  in  other  cases  f — A.  No.  I  have  known 
plenty  of  men  catching  their  own  squid  in  Newfoundland  or  Canso. 

Q.  But  I  mean  to  say  on  our  own  coast,  have  you  known  of  the  crews 
of  other  vessels  getting  people  from  the  coast  to  assist  them  ? — A.  Yes, 
I  have  known  men  to  take  crews  from  one  port  to  another  to  catch  bait ; 
say  from  Prospect  to  Ketch  Harbor,  or  from  Ketch  Harbor  ui>  to  the 
Northwest  Cove. 

Q.  A  vessel  would  go  to  Prospect  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  take  a  number  of  men  on  board  there,  with  a  seine  f  Who 
would  the  seine  belong  to  7 — A.  It  was  not  a  seine ;  it  was  a  net.  It 
wonld  belong  to  the  parties  on  shore — the  natives. 

Q.  You  would  take  these  nets  to  another  place,  and  who  would  catch 
the  bait  f — A.  The  parties  that  owned  the  nets. 

Q.  Would  the  crew  assist  at  all  1 — A.  If  the  men  wanted  any  assist- 
ance, then  the  crew  would  assist. 

Q.  Catching  bait,  that  is  for  the  cod-fi»hing  business  T  Is  that  a  con- 
venient way  of  getting  fresh  bait?— A.  If  it  is  plenty,  it  is. 

Q.  It  is  usually  got  on  that  coast  in  that  way  f — A.  It  is  sometimes- 
Sometimes  it  is  different.  Sometimes  they  catch  it  right  here  in  Pros. 
pect  'j  we  don't  have  to  go  any  farther. 

Q.  Is  the  custom  as  to  getting  bait  different  at  different  places !— A. 
No;  it  is  all  alike;  only  it  is  different  prices. 

Q.  Well,  where  they  assist  in  catching  it  themselves  that  varies  the 
price  f — A.  Not  a  bit ;  not.  in  the  vessels  I  have  had  anything  to  do 
with. 

Q.  Now,  I  would  like  to  know  from  your  experience  what  is  the  best 
part  of  the  season  for  the  mackerel  catch.  First  of  all,  have  you  caught 
mackerel  on  the  coast  of  Prince  Edward  Island  t— A.  We  take  it  from 
abont  the  15th,  I  should  say  the  10th  of  September,  down  to  October. 
The  heaviest  quantities  of  mackerel  are  taken  then. 

Q.  Were  yon  in  an  American  vessel  last  yeart — A  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  what  are  yoo  in  this  season  f— A  I  am  in  a  British  vessel  this 
year. 

Q.  What  have  yon  been  doing  this  season  f-— A.  Godflsbing  so  fiar. 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


999 


Dt  places !— A. 


Q.  In  this  same  British  vessel  yoa  are  in  nowf — A.  Yes. 

Q.  She  is  in  this  port? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  lande<l  your  fish  and  are  now  going  to  the  bay  for 
inacljerel  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  are  yoa  going  first?— A.  I  do  not  know;  bat  wherever  we 
lire  moat  likely  to  get  fish  we  shall  go. 

Q.  Yoa  consider  from  your  experience  over  all  these  years  you  have 
been  in  the  business  that  from  the  10th  of  ^September  onward  is  the  best 
part  of  the  season  ? — A.  I  should  say  so,  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge 
of  the  business. 

Q.  You  have  been  fishing  for  mackerel  and  codfish  in  American  bot- 
toius? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Any  thing  else  ? — A.  1  have  been  running  fresh  halibut  down  the 
irulf. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  them  ? — A.  Wherever  we  could. 

Q.  Where  are  the  best  places  ? — A.  The  best  places  used  to  be  np  the 
i;ulf,  St.  Margaret's  River,  Point  Des  Monts,  Moisic  Kiver,  and  down  at 
Toint  St.  Charles,  then  down  around  Anticosti,  and  wherever  we  could 
catch  them  we  would. 

Q.  W  hat  part  of  the  coast  did  you  catch  them  T  How  far  from  shore  ? — 
A.  As  close  as  we  can  get  in. 

Q.  They  are  always  caught  inshore  ? — A.  Not  always.  We  would 
catch  them  from  200  or  300  yards  to  a  mile  or  a  mile  and  a  half. 

Q.  There  were  some  vessels  seized  a  short  time  ago  ? — A.  Two. 

Q.  What  vessels  were  they  ? — A.  The  James  Bliss  and  a  vessel  of  a 
raau  by  the  name  of  Cunningham.  I  can't  just  think  of  the  vessel's 
uame.    Yes ;  it  was  the  Euola  C. 


at  Anticosti. 

the  whole  of  them. 


(j.  You  were  fishing  at  the  same  time? — A.  Yes ; 

Q.  Did  you  catch  within  three  miles? — A.  Yes; 
All  we  caught  that  trip  we  did. 

Q.  Well,  did  you  see  these  other  vessels  ? — A.  I  saw  one  of  then  ;  not 
the  other.  The  James  Bliss  was  catching  as  close  as  she  coulu  catch 
them.  The  other  one  I  didn't  see.  We  didn't  go  quite  so  far  up  as  she 
was. 

Q.  IIow  long  after  you  saw  this  vessel  was  she  seized  ? — A.  Wesaw  her 
about  I  o'clock,  and  she  was  seized  that  evening  or  next  morning. 

Q.  Yon  were  aware  the  cutters  were  looking  after  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  you  found  it  necessary  in  order  to  prosecute  the  fisheries  suc- 
cessfully to  fish  there  ? — A.  Certainly  ;  I  would  catch  them  wherever  I 
vould. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  for  halibut? — A.  I  made  four,  but 
not  all  there. 

Q.  What  year  ? — A.  In  that  same  year ;  in  that  one  year. 

Q.  Yon  made  four  trips  that  same  year  ? — A.  We  would  make  a  trip 
every  month — a  vessel  engaged  in  fresh  fishing. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  for  halibut  any  other  year  ? — A.  Not  there ;  not  in  the 
Sulf. 

Q.  Well,  where  afterwards  ? — A.  Wo  fishe<l  after  that  at  Sable  Island, 
Western  Bank,  and  all  those  places. 

Q.  How  many  American  vessels  did  yon  see  fishing  for  cod  and  hali- 
but f— A.  Wellf  I  only  saw  three  at  that  time. 

Q.  But  generally,  did  you  ever  see  any  others  t — A.  No ;  not  around 
there.    I  saw  three  that  trip.    There  were  three  of  as. 

Q.  Yoa  were  together  ?— A.  Yes ;  at  Antiooati. 

Q.  Three  that  year  ? — A.  Three  at  that  one  trip,  bat  more  went  after* 
wards. 


1000 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  you  mean  to  aay  that  the  two  that  were  taken  and  your  vessel 
made  the' three f — A.  No;  two  of  08  got  clear  and  the  other  two  were 
taken.  One  op  at  Point  l>e8  Monts  got  taken.  We  were  there  about 
ten  days. 

Q.  How  many  did  yon  get  in  those  ten  days!— A.  We  got,  about  as 
near  as  I  can  judge,  25,000  jiounds. 

Q.  Then  you  got  a  full  fare  T — A.  A  decent  fare. 

Q.  Did  you  remain  after  the  other  vessel  was  taken  ? — A.  Yes ;  we 
fished  away.  We  knew  then  that  the  cutter  was  gone.  There  was  no 
trouble  then.  We  watched  her  till  she  got  away,  and  then  went  back 
and  fished.  It  was  only  nonsense  for  a  man  to  let  those  cutters  take 
him,  anyhow. 

Q.  You  say  you  got  1,000,  500,  and  700  barrels  of  mackerel!— A.  Yes. 

Q'  And  you  got  the  greatest  part  inshore  T — A.  Yes ;  the  biggest  part 
of  the  mackerel  was  caught  inshore. 

Q.  And  all  the  mackerel  you  ever  caught  from  18G0  down,  you  caught 
mainly  inshore? — A.  Yes;  the  principal  part. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Captain  Stapleton  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  meet  him  on  the  fishing  ground  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  He  would  fish  with  the  rest  of  yon  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Captain  Bradley  t — A.  I  have  seen  him.  I  Lave  uo 
acquaintance  with  him. 

Q.  He  must  have  been  an  outside  fisher  f — A.  No.  He  sailed  from  a 
different  port,  probably  Newbury  port,  and  not  irom  Gloucester.  1  would 
not  therefore  know  him. 

Q.  Stapleton  fished  inshore  the  same  as  the  rest  f — A.  I'es. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  How  long  ago  was  it  you  saw  Captain  Stapleton  fishing!— A.  1 
can't  say. 

Q.  Give  me  some  notion. — A.  .  should  say  somewhere  about  1867  or 
1868,  along  there. 

Q.  Ten  years  ago,  about !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  asked  at  that  time  to  observe  him  and  watch  him  t— A. 
No;  only  I  know  he  fished  inshore. 

Q.  You  did  not  see  him  all  the  time  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  many  times  a  year  would  you  see  him  f — A.  Probably  every 
day  for  a  week. 

Q.  And  then  not  again  for  some  time  f — A.  Then  not  again  for  a  fort- 
night.   1  could  not  begin  to  say  how  often. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  us  what  ship  he  was  in  f — A.  1  think  I  can. 

Q.  It  is  no  matter  if  you  cat  not  remember.  A.  I  will  think  presently. 
It  was  the  Laura  Mangam,  1 1  aink,  if  I  am  not  very  much  mistaken. 
But  it  is  so  long  ago  that  my  memory  is  not  very  good. 

Q.  That  is  the  only  one  you  remember  T — A.  Yes,  that  is  the  only 
one.  Yes,  I  remember  the  Fitz.  J.  Babson.  It  needs  a  man  to  have  a 
big  memory  to  remember  all  those  things. 

Q.  Have  the  halibut  fisheries  been  pretty  much  exhausted  in  tbe 
gulf  f — A.  I  cannot  say.  I  have  not  been  in  the  business  for  the  last 
five  or  six  years. 

Q.  You  say  it  was  the  custom  of  the  Americans  when  you  were  in  tbe 
fisheries  to  buy  their  bait  as  a  general  thing  f  They  did  not  themselves 
come  dose  to  the  shore  and  fish  for  their  own  herring,  &c.  f — A.  No. 
They  would  come  in  the  harbor  and  lay  therBf  and  buy  their  bait  from 
the  natives. 

Q.  Yon  say  that  sometimes  you  have  known  instances  whore  they 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1001 


e  got,  about  as 


)vrn,you  caught 


latch  himt— A. 


ces  whore  they 


have  taken  men  on  board  and  taken  them  Arom  one  port  to  another  T— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  the  men  canght  the  bait  in  their  netst — A.  Tes. 

Q.  Yea  were  asked  whether,  if  the  crew  were  called  npon  to  assist, 
tbey  (lid  f — A.  I  suppose  they  did. 

Q.  It  made  no  difference  in  the  pay  T — A.  No,  no  difference  in  the 
price. 

Q.  They  were  not  employed  by  the  day  or  tlie  week,  but  sold  the  fish 
at  a  tlxed  rate  to  the  vessel  Y — A.  Yes. 

Q,  That  is,  so  far  as  you  know  ;  and,  so  far  as  yon  know,  what  was 
the  rate  given  for  the  fish  when  they  came  aboard  and  brought  their 
nets  !•— A.  |2  a  barrel. 

No.  61. 

Charles  E.  Nass,  of  Nova  Scotia,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Govern- 
ineut  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Question.  You  have  been  in  American  vessels  f — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  In  wliat  year  T— A.  1871. 

Q.  What  others  T — A.  1872,  as  near  as  I  can  recollect. 

Q.  Any  other  years  Y — A.  I  don't  rightly  recollect  what  yearti. 

Q.  I  don't  want  to  tie  yon  down  to  dates. — A.  It  was  1873  or  1874. 

Q.  There  were  three  different  seasons,  1871, 1872,  and  1873  or  1874  T— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Had  you  any  license  to  fish  T — A.  No. 

Q.  Those  vessels  sailed  out  of  the  port  of  Gloucester.  Did  you  ever 
bear  of  licenses  f — A.  No,  sir ;  I  never  heard  of  them. 

Q.  You  understood  they  were  issued  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  AVhy  didn't  you  apply? — A.  Well,  I  don't  know ;  the  captain  didn't 
take  them. 

Q.  You  are  the  captain  of  a  vessel  now  vourselfT — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  go  into  the  bay  to  catch  mackerel  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  have  yon  been  doing  this  yearl — A.  Cod  fishing. 

Q.  At  Newfoundland? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  vessels  were  those?  Name  them. — A.  The  Peerless,  the 
William  B.  Hutchins,  and  the  Peerless  again. 

Q.  Did  you  get  full  fares? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  W^hat  size  were  the  vessels  ? — A.  We  got  full  fares  twice ;  the 
last  time  we  did  not 

(I  Were  you  mackerel  fishing  any  other  years? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  did  you  catch  those  fish  ? — A.  We  caught 
tbeu)  within  three  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Wera  there  many  other  vessels  fishing  in  company  with  you  from 
time  to  time? — A.  Yes  ;  more  or  less. 

Q.  Where  did  they  fish?— A.  They  fished  alongside  of  us. 

Q.  Did  you  see  any  considerable  number  of  vessels  fishing  more  than 
three  miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Well,  it  is  pretty  hard  to  measure. 
We  cau't  tell  exactly. 

Q.  To  the  best  of  your  judgment? — A.  I  have  seen  some  fishing  off 
a  little  further  at  times. 

Q.  How  many  ? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

^  Q.  The  m^ority  ?  The  largest  number  or  the  smallest  number  ? — ^A. 
^'ell,  there  woold  be  generally  a  fleet,  mostly  of  100  sail— sometimes 
less,  sometimes  10  sail. 

Q<  You  have  told  us  where  yon  canght  yourself.    Where  did  the 


1002 


AWABD  OF  THE  FI8HEBY  COMMISSION. 


frreatest  uuinber  of  the  vessels  get  the  greatest  part  of  their  flsh  !->A. 
The  greatest  number  of  them  got  them  arouud  Prince  Edward  Island 
and  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  f— A.  They  got  them  handy  three  miles. 

Q.  Inside  of  three  miles  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  know  whether  yon  were  running  any  riek  fishing  in- 
shore!   Were  you  aware  at  the  time  t — A.  Yea. 

Q.  You  were  running  the  rislc  of  capture.  Were  the  other  vessels 
aware  of  this  T  Did  you  converse  with  any  of  the  skippers  t — A.  Yes ; 
they  were  well  aware  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  see  the  cutter  t — A.  Yes ;  sometimes. 

Q.  "What  did  you  do  then  f — A.  I  would  leave. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  know  whether  the  greater  number  of  the  ve.sselfi 
to3k  licenses  or  notT — A.  No.  I  heard  of  a  few.  I  could  not  mentiuu 
any  names. 

Q.  Did  you  converse  with  any  of  the  other  skippers  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  you  find  any  that  had  licenses  ? — A.  No;  I  don't  know  otie. 

Q.  Well,  how  many  flsh  did  you  take  in  the  two  first  vessels  you  nion- 
tioned — the  Peerless  and  the  William  B.  Hutohinst  How  many  bar- 
rels!—A.  We  fitted  for  250. 

Q.  That  filled  you  !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  make  more  than  one  trip! — A.  No;  I  did  not  go  biick 
again.  I  left  the  vessel  when  we  arrived  in  port.  She  was  only  a 
small  vessel. 

Q.  You  only  made  one  trip  on  each  occasion  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  best  season  for  catching  mackerel  in  the  Gulf  of  St. 
Lawrence! — A.  We  went  there  the  last  of  June. 

Q.  I  asked  you  which  was  the  best  season.  What  is  considere<l  by 
the  American  fishermen  the  best  season  ! — A.  July,  August,  and  Sep- 
tember are  supposed  to  be  the  best. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  number  fishing  in  1871  ?— A. 
No ;  I  could  not  give  you  any  rightly. 

Q.  Did  you  see  200  at  one  time  ! — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Where  did  you  see  them  ! — A.  I  think  I  saw  them  at  Magdalen 
Islands  for  one  day. 

Q.  You  don't  know  what  the  Ameiicans  themselves  considered  the 
number  of  the  fleet  for  that  year  ! — A.  No. 

Q.  Were  there  anymore  or  less  afterwards  ! — A.  I  could  not  say. 
We  never  went  into  many  ports. 

Q.  You  are  not  aware  whether  there  was  a  greater  or  a  smaller  nuin- 
ber  fishing  ! — ^A.  No. 

Q.  How  many  weeks  were  you  catching  this  fare  altogether  !— A.  To 
the  best  of  my  knowledge,  I  think  about  eight  weeks  on  that  trip. 

Q.  Was  it  a  usual  or  an  unusual  thing  for  a  vessel  not  to  get  pretty 
good  fare! — A.  I  was  there  three  times,  and  during  my  stay  we  got  good 
fares  each  time. 

Q.  Generally,  was  it  considered  among  the  American  skippers  a  usual 
thing,  or  was  it  considered  an  unusual  thing,  to  go  home  with  a  small 
fare  ! — A.  Some  of  them  did,  and  some  got  very  large  fares. 

Q.  Bnt  I  joat  want  to  know  what  the  actual  state  of  the  matter  is. 
Was  it  generally  considered  a  nsnal  thing  to  go  home  with  a  small  fare, 
or  did  they,  in  the  majority  of  cases,  fill  up  !— A.  At  this  time  in  1871 
and  1872,  they  did  not  get  very  large  fares. 

Q.  I  am  aware  of  thai,  bat  even  at  t^at  time  did  not  most  vessels  do 
pretty  well ! — A.  Yes,  most 


▲WARD    or  THE  FISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


1003 


the  Gulf  of  St. 


lost  vewels  do 


Q.  Have  you  ever  been  in  Amerioan  vessela  cod-fishing  or  balibut- 
tishincT  T — A.  I  was  one  year  cod-flsbing. 

Q.  What  year  was  that  f— A.  That  was  in  1873  or  1874. 

Q.  In  an  American  vessel  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  the  same  vessel  you  had  been  catching  mackerel  in  f — 
A.  No ;  that  was  another. 

Q.  Well,  do  the  mackerel  vessels  not  catch  some  coil  fish  T— -A.  Yes,  in 
general. 

Q.  Tliey  are  prepared  to  catch  codfish  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  all  catch  a  fow  f — A.  In  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  T 

Q.  Yes,  or  where  you  were  fishing,  all  aroand  the  coast  f — A.  Well, 
they  catch  very  few. 

Q.  What  do  you  call  very  few  f  Do  they  all  take  some  home  T — A. 
Yea,  some,  more  or  less. 

i).  Do  they  catch  these  codfish  right  on  the  mackerel  ground  T  They 
aroall  prepared  for  catching  codT — A.  Yes;  they  are  all  ready  at  the 
time. 

Q.  They  carry  the  gear  to  catch  codfish  as  well  as  mackerel  ? — A. 
i'es ;  they  carry  some  gear ;  not  very  much. 

Q.  But  they  all  carry  some,  so  that  when  the  mackerel  are  not  biting 
tbey  catch  cod  on  the  same  grounds  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  they  do  with  the  gurry  of  codfish  T  Do  they  clean  them 
on  deck  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  throw  it  over  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  On  the  fishing-gronnd  T — A.  Most  likely. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Captain  Stapleton  ? — A.  I  am  not  personally  ac- 
quainted with  him.    I  have  seen  him. 

Q.  Did  yon  see  him  out  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  he  fish  inshore  or  outshore  f — A.  I  could  not  say. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  spoke  of  fishing  in  the  years  1871, 1872,  and  1873  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  don't  you  know  that  the  Dominion  Government  ceased  to  issue 
liceuses  after  the  year  1870  f — A.  I  was  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  licenses  issued  in  1871  f — A.  Ko ;  only  as  I 
heard.    I  don't  know  of  any  being  issned. 

Q.  You  don't  know  of  any  that  had  licenses  in  1871, 1873,  and  1873  f— 
A.  No. 

Q.  Then  you  don't  mean  to  say  that  yon  know  that  they  could  get 
tbem  if  they  wished  them  f  You  don't  know  whether  they  were  issued 
or  not  in  thbse  years  1 — A.  No. 

(Mr.  Dana  refers  to  correspondence,  cited  in  brief,  showing  that  no 
liceuses  were  issued  after  1870.) 

Mr.  WsATHfiBBB.  They  were  notaware  of  that  All  I  wanted  to  show 
was  that  they  were  running  the  risk. 

Mr.  Dana.  You  cannot  show  that  by  witnesses  saying  they  had  no 
licenses. 

Mr.  Weathbbbb.  We  admit  that  there  were  none  issued. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  sailed  out  of  Gloucester  several  times.  Yon  have  mentioned 
the  occasiODB.  Do  yon  know  anything  about  the  shore  fisheries  of  the 
United  States,  the  seine  fishing  t — A.  I  have  been  seining  off  there,  from 
GloQcester. 

Q.  How  far  out  t— A.  Sometimes  a  long  way,  and  sometimes  very 
bandy. 

Q.  Was  there  a  great  deal  of  seining  done  all  along  the  MaasaohU' 


1004 


AWABD  OP  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


aettfl coast  near  Olonoester  and  that  neighborhood t — A.  Yes;  some, 
more  or  less. 

Q.  Was  there  a  good  deal  of  weir  fishing  there  on  that  coast  t— A. 
Yes,  on  the  Massachusetts  coast  and  Vineyard  Sound. 

Q.  Was  it  not  successful  fishery ;  a  good  many  people  employed  in 
it  and  a  great  many  fish  caught  f — A.  They  used  to  get  bait  there ;  that 
is  all  I  know. 

Q.  You  don't  know  anything  about  whether  it  was  successful  or  not  f— 
A.  No. 

Q.  But  there  was  a  good  deal  of  it,  and  a  good  many  people  em- 
ployed f — A.  I  was  not  in  that  sort  of  fishins. 

Q.  Yon  knew  it  was  going  on,  didn't  you  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Also,  you  learned  by  being  at  Gloucester  that  in  the  autumn,  in 
November,  there  was  a  great  deal  of  mackerel  fishing  off  Cape  Cod  f— 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Those  mackerel  that  came  down  from  here,  it  is  supposed,  in  tlie 
autumn,  those  were  good  mackerel,  were  they  not? — A.  Yes;  late  iu 
the  season. 

Q.  Were  you  engaged  in  seining  in  vessels  on  the  American  coast  f— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Give  the  names  of  the  commanders  of  vessels  you  were  in,  sein- 
ing f — A.  I  could  give  the  name  of  the  first  vessel  I  was  iu ;  not  the 
captain. 

Q.  What  was  the  first  vessel's  name  f— A.  I  can  hardly  remember. 
She  bad  such  a  hard  name  I  forget  it. 

Q.  Gan  yon  state  the  captain's  name  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Gan  you  tell  the  names  of  any  of  the  vessels  f — A.  The  last  one 
was  the  S.  B.  Lane,  Captain  Jacobs. 

Q.  Do  yon  know  the  names  of  other  vessels  or  captains  of  the  vessels 
you  were  seining  in  f  — A.  No.    I  was  only  part  of  two  years  seining. 

Q.  Were  yon  long  employed  each  season  f — A.  One  month  the  tirst 
time  and  the  whole  season  the  last  time. 

Q.  Iu  what  parts  of  the  bay  were  you  seining  f — A.  We  fished  oil' 
Block  Island  in  the  spring,  in  June;  and  we  fished  on  George's  as  the 
season  advanced,  and  from  away  down  to  Mount  Desert 

Q.  You  followed  along  f — A.  Yes ;  and  back  to  Cape  Cod. 

Q.  When  were  you  at  Cape  Cod  f — A.  In  the  last  of  October. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q.  Yon  have  heard  of  the  American  fishery  having  failed,?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  that  in  the  States  f — A.  This  year,  I  believe,  it  has 
failed. 

Q.  That  is,  the  inshore  fishery.  When  you  were  in  the  States,  on 
board  an  American  vessel,  why  did  you  not  fish  in  American  waters, 
and  why  did  you  come  here  to  fish  f^A.  There  was  no  hooking  there. 

Q.  That  is,  no  fish  could  be  caught  with  hook  and  line  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  W^hy  not ;  was  it  because  the  fish  were  not  round  there  T— A.  The 
seines  had  destroyed  them. 

Q.  Then  you  heard  that  the  American  fishery  had  been  destroyed  by 
seine  fishing  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  was  the  opinion  of  the  Americans  themselves  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  was  in  consequence  of  the  destruction  of  the  American  fishery 
that  you  were  obliged  to  come  here  to  fish  f — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  Yon  refer  to  the  fishing  this  year  T— A.  For  as  much  as  three  years 
they  have  not  hooked  any  fish. 


▲WABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1005 


uiericau  coast  ?— 


hardly  remember. 


—A.  The  last  one 


teen  destroyed  by 


ich  as  three  years 


Q,  You  have  not  caaght  any  mackerel  with  hooks  in  American 
waters  f— A.  Nothing  worth  talking  aboat  for  the  last  throe  years. 

Q.  Have  yoa  been  there  during  those  three  years  f — A.  I  was  there 
in  1871. 

Q.  When  were  you  next  there  f— A.  I  was  there  in  summer,  right 
along  every  year  till  last  June. 

Q.  Summer  fishing  oft'  the  const  of  the  United  States  T— A.  Off  the 
const  of  Massaohnsetts. 

Q.  And  you  found  tlsh,  did  you  not  f — A.  Yes ;  we  found  some,  mere 
or  lesH. 

Q.  You  got  pretty  good  fares  !— A.  Some  years  we  did. 

Q.  When  were  you  fishing  on  the  American  coast  T — A.  Since  1873. 

Q.  What  did  yon  catch  in  1874  f— A.  We  went  to  the  George's  cod- 
fisbing  until  June. 

Q.  And  then  you  went  mackerelingf  I  suppose.  Where  did  you 
•^oT—A.  To  Block  Island  and  along  the  coast. 

Q.  What  was  your  catch  f — A.  The  catch  was  not  very  large. 

Q,  How  large  was  the  vessel  f — A.  Seventy  tons. 

Q.  What  was  your  catch  f — A.  About  800  barrels. 

Q.  Do  yon  call  that  a  destroyed  fishery  f — A.  That  catch  was  made 
with  a  seine. 

Q.  In  1875  what  vessel  were  you  in,  and  where  did  you  fish  on  the 
American  coast  t — A.  I  was  cod-fishing. 

Q.  Did  you  do  any  mackerel-fishing  in  1875  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  have  a  good  yield  of  codfish  T — A.  Pretty  fair. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  f — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  get  f — A.  We  made  short  trips  and  sold  the 
fish  when  we  came  in.    I  cannot  tell  the  catch  for  the  season. 

Q.  Where  were  you  in  1876  Y — A.  That  is  another  time,  I  was  down 
here ;  I  forgot  to  mention  it.  I  was  fishing  on  this  coast  in  an  Amori* 
can  vessel. 

Q.  You  were  not  on  the  American  coast  at  all  in  1876  f — A.  No. 

Q.  In  1874  you  were  cod-fishing  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  1875  were  you  mackerel-fishing  f- -A.  I  was,  either  in  1874 
or  1875. 

Q.  From  1873  to  the  present  time,  how  many  years  were  yon  mack- 
erel-fishing on  the  American  coast  T — A.  From  1871  until  last  year  in 
Jane. 

Q.  But  you  were  fishing  on  this  coast  in  1876  Y — A.  I  was  fishing  in 
an  American  vessel. 

Q.  How  many  years  have  you  been  fishing  on  the  American  coast  for 
maciierel  Y— A.  One  whole  year ;  that  is  all. 

Q.  And  you  caught  800  barrels  Y— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Who  has  told  you  that  the  American  fishery  has  been  destroyed  Y 
You  have  not  been  there  maokerel-fiHhing  except  one  year  Y — A.  I  was 
fishing  there  and  here  also ;  part  of  the  year  I  was  cod-fishing  off  there, 
and  part  of  the  year  1  was  in  the  bay. 

Q.  Yon  did  not  fairly  try  mackerel-fishing  on  the  American  coast  Y — 
A.  Yes  ;  I  tried  at  hooking  one  year  for  a  month. 

Q.  That  mode  of  fishing  has  rather  gone  out,  I  believe  Y — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  the  other  modes  used  for  taking  mackerel  are  successful,  are 
tbey  not  Y — A.  They  seem  to  be,  except  this  year. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe : 

Q>  You  are  following  the  old  mode  of  catching  fish  on  these  shores  Y 
—A.  Yes. 


1006 


AWARD  OF  THE   P18HERY  C0MMIB810N. 
No.  05. 


lion.  RoBBBT  YouTfO,  residiner  at  Garaqnette,  N.  B.,  merchant,  calloti 
on  behalf  of  the  Goverument  of  Her  Britannic  Mnjuatj',  sworn  and  ex- 
amined. 

By  Mr.  Thompson : 
Question.  You  are  president  of  the  executive  council  of  New  Bruii.v 
wick  I — Answer.  Yes. 
Q.  You  are  member  of  the  legislative  council  as  well,  I  believe  f— A. 

YC8. 

Q.  You  reside,  I  think,  on  the  shores  of  Bay  Ghaleurs  T — A.  Yes ;  at 
Caraquette. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  resided  there  f — A.  Twenty-six  years. 

Q.  Yon  are  acquainted  with  the  flsheries  along  ihe  coast,  I  presume, 
and  the  mauner  in  which  they  are  carried  on  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  are  the  kinds  of  fish  chiefly  taken  in  that  bay  f— A.  CoilAsb, 
mackerel,  and  herring. 

Q.  Take  mackerel ;  are  they  taken  out  in  the  body  of  the  bay  or  in- 
shore f — A.  Inshore  principally. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore,  as  a  rule,  are  they  takenT  — A.  Most  of 
them  are  taken  within  from  one  to  two  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Seldom  as  far  out  as  three  miles  T — A.  Sometimes  some  are  taken 
outside  •■)  but  the  principal  porUon  is  taken  within  a  mile  or  two  of  ttie 
shore. 

Q.  Those  taken  outside  are  comparatively  few  f— A.  Comparatively 
few. 

Q.  Could  any  one  sncoessfnlly  carry  on  the  busineas  of  mackerel 
fishing  in  Bay  Chaleure  or  the  gulf,  so  far  as  you  are  aware,  if  pro- 
hibited from  coming  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  to  tlsh  t— A.  They 
could  not. 

Q.  Mackerel  is  eminently  an  inshore  fish  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  other  fish  are  taken  on  your  shores t  You  fish  for  cod  t— A. 
For  cod  and  herring. 

Q.  Is  herring  entirely  an  inshore  fish  f  — A.  Yes.  Some  small  quanti- 
ties are  taken  ontside  the  bay. 

Q.  You  catch  them  inshore,  at  what  time  f— We  catch  cod  inshore  at 
the  early  part  of  the  season,  in  May  and  June. 

Q.  They  are  chiefly  taken  inshore,  then  f— A.  Chiefly. 

Q.  How  far  are  they  taken  from  the  shore  f — A.  About  a  con  pie  of 
miles  out  in  some  places.    From  two  to  six  miles  out  at  flrst. 

Q.  When  the  cod  first  come,  a  large  proportion  is  taken  inshore !— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  proportion  so  taken  f — A.  About  three-fourths. 

Q.  That  continues  in  May  and  June  t — A.  In  the  mouth  of  May  and 
the  best  part  of  June. 

Q.  After  that  they  strike  out  T — A.  Yes ;  into  deep  water. 

Q.  How  about  halibut  f — A.  Halibut  are  generi^ly  taken,  I  think,  i(i 
deep  water. 

Q.  How  about  haddock  and  pollack  f — A.  We  have  no  pollack  on  our 
coast. 

Q.  You  have  haddock  f— A.  Yes.    They  are  taken  in  deep  water. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  whether  during  the  years  of  the  Beciprocity 
Treaty,  large  numbers  of  American  mackerel-fishing  vessels  frequented 
the  bay  f— A.  Yoa  refer  to  the  years  flrom  1854  to  1856.  I  have  seen 
large  numbers  of  American  vessels  in  the  bay  daring  those  years. 


AWARD   OF  THE    F18IIKRY   COMMISSION. 


1007 


»f  the  bay  or  in- 


..  Comparatively 


0  pollack  on  our 


Q.  Before  1834  did  they  come  there  T— A.  Yee;  I  naw  them  before 
18.VI. 

Q.  They  fltthed  inshore  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  the  cotters  ever  interfere  with  them  before  the  Beciprooity 
Trnity,  before  1854? — A.  Not  to  my  Itnowledge. 

Q.  After  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  abrofrnted  in  1800,  and  from  that 
on  and  before  the  Treaty  of  Washington  in  1871  was  made,  the  Americans 
sitill  came  in  the  same  way  T— A.  Yes. 

i).  Did  the  cutters  come  in  once  in  u  while  then  ?— A.  Yes. 

(j.  Did  the  cutters  meddle  with  them  ? — A.  They  came  between  1860 
and  1S71. 

Q.  What  did  the  American  Ashermen  do  T — A.  I  have  seen  them  get 
under  way  and  leave  and  go  down  the  bay  when  the  cotters  came  in 
silflit.    They  were  (ishin^  close  inshore. 

Q.  That  was  the  asual  practice  ? — A.  I  have  seen  it  done  several 
times. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  have  yon  seen  at  one  time  f— A.  I  have  seen 
at  one  time  off  my  onn  place  akx>ut  100  vessels. 

Q.  Th^t  is  off  Oaraquette  ?— A.  Yes. 

(■i.  Were  they  all  Ashing  within  three  miles  of  shore  T— A.  Most  of 
tbem,  not  all  of  them  ;  bot  I  should  say  three-fourths  of  them,  perhaps 
more. 

Q.  They  were  all  tisUing  for  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  During  the  time  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  and  fh>m  that  on,  about 
how  many  mackerelers  fk-equented  the  bay  t — A.  About  300. 

Q.  After  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  abolished,  they  still  came  in  the 
same  manner  f — A.  Yes ;  i  saw  no  difference. 

Q.  Up  to  the  present  time  has  there  been  any  falling  off,  and  if  so, 
wbereT — A.  There  have  not  lieen  so  many  since  1871.  I  have  not  seen 
80  many  in  the  bay  since  1871. 

Q.  How  many,  on  an  average,  have  you  seen  in  the  bay  since  1B71 T — 
A.  I  should  say  about  100;  the  number  may  be  more. 

Q.  Of  course  you  are  speaking  now  only  of  Bay  Ghaleurs  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Those  vessels  come  direct  to  Bay  Ohaleurs,  I  believe  ;  they  do  not 
stop  to  fish  in  the  gulf  or  around  Prince  Edward  Island  T — A.  Those 
who  come  to  Bay  Chaleurs  generally  return  to  the  bay. 

Q.  How  many  trips  will  American  vessels  make  in  a  season  to  Bay 
Cbaleurs  f — A.  They  generally  make  two  trips,  but  some  will  make  three. 

Q.  Since  the  Treaty  of  Washington  and  transshipping  has  been  prac- 
ticed, liave  not  the  vessels  made  more  trips  t — A.  I  am  not  aware  with 
respect  to  transshipping;  they  do  not  transship  in  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  they  transship  at  Oanso  T — A.  I  am  not  aware 
of  it. 

Q.  I  believe  you  have  a  large  cod-fishing  business  of  your  own  f — A. 
I  do  principally  a  cod- fishing  business. 

ii.  You  have  men  and  boats  to  fish  for  cod  f — A.  Yes. 

(}.  Where  do  yon  send  your  fish  ? — A.  To  the  Mediterranean  and  West 
Indies.  There  is  a  large  local  consumption  ;  we  sell  a  good  deal  of  it  in 
the  province. 

(}.  Do  you  send  any  to  the  United  States  T — A.  No. 

Q.  The  herring  fishery  along  your  coast  is  a  large  one  ? — A.  Yes,  there 
is  a  large  quantity  of  herring  taken  on  our  coast. 

Q.  What  do  yon  with  the  herring  yon  take  f — A.  They  are  generally 
shipped  to  Quebeo  and  Montreal. 

Q.  None  to  New  York  that  you  are  aware  off— A.  I  think  some  of  the 
spring  herring  are  sent  to  the  State  from  the  north  side  of  Bay  Ohalettrs. 


1008 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


I  am  not  aware  whether  any  have  been  sent  latterly,  but  years  ago  some 
were  sent  from  there. 

Q.  None  were  sent  from  your  side ;  the  New  Brunswick  siOe  of  the 
bay  f — A.  No.  They  have  been  sent  from  our  side  of  the  bay  to  Irelaud 
in  pretty  large  quantities. 

Q.  How  many  men  and  boats  do  you  employ! — A.  In  my  own  boats 
I  have  60  men. 

Q.  In  how  many  boats  f — A.  I  al'M)  supply  a  number  of  boats ;  I  do 
not  own  the  boats,  but  ".  supply  the  fishermen. 

Q.  They  are  fishing  for  you  t — A.  Yes 

Q.  Do  they  fish  inshore  ? — A.  Those  who  fish  iu  my  own  boats  lish 
inshore. 

Q.  Those  you  supply  T— A.  Those  I  supply  I  buy  the  fish  from  them. 

Q.  At  a  price  agreed  apon  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  price  per  quintal  you  pay  for  the  codfish  f — A.  Four 
dollars. 

Q.  That  is  after  it  is  dried  and  cured  ? — A.  Yes,  and  ready  for 
market. 

Q.  I  suppose,  as  regards  those  who  fish  inshore  in  your  boats,  you 
take  the  tish  and  pay  them  iu  the  same  way  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Arc  you  aware  that  the  people  iu  the  county  of  Gloucester  or 
along  the  shores  of  the  gulf  or  Bay  Chaleurs  ever  sent  a  vessel  to  Amer- 
ican waters  to  fish  ! — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  to  the  people  of  your  district  the  Treaty  of  Washington  is 
no  advantage  whatever  f — A.  Not  so  far  as  selling  fish  is  conceruiHl. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q,  How  many  American  fishing-vessels  have  you  seen  yourself  within 
the  last  few  years  in  Bay  Chaleurs? — A.  I  have  seen  about  40  myself. 

Q.  In  what  year?— A.  In  1872,  1873,  and  1874. 

Q.  About  the  same  number  in  each  of  those  years  ? — A.  Yes ;  some 
years  perhaps  more  or  less. 

Q.  That  would  be  tbe  average  from  1872  to  1874,  inclusive  ?— A.  Yes, 
of  those  I  saw  myselV. 

Q.  How  many  in  1^)75  and  187G  ? — A.  There  may  have  been  as  many 
those  years,  but  I  cannot  bo  as  positive  in  regard  to  them.  My  impres- 
sion is  that  the  number  fell  oft'  and  there  were  not  as  many  as  before.  I 
saw  about  a  dozen  this  year. 

No.  66. 

Ronald  McDonald,  farmer  and  flshfrman,  East  Point,  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island,  called  on  behalf  of  the  (Government  of  Her  Britafuiic  Ma- 
jesty, sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  How  many  years  have  you  been  engaged  in  fishing  ?— An- 
swer. About  15  years. 

Q.  Is  fishing  carried  on  to  any  extent  in  your  neighborhood  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  With  what  class  of  craft  do  you  fish  ? — A.  Boats. 

Q.  Has  that  kind  of  fishing  increased  much  of  late  years?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  much  would  you  say  during  the  last  five  years  f — A.  It  has 
fully  doubled. 

Q.  And  you  find  it  pretty  profitable  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  From  East  Point  to  the  Chapel  is  one  of  the  Itest  fishing  grounds 
at  the  island  ? — A.  It  is  one  of  the  best ;  I  oonld  not  say  it  is  the  best. 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


1009 


Q.  How  many  boats  are  engaged  from  East  Point  to  Georgetown  and 
round  East  Point  f — A.  Tliere  are  a  large  number,  bat  I  could  not  say 
liow  many. 

Q.  How  many  about  East  Point? — A.  From  East  Point  to  Souris 
there  are  probably  from  100  to  150  boats ;  there  are  over  100. 

Q.  Are  they  small  boats  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  On  the  north  side  of  the  island,  I  believe  they  are  larger  1 — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  About  how  many  men  to  a  boat  f — A.  On  the  north  side  about 
four  men  to  a  boat. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  do  the  boats  catch  their  flsh  ? — A.  From 
oDe  and  one  and  a  half  to  two  miles  of  the  shore;  principally  within  a 
mile  and  a  half  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Have  many  American  fishermen  visited  yon  dnring  the  last  15  or 
20  years? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  seen  them  yourself  by  dozens  and  hundreds  at  a  time  ? 
-A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  they  catch  fish  when  they  come  round  your  part  of  the 
island  ? — A.  Principally  along  the  shore. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  on  the  same  ground  as  the  boats  ? — A.  Yes,  pretty 
much  80. 

Q.  Do  the  men  in  the  boats  catch  any  fish  besides  mackerel  ? — A. 
Codfish. 

Q.  To  any  extent  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Largely? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  catch  these  codfish  within  the  three  miles  or  outside? — 
A.  The  principal  part  are  taken  inside  of  the  three  miles.  We  catch 
some  outside. 

Q.  In  the  spring  of  the  year  you  take  large  quantities  of  herring  for 
bait?— A.  Yes. 

(}.  They  are  taken  right  inshore  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Not  a  quarter  of  a  mile  from  the  shore  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  in  American  vessels? — A.  Yes. 

(^  How  uiany  years  i — A.  About  seven  summers. 

Q.  When  did  you  first  go  in  an  American  schooner  ? — A.  About  1859 
or  1800. 

Q.  What  is  the  name  of  the  first  vessel  ? — A.  Daniel  McFie,  of  Glou* 
wsier,  Daniel  McFie,  captain. 

(ij  Where  »lid  you  flsh? — A.  We  began  to  fish  along  the  island 
towards  North  Cape,  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  And  you  fished  along  at  all  the  usual  places? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  did  yon  catch  that  year  f — A.  About  liOO  barrels  for  the 
Wilson. 

Q.  How  far  from  shore  did  you  usually  fish  ? — A.  We  fished  mostly 
all  over  the  bay.  The  principal  part  of  the  fish  we  got  on  the  Canada 
^lioru  and  Ca()e  Breton  shore  and  along  the  island.  We  cangiit  a  few 
on  Jiaiik  Bradley,  ami  some  up  northward  about  Gasp(3.  The  principal 
l>art  we  got  on  Cape  Breton  shore. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  catch  on  Bank  Bradley  ? — A.  Not  more 
than  from  15  to  20  barrels.  perhai)S  less. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  at  the  Magdalen  Islands  that  year? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  year  was  that?— A.  1859  or  1860. 

Q<  In  what  vessel  did  you  go  next? — A.  In  Itattler. 

Q.  Mow  many  summers  were  you  in  that  vetssel? — A.  One  summer. 

Q.  Who  was  the  captain  ? — A.  Andrew  Layton. 

^.  Where  did  the  vessel  hail  from  ? — A.  Gloucester. 

64  F 


1010 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  many  barrels  did  she  g^t  f — A.  About  1,000  barrels. 

Q.  Captain  Lajton  is  always  successful  apparently  f — A.  I  believe 
he  is. 

Q.  He  is  one  of  the  best  fishermen  in  the  fleet  ? — A.  In  his  time,  when 
he  was  in  the  bay,  I  think  he  was. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  to  fish  T— A.  I  shipped  at  East  Point,  Priuce 
Edward  Island,  and  we  fished  along  to  West  Cape ;  then  up  the  west 
shore,  up  to  the  Bay  Chaleurs ;  then  otf  Bank  Bradley,  and  afterward 
at  the  Magdalen  Islands,  and  away  up  the  Canada  shore,  above  Gaspe. 

Q.  Did  you  take  fish  on  Bank  Bradley  T— A.  From  70  to  100  barrels. 

Q.  Taking  the  fiah  you  got  off  East  Point,  along  Prince  Edward  Is- 
land, along  the  west  shore  and  Canada  shore,  how  far  from  the  land  did 
you  catch  them  ? — A.  Along  the  island  and  the  west  shore,  wc  got  the 
principal  part  close  to  the  shore. 

Q.  How  did  you  do  along  the  west  shore! — A.  From  the  time  we  left 
Bay  Chaleurs  we  probably  got  about  200  barrels. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  in  Bay  Chaleurs  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  ? — A.  We  tried  everywhere  ;  part  of  the 
time  inshore. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  much  in  the  center  of  the  bay  f — A.  Xo. 

Q.  You  did  fiah  somewhat  there  ? — A.  We  did. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  this  large  catch  was  taken  within  three  mWn 
of  shore  ? — A.  About  one-half. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  the  other  half? — A.  On  Bank  Bradley  and  at 
the  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  What  wae  the  next  vessel  in  which  you  fished  ? — A.  W.  S.  Baker. 

Q.  How  many  years  were  you  in  her  T — A.  Four  consecutive  years. 

Q.  Who  w>  s  the  captain  T — A.  A.  K.  Pierce. 

Q.  What  did  you  catch  the  first  summer  in  her? — A.  Something  over 
900  barrels. 

Q.  What  the  second  year  ? — A.  About  the  same,  over  900  barrels. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch  the  third  year  T — A.  About  400  barrels. 

Q.  And  the  fourth  year  ? — A.  About  500  barrels. 

Q.  W^hat  was  the  size  of  the  schooner  ? — A.  From  98  to  100  tons. 

Q.  Where  did  you  trke  the  catches  those  four  years— did  you  ^o  tsi 
the  same  places  every  year  ? — A.  To  pretty  much  the  aame  places.  We 
generally  took  a  great  many  round  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Cape 
Breton.    We  got  some  at  Bank  Bradley  and  some  at  Magdalen  Islands. 

Q.  Those  you  took  at  Cane  Breton  and  Prince  Edward  Island,  how 
far  from  the  shore  were  they  taken  ? — A.  One  trip  we  made  I  suppose 
we  got  about  400  barrels  at  one  time,  all  inshore. 

Q.  Taking  the  fish  caught  during  the  whole  four  seasons,  what  pro 
portion  would  be  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ?— A.  At  least 
two-thirds. 

Q.  You  did  catch  a  few  on  Bank  Bradley  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  many  vessels  accustomed  to  fish  on  Bank  Bradley  ?— A.  We 
never  fished  a  great  deal  there,  except  when  we  found  fish  there.  One 
time  we  got  a  decent  haul. 

Q.  Did  you  try  there  very  often  T — A.  Yea. 

Q.  And  were  only  once  successful  f—A.  Once  we  were  successful. 

Q.  That  was  the  only  time  f — A.  The  only  time  in  that  vessel. 

Q.  As  a  rule,  where  do  American  vessels  go  to  fish  ;  do  they  make 
for  Bank  Bradley  or  for  inshore  T — A.  The^  make  for  inshore. 

Q.  Why  T — A.  Because  the  fish  are  generally  there. 

Q.  What  was  the  next  vessel  in  which  you  fished  T — A.  Reunion,  of 
Gloucester.    I  fished  two  mouths  in  her  at  the  latter  part  of  the  season. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1011 


n  his  time,  when 


1  tbe  time  we  left 


.  Something  over 


Q.  Where  did  yoa  fish  f— A.  Bound  North  Cape  and  Malpocqae  and 
Margaree. 

Q.  Were  you  in  British  bottoms  besides  the  American  vessels  yon 
bavo  named  f — A.  I  was  in  one.  I  have  been  mostly  boat-fishing  since 
then. 

Q.  You  have  been  15  years  fishing  altogether  ? — A.  That  is  between 
boat  and  schooner  fishing. 

Q.  During  those  15  years  what  would  be  the  average  number  of  the 
American  flo't  which  came  down  to  the  bay? — A.  I  should  say  from 
400  to  500  sail.  I  have  counted  300  sail  at  one  place ;  they  sailed  past 
East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Island,  during  one  day. 

Q.  Did  these  300  vessels  fish  on  tbe  same  grounds  ? — A.  Pretty  much 
80 ;  they  try  all  along. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  were  they  accustomed  to  fish  as 
tbey  sailed  along? — A.  Along  the  island,  generally  from  one  to  three 
miles  from  shore.  That  is  tbe  principal  fisbing-ground.  Of  course  tbey 
drift  off. 

Q.  Suppose  they  do  not  drift  off,  is  it  within  your  knowledge  that  any 
fishnrman  deliberately  goes  to  tbe  open  sea,  and  there  hauls  to  and  com> 
luences  to  fish  ? — A.  There  may  be  some  cases.  Men  have  different 
uotious  about  fishing;  some  prefer  one  thing  and  some  another.  Aa  a 
ireneral  thing  they  try  inshore,  and  if  they  cannot  get  fish  tbey  try  oft'- 
shore. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  successful  in  finding  fish  off  shore? — A.  We 
got  more  inshore  than  offshore,  of  course. 

Q.  Do  American  schooners  injure  the  boat-fishing  ! — A.  I  shouid  think 
they  do. 

Q.  Do  you  think  they  do! — A.  Yes;  tbey  do. 

t^.  Are  they  looked  upon  as  benefactors  ? — A.  Tbe  boat-fishermen  Jo 
not  at  all  like  to  see  them  come. 

Q.  Why? — A.  Because  they  lee-bow  the  boats,  throw  out  large  quan- 
tities of  bait  and  take  tbe  fish  from  tbe  boats,  so  that  tbe  boats  have 
uo  chance  with  tbem. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  Americun  vessels  are  down  this  year? — A. 
I  have  not  seen  many. 

Q.  You  don't  know  how  many  there  are  in  tbe  bay  ? — A.  I  could  not 
say. 

Q.  Is  this  a  gootl  fishing  year — are  you  catching  plenty  of  mackerel? 
-A.  There  is  good  fishing  round  tbe  island.  It  is  a  good  year  where  1 
am  boat  fishing. 

^^  When  tbe  cutters  were  on  the  coast  did  you,  when  in  American 
vessels,  take  as  large  a  catch  as  you  used  to  do  ?  Did  they  do  much 
ii'Jiiry  to  Americau  vessels  ? — A.  We  never  were  much  injured  by  them. 

Q.  How  used  you  to  act ;  did  you  keep  out  of  the  way  of  tbe  cutters? 
-A.  We  sneaked  in  once  in  a  while.  There  was  one  year  we  had  a 
linense. 

Q.  You  then  fished  where  you  liked  ? — A.  Yes. 

0  ^vjjetiier  the  cutters  were  about  or  not,  you  went  inshore  to  fish? 
~A.  Ye?. 

^l  Have  you  no  information  as  to  American  vess3ls  in  the  bay  this 
year! — A.  Only  what  I  heard  from  captains. 

Q.  You  have  beard  from  American  captains  ? — A.  No ;  it  was  from  an 
iHlaud  captain.  Gaptain  James  Macdonald,  of  the  Lettie,  who  has  landed 
-3*)  barrels,  told  mo  be  thought  about  150  vessels  were  in  the  gulf.  That 
was  two  or  three  weeks  ago. 


1012 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Aboot  parse-seining;  you  have  seen  a  good  deal  of  it,  I  suppose ?— 
A.  I  have  seen  it,  but  not  much  of  it. 

Q.  What  do  you  suppose  is  the  effect  of  it  on  the  fisheries  ?•— A.  I 
should  not  think  it  was  any  benefit. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  What  were  the  four  years  you  were  on  the  W.  S.  Baker  f— A. 
1867, 18CG,  1865,  and  1864. 

Q.  In  the  Rattler  you  made  the  best  voyage  you  ever  made — 1,000 
barrels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  trips  ? — A.  Three  trips ;  we  got  scarcely  anything  the 
last  trip 

Q.  On  the  first  trip,  did  you  go  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  there  ? — A.  Perhaps  200  barrels. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Bank  Bradley  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  got  some  tliere ;  about 
70  barrels. 

Q.  What  was  your  whole  catch  that  trip? — A.  Five  hundred  and 
forty  barrels,  I  think. 

Q.  On  the  second  trip  did  you  go  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  catch  there  ? — A.  About  150  barrels. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Bank  Bradley  f— A.  No. 

Q.  What  was  the  whole  catch  of  the  second  trip? — A.  Four  hundred 
barrels. 

Q.  Where  else  did  you  go  except  to  Magdalen  Islands?— A.  Kound 
the  north  side  of  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  The  third  trip  was  a  failure,  and  you  only  got  100  barrels?— A. 
Thereabouts. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  those  ? — A.  Principally  on  the  Cape  Breton 
shore. 

Q.  Now,  we  will  take  the  four  years  you  were  in  the  W.  S.  Baker. 
Did  you  go  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  the  first  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  trips  did  you  make  ? — A.  Two. 

Q.  How  many  fish  did  you  catch  round  Magdalen  Islands  on  the  first 
trip? — A.  Probably  about  100  barrels. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Bank  Bradley? — A.  Yes;  we  probably  got  150 
barrels  there. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  was  the  catch  of  the  first  trip? — A.  About 
500. 

Q.  On  the  second  trip  of  the  first  year,  did  you  go  to  the  Magdalen 
Islands? — A.  No. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Whe^-e  did  you  make  the  second  trip  ? — A.  In  the  Bend  of  Prince 
Edward  Island. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  ? — A.    Four  hundred. 

Q.  The  next  year  you  got  the  catch  in  how  many  trips? — A.  Two^ 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  on  the  first  trip? — A.  Yes; 
we  got  there  about  70  barrels. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  ?— A.  We  got  none  on 
Orphan ;  we  got  probably  100  on  Bradley. 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  the  rest  ?— A.  Along  Prince  E<lward  Island. 

Q.  How  many  comprised  the  first  catch  ?— A.  Something  over  500 
barrels. 

Q.  On  the  second  trip,  how  many  did  you  get  at  the  Magdalen 
Islands? — A.  None. 

Q.  How  many  at  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  t — A.  None. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1013 


ive  hundred  and 


,  We  got  uoiie  oa 


Q.  Where  did  you  get  them  all  T— A.  On  the  north  side  of  Priuce  Ed- 
ward Island. 

Q.  That  bringR  you  down  to  18GG;  you  got  400  barrels  that  year  in 
liow  many  trips ! — A.  One. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  ? — A.  We  were  out  the  whole  season  one  trip ; 
we  went  everywhere  through  the  bay. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Magdalen  Islands  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  get  there ! — A.  Probably  50  or  60  barrels ; 
perhaps  more. 

Q.  IIow  many  on  Ban  Its  Bradley  and  Orphan  ? — A.  We  did  not  get  a 
groat  many  there. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Fisherman's  Bank  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  get  there  T — A.  We  got  a  few  scattered  all 
over  the  bay ;  it  was  hard  picking. 

Q.  How  long  did  it  take  you  to  get  400  barrels  ?— A.  We  were  from 
about  the  last  of  August  to  the  end  of  the  season,  some  time  in  October. 

Q.  That  year  when  you  were  so  unlucky,  you  say  you  did  not  catch 
more  than  half  the  fish  within  three  miles  from  the  shore  f — A.  It  might 
be  a  little  over  one-half;  I  could  not  say  positively. 

Q.  In  the  last  year  you  fished  in  American  vessels,  the  last  yeai  you 
were  on  board  the  S.  8.  Baker,  you  caught  500  barrels,  now  many  trips  f — 
A.  One  trip. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  I — A.  Principally  along  Prince  Edward  Island, 
round  North  Gape,  and  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  the  Magdalen  Islands  ?— A.  Yes.  I  don't  suppose 
wo  got  over  40  barrels  there. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  ? — A.  Yes ;  we  got  a 
few  &»h,  I  could  not  say  how  many. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  difi:'erent  captains  had  different  no- 
tions about  places  where  to  fish  f — A.  Some  men  are  more  for  fishing  off 
shore  than  others,  I  believe.    That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  You  usually  fish  rather  inshore ! — A.  We  have  done  a  good  deal 
of  it.    We  get  big  fishing  inshore. 

Q.  When  you  begin  fishing  inshore  do  yon  not  drift  out  beyond  three 
miles! — A.  Of  course,  vessels  do. 

Q.  Do  you  drift  out  5  or  6  miles? — A.  I  call  that  outshore  fishing.  We 
hardly  ever  drift  off  that  far. 

Q.  Four  or  five  miles? — A.  Sometimes  you  get  mackerel  outside,  but 
as  a  general  thing  we  fish  inshore. 

Q.  In  that  kind  of  fishing  you  think  you  get  more  inside  of  three  miles? 
—A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  get  more  than  one-half  of  your  fish  inside  of  three 
miles  ? — A.  We  made  one  trip  altogether  very  near  the  shore. 

Q.  Of  the  whole  catch,  would  more  than  one-half  be  taken  inshore  ? — 
A.  I  should  say  two-thirds. 

Q.  You  were  asked  something  about  the  number  of  American  schoon- 
ers in  the  bay  this  year,  and  you  stated  that  Captain  Macdonald  had 
estimated  the  number  at  150  ?--A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  have  you  seen  yourself  this  year  ? — A.  I  don't  think  I 
have  seen  more  than  thirty  sail  this  year  at  one  time. 

Q.  Where  did  you  see  them  ? — A.  At  East  Point,  probably  three  or 
four  weeks  ago. 

Q.  Are  there  more  American  vessels  there  this  year  than  there  hi^ve 
been  for  three  or  four  years  past? — A.  I  could  not  say,  as  I  am  not 
on  board  a  vessel. 


1014 


^WABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


■^  ^'i^M  ^ 


Q.  How  far  oat  do  you  go  fishing  f— A.  Sometimes  one,  two,  or  three 
miles. 

Q.  Yon  have  not  seen  more  than  30  American  vessels  this  year  at  one 
timet — A.  No. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  see  last  year  ? — A.  I  could  not  exactly  say 
how  many  at  one  time. 

Q.  A  dozen  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  More  or  less  T — A.  I  think  more. 

Q.  How  many  more  T — A.  Perhaps  15  or  20  sail  at  a  time. 

Q.  What  was  the  greatest  number  you  saw  together  in  1875  ?— A.  I 
could  not  tell  by  the  dates. 

Q.  Only  a  small  number  as  compared  with  former  years,  I  suppose  ?— 
A.  There  was  not  so  large  a  fleet  as  in  former  years,  for  there  had  been 
large  fleets.  Some  years  I  should  say  there  were  probably  600  or  700 
vessels  in  the  bay. 

Q.  But  the  number  has  diminished  during  the  last  Ave  or  six  years 
very  much,  until  this  year  ? — A  Yes. 

Q.  Give  the  Commission  an  estimate  of  the  number  of  American 
mackerelers  on  the  north  side  of  Prince  Edward  Island  last  year.— A. 
I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Give  the  Commission  an  estimate  of  the  number  on  your  coast; 
they  mostly  all  go  to  East  Point ! — A.  Many  will  go  by  while  I  sleep 
at  night. 

Q.  Do  they  not  stop  there  if  the  fish  are  there  f — A.  Of  course. 

Q.  Give  the  best  estimate  you  can  of  the  number  of  American  ves- 
sels in  the  bay  last  year.— A.  Since  I  was  not  in  a  vessel  or  through  the 
bay,  it  would  be  very  bard  for  me  to  say  the  number. 

Q.  You  know  the  number  has  fallen  off  very  much  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  for  the  last  five  or  six  years  the  number  has  been 
quite  small  ? — A.  There  was  not  nearly  so  large  a  fleet ;  the  number  has 
fallen  off",  of  course. 

No.  07. 

Holland  C.  Payson,  fishery  overseer  for  Long  and  Bryer  Islands, 
residing  at  Westport,  Digby  County,  N.  S.,  called  on  behalf  of  the 
Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe: 

Question.  Westport  is  on  Bryer  Island  T — Answer.  Y'es. 

Q.  At  the  mouth  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  On  the  Nova  Scotia  side  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  On  one  side  bounded  by  the  Bay  of  Fundy  and  on  the  other  by  St. 
Mary's  Bay  t — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  St.  Mary's  Bay  is  a  long  bay  running  up  into  Digby  County  j  what 
length  is  it? — A.  About  30  miles. 

Q.  And  how  wide  is  the  bay  !— A.  About  nine  miles  across  at  our  part. 

Q.  How  wide  is  it  at  Petit  Passage  f — A.  About  six  miles ;  over  five. 

Q.  The  northern  side  of  the  bay  is  confined  by  Digby  Neck,  a  long 
stretch  of  landf — A.  Yes. 

Q.  About  how  long  is  that  neck  of  land  and  the  two  islands  T— A. 
From  27  to  30  miles. 

Q.  How  wide  is  that  neck  of  land  f— A.  At  some  places  not  over  one 
mile. 

Q.  All  round  the  neck  of  land  on  both  sides  of  it  there  are  valuable 
fisheries  ? — A.  Yes,  for  herring  md  mackerel. 


AWAHD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1015 


five  or  six  years 


(}.  Is  it  80  on  the  other  side  of  the  Bay  of  St.  Mary's  f — A.  There  is 
tisliiDg  all  in  that  bay. 

Q.  AH  round  the  shore  of  St.  Mary's  Bay,  both  shores  of  Digby  Neck, 
and  round  the  islands? — A.  Yes;  there  is  fishing  all  round  there. 

Q.  You  are  inspector  of  fisheries  there  ? — A.  Yes;  up  to  Tiverton  and 
Petit  Passage. 

Q.  What  do  you  consider  to  bo  the  value  of  the  fisheries  there  ? — A. 
Last  year  the  fishermen  exported  about  $200,000  worth  of  fish. 

Q.  What  parts  of  the  coast  does  that  include  7 — A.  The  two  islands. 

(].  From  the  two  islands,  which  constitute  about  7  miles  of  the  30 
miles  of  the  nock  on  one  side  of  the  bay,  the  fish  exported  amounted  to 
.4200,000!— A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  other  portion  of  the  fishery  is  as  good  as  yours  t — A.  Well, 
perhaps  not  quite ;  they  are  not  as  fully  carried  out. 

Q.  Fish  are  as  plentiful  ? — A.  There  is  fishing  all  along  the  coast. 

i).  The  people  on  those  islands  live  almost  exclusively  by  fishing? — 
A.  I'retty  much  altogether. 

Q.  For  a  nnmber  of  years  your  district  has  been  frequented  by  small 
American  schooners  ? — A.  Y'es. 

(}.  What  kinds  of  fish  do  they  catch  ? — A.  They  catch  the  same  kinds 
as  we  do — cod,  halibut,  pollack,  and  herring. 

(^  They  catch  their  own  bait  ? — A.  The  small  vessels  catch  their  own 
bait. 

Q.  Besides  these  small  American  schoolers,  your  district  is  frequented 
by  other  American  fishing- vessels  ? — A.  A  great  many  other  vessels 
come  in  mainly  for  bait,  sometimes  for  ice,  and  go  out  again. 

Q.  How  often  do  they  come  in  for  bait  T — A.  I  have  known  some  ves- 
sels to  come  three  times  in  a  season. 

Q.  Where  do  the  small  American  vessels  take  their  fish? — A.  To 
where  they  belong,  I  suppose  ;  they  come  from  along  the  coast  down  to 
Mount  Desert. 

Q.  It  is  a  business  that  is  increasing  ? — A.  Yes. 

(^  Do  the  American  vessels  fish  there  during  the  season  ? — A.  The 
small  fishing-vessels  fish  there  during  the  season,  and  the  other  vessels 
come  ill  for  bait.  There  are  fisheries  at  Whale  (Jove  and  White  Cove, 
from  one  to  three  miles  above  Petit  Passage,  and  quite  an  extensive 
tishery  about  five  miles  above.  The  people  there  complained  of  the 
small  American  vessels  coming  there  and  interfering  with  the  fishery. 
I  tokl  them  I  could  not  do  anything,  because  the  Americans  are  allowed 
the  same  privileges  as  we  are.  I  also  heard  complaints  of  the  Ameri- 
cans transgressing  the  law  by  Sabbath  fishing  and  throwing  gurry  over- 
board. In  two  cases  I  issueid  a  warrant,  but  they  got  out  of  the  way 
and  it  was  not  served  upon  them. 

Q.  Why  do  the  American  schooners  come  over  to  your  district,  and 
not  fish  on  their  own  coast  ? — A.  They  said  the  fishery  on  their  own 
coast  has  failed,  and  they  gave  me  as  a  reason  that  they  thought  it  was 
'<i  good  deal  due  to  the  trawling  practices. 

Q.  During  how  many  years  have  they  been  coming  there  ? — A.  Three 
or  four  years. 

Q.  They  gave  you  that  as  the  reason  why  they  come  to  your  coast? — 
A.  I  talk  to  a  great  many  masters  of  American  vessels.  My  son  keeps 
an  ice-house,  and  they  come  there  for  ice,  and  I  have  talked  with  them 
about  the  fisheries,  and  they  told  me  the  trawling  had,  in  a  measure, 
broken  up  their  fishing. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  do  th:'y  catch  cod,  poIla'.*k,  and  had- 
dock ? — A.  From  half  a  mile  to  a  mile.    The  large  vessels  fish  mostly 


m 


1016 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


outside  the  three  miles,  but  the  small  vessels  flMh  on  the  same  fjround 
as  our  own  fishermen.  The  small  vessels  fish  within  half  a  mile  or  a 
mile  of  the  shore.  They  anchor  the  vessels  in  the  harbor,  and  go  out 
in  boats  to  fish ;  they  fish  close  inshore. 

Q.  Previous  to  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  had  you  been  in  tlio  habit 
of  carrying  fish  to  American  ports? — A.  Yes;  I  followed  that  business. 

Q.  You  run  across  the  Bay  of  Fundy  and  are  in  the  Htates  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  How  far  are  you  from  Grand  Manan  f — A.  About  18  milea. 

Q.  The  boats  that  fish  at  your  place  run  across  to  Grand  Mauaii,  ntul 
fish  there  also  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Uow  long  did  you  carry  fish  to  the  United  States  before  the  Wash- 
ington Treaty  f^A.  For  30  years  off  and  on. 

Q.  llave  you  continued  the  business  since  the  Washington  Treaty  f— 
A.  No. 

Q.  Why  notf— A.  The  price  has  declined  so  much  it  does  not  pay  ino 
to  go.    We  get  more  for  our  fish  in  our  own  markets. 

Q.  You  are  aware  of  the  provision  of  the  treaty  by  which  fish  goes 
into  the  United  States  free  of  duty  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  a  great  advantage  f — A.  I  don't  think  it  is, 
for  under  the  former  regime,  when  we  paid  the  duty,  the  fish  netted  onr 
fishermen  more  than  they  have  since.  They  brought  more  money  per 
quintal  then  than  since. 

Q,  Where  have  you  taken  the  fish  since  f — A.  To  Halifax,  St.  John, 
and  Yarmouth.  A  large  amount  of  fish  is  being  sent  from  Yarmouth  to 
the  West  Indies. 

Q.  The  people  in  your  district  have  railway  connection  with  llali- 
faxl — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  the  Americans  in  the  habit  of  catching  halibut  on  your 
shores  T— A.  They  trawl  for  it. 

Q.  The  larger  American  vessels  of  which  you  spoke  go  out  to  sea  to 
fish  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  American  schooners  which  fish  in  their  skiffs 
among  your  boats,  is  the  quantity  of  fish  caught  by  them  less  or  more 
than  your  product  ? — A.  I  don't  think  it  is  nearly  so  much.  Our  fishing 
is  pretty  extensive. 

Q.  In  your  two  islands  the  product  last  year  was  $200,000.  What 
would  be  the  product  of  the  small  American  vessels  f — A.  I  don't  think 
the  small  vessels  would  catch  one-fourth  of  that. 

Q.  Do  you  think  one-fourth  ? — A.  Probably  less. 

Q.  The  business  is  increasing  t — A.  Yes.  More  people  are  employed. 
and  there  are  more  vessels. 

Q.  Since  you  are  so  near  the  States,  are  you  aware  that  any  of  your 
fishermen  have  gone  to  American  waters  to  fish  f — A.  I  never  knew  any. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  worth  their  while  to  do  sot — A.  I  never 
knew  one  of  onr  vessels  go  there. 

Q.  You  have  heard  from  American  fishermen  that  the  reason  why 
they  did  not  fish  on  their  own  shores  was  in  consequence  of  the  failure 
of  their  fisheries  I — A.  They  say  we  can  do  better  to  fish  at  your  place 
than  to  fish  on  our  own  coasts.  I  have;;often  said  to  them,  Why  do  you 
not  come  down  and  establish  a  fishery  on  our  side,  where  you  could 
better  carry  on  the  business  than  by  going  home.  I  ofier^  them  a 
very  good  stage  for  the  fishing  business. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  What  reason  did  they  give  for  not  adopting  your  suggestion  t— A. 
They  did  not  give  any  particular  reason. 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1017 


Q,  I  8ui)|)ose  they  preferred  to  live  where  they  bad  always  lived  T — 
A.  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  And  partly  because  they  had  hope  that  their  owo  fishing  would 
come  up  again  f— A.  Perhaps  so.  They  admitted  to  me  that  they  had 
to  tish  winter  and  summer,  and  then  did  not  do  more  tlian  live.  I  told 
them  our  fishermen  only  worketl  five  mouths  in  the  year,  and  did  nothing 
during  the  rest  of  the  year. 

Q.  Does  it  not  cost  more  to  live  in  the  States  than  whore  you  live  f— 
A.  We  get  most  of  our  provisions  from  the  States. 

Q.  There  is  considerable  trade  in  that  way  f — A.  If  we  can  get  pro* 
visions  from  the  States  cheap  enough  to  live,  those  in  the  States  should 
live  cheaper.     We  have  the  freight,  and  sometimes  duty,  to  pay. 

Q.  Do  American  Bank  fishermen  come  into  your  ports  for  bait  f — A. 
Ves. 

ii.  Are  your  people  prepared  to  sell  it  ? — A.  They  supply  the  vessels 
generally  when  they  come.  More  of  the  vessels  go  for  bait  above  my 
district,  at  Sandy  Cove,  and  some  take  it  in  the  harbors  of  Freeport 
and  Westport. 

Q.  ilave  you  any  theory  as  to  the  reason  why  the  price  of  fish  has 
declined  in  the  American  market  since  1871 T — A.  No;  unless  your  own 
people  catch  more  fish  and  supply  your  market  more. 

Q.  That  is  the  most  natural  solution  ! — A.  That  is,  I  supi^se. 

i}.  The  duties  being  taken  oQ',  you  can  send  your  fish  into  the  Amer- 
ican markets  free,  and  you  would  have  a  pretty  good  chance  if  the 
Americans  were  short  of  fish  ! — A.  Yes. 


)lcare  employed. 


suggestion  T— A. 


No.  G8. 

Clement  McIsaac,  residing  at  East  Port,  Prince  Edward  Island, 
farmer  and  fisherman,  called  on  behalf  uf  the  Government  of  Her 
Britannic  Majenty,  aworn  and  examined. 

IJy  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  Have  you  been  fishing  many  years  f — Answer.  Eighteen 
years. 

Q.  A  much  better  class  of  boats  is  now  employed  than  formerly? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  moro  |>eo])le  are  employed  T — A.  Those  who  used  to  go  with 
the  Americans  are  employed  now  in  our  own  fishing,  principally  with 
boats. 

(i.  Do  many  Americans  come  in  to  fish  with  vessels  ? — A.  Tbey  do. 

Q.  Do  they  injure  the  boat-fishing  when  they  come  ? — A.  Certainly 
they  do,  very  much. 

Q.  Describe  to  the  Commission  how  that  is. — A.  They  lee-bow  the 
boats,  and  throw  out  a  great  quantity  of  bait,  and  get  the  fish  away 
from  the  boats.  The  boats  generally  fish  on  a  spring,  and  they  have  to 
get  away  before  the  vessels  drift  down  upon  them  ;  so  the  vessels  spoil 
their  fishing. 

Q.  Your  boat  fishermen  do  not  welcome  the  Americans  with  open 
arms  T — A.  There  is  no  fear  of  that. 

Q.  You  would  rather  keep  them  away  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  on  board  Amerioan  vessels  7^A.  I  have. 

Q.  When  did  you  commence  T — A.  About  1859. 

Q.  What  was  the  first  vessel  ? — A.  Sarah  B.  Harris,  of  Book(Mrt, 
John  Conley,  captain. 


1018 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  What  did  she  catch  T — A.  We  made  a  very  poor  summer;  we 
caught  230  barrels. 

Q.  What  was  the  next  vessel  T— A.  Zona. 

Q.  What  year  was  that  f— A.  1860. 

Q.  Were  you  fishing  mackerel  T — A.  No ;  we  were  trawling,  at  Cape 
North  in  Gape  Breton,  and  between  Broad  Cove  and  Kimbo. 

Q.  Where  did  you  take  the  cod  T — A.  From  one  to  two  miles  from 
shore:  about  a  mile  and  a  half  off. 

Q.  Did  you  get  a  catch  T — A.  A  pretty  decent  catch  ;  I  do  not  retnoiii- 
ber  how  many  quintals. 

Q.  Did  you  get  any  bait  there  f — A.  We  got  a  few  mackerel  on  tlio 
Banks  where  we  were  fishing,  and  we  got  a  supply  of  fr38h  herring  at 
Magdalen  Islands.  Wo  got  sixteen  barrels,  half  of  which  we  caufjht 
in  Pleasant  Bay.  We  had  only  to  drop  our  nets  over  the  side  of  the 
vessel  to  take  them. 

Q.  What  was  the  next  vessel  you  were  in  f— A.  John  P.  ITalo,  of 
Bockport. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  catch  ? — A.  370. 

Q.  That  was  in  1804  T— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  did  you  next  go  iu  an  American  vessel  T — A.  In  ISG8. 

Q.  What  is  the  name  of  the  vessel  ? — A.  Ada  Fry. 

Q.  What  was  the  catch  ?— A.  About  170  barrels.  We  were  afraid  to 
come  inshore  on  account  of  the  cutters,  which  used  to  dart  iushorv  after 
a  time. 

Q.  That  is  why  you  made  such  a  i>oor  catch  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  many  American  vessels  in  the  bay  that  year  ? — A.  Tliere 
were,  off  and  on,  between  400  and  .500. 

Q.  Did  you  go  next  year  iu  an  American  vessel  ? — A.  No;  in  a  Do- 
minion vessel. 

Q.  How  many  fish  did  you  catch? — A.  500  barrels,  two  trips. 

Q.  In  what  vessel  did  you  fish  in  1870? — A.  Thomas  Hunt,  of  (Mou- 
cester. 

Q.  How  many  barrels  did  you  catch  ? — A.  Two  hundred  and  seventy, 
one  trip.  In  1871 1  was  in  the  George  P.  Rice,  of  Gloucester ;  we  took 
170  barrels;  she  was  a  vessel  of  80  tons;  we  were  five  weeks  in  the 
bay  making  the  fare.  In  1873  I  was  in  Lizzie  Williams,  of  North 
Haven ;  we  took  270  barrels. 

Q.  It  is  said  there  was  a  smaller  number  of  American  vessels  in  the 
bay  that  year.    How  many  were  there  ? — A.  Between  300  and  400. 

Q.  In  all  those  vessels  where  did  you  catch  the  fish?— A.  In  John  P. 
Hale  we  began  at  Port  Hood  Island  and  took  70  barrels  when  we  first 
hove  to,  three-quarters  of  a  mile  from  shore.  The  next  part  of  the  voy- 
age we  made  between  First  Chapel,  Georgetown,  and  East  Point,  and 
it  was  a  very  remarkable  thing,  we  got  them  in  very  shoal  water  aiul  in 
a  very  short  time. 

Q.  How  close  to  the  shore?— A.  About  three  quarters  of  a  mile  off 
shore. 

Q.  Taking  your  experience  all  through,  what  proportion  of  the  fish 
did  you  catch  within  three  miles  of  the  shore? — A.  I  never  caught  100 
barrels  outside  of  three  miles.    I  always  fished  in  shoal  water. 

Q.  As  far  as  your  experience  goes  and  from  what  yoa  saw  the  other 
fishing- vessels  catching,  where  did  they  take  their  fares?— A.  Generally 
oat  in  about  the  same  ground  as  we  did. 

Q.  Yoa  did  not  catch  any  on  Bank  Orphan  ? — A.  I  never  took  10 
barrels  there. 

Q.  Nor  on  Bank  Bradley  f — A.  No. 


r  summer;    wo 


do  Dot  remotii- 


.hn  P.  Ilule,  of 


L.  No;  in  a  Do- 


srs  of  a  mile  olf 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 
No.  69. 


1019 


Laugiilin  Macdonald,  reHidinio:  at  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island, 
flsberman,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Ma- 
jesty, sworn  and  examined : 

Jiy  Mr.  DavicH : 

Question.  Have  you  been  engaged  fishing  for  many  years  ?— Answer. 
About  all  my  life. 

(}.  With  regard  to  the  fishing  about  East  Point,  bow  far  ont  from 
shore  is  it  done  f — A.  From  one  mile  and  a  half  to  two,  and  sometimes 
tbrce  miles  out. 

(i.  Are  mackerel  taken  four  to  five  miles  out  T — A.  Not  that  I  know  of. 

C^).  Have  you  fished  much  iu  American  vessels  i—A.  Eight  or  nine 
years.  I  fished  in  the  E(]uator,  of  Newburyport,  in  1801 ;  we  took  350 
barrels  of  mackerel  in  the  gulf.  In  1862  I  was  on  board  the  Spartley, 
of  Maine ;  wo  took  00  barrels  in  five  weeks ;  I  did  not  remain  on  her  the 
whole  trip.  In  18G3  1  was  on  the  lanthe,  of  Portland ;  we  made  one 
full  trip,  and  caught  130  barrels.  In  1864  I  fished  on  the  S.  A.  Park* 
hurst,  of  Gloucester ;  we  caught  250  barrels  in  one  fall  trip. 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  your  trip  iu  the  fall  f — A.  Kound  Prince  Edward 
Island  and  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  Were  any  taken  oflf  shore  ? — A.  No. 

(i.  Don-t  American  vessels  get  their  fall  trips  all  inshore  ! — A.  From 
uiy  experience,  they  do. 

Q.  In  1866  what  vessel  were  you  in  ? — A.  The  Franklin  Snow,  of  Glou< 
cester ;  we  caught  690  barrels.  Of  the  fish  taken  during  the  two  trips, 
two-thirds  were  taken  inshore.  In  1867  I  was  on  the  A.  H.  Wanson,  of 
(Gloucester ;  we  made  a  fall  trip,  and  got  280  barrels.  In  1868  I  was  on 
tbe  Sergeant  S.  Day,  of  Gloucester ;  we  caught  750  barrels.  In  those 
years  there  were  on  an  average  400  or  500  vessels  in  the  bay.  During 
tbe  first  year  I  went  there  the  vessels  would  number  about  7(>(),  but  after 
tbat  tbe  average  would  be  from  400  to  500.  In  1869  I  again  went  on  the 
!S.  S.  Day ;  we  made  two  small  trips.  In  1870  I  was  in  the  Ruth  Groves, 
of  Gloucester ;  we  got  240  barrels  one  trip.  In  1871 1  was  again  on  the 
same  vessel ;  we  got  330  barrels.  We  made  one  trip  which  lasted  the 
wliole  season. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  these  catc  bes  was  taken  within  three  miles  of 
shore  ? — A.  I  may  safely  say  two-  thirds. 

(j.  And  did  the  Americiiu  vessels  you  saw  catch  their  fish  about  the 
same  distance  from  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  on  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan  ? — A.  Yes ;  I 
lished  on  Bradley  more  than  once,  but  never  caught  anything. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  value  Bank  Bradley  as  a  good  fishing  ground  T — 
A.  I  rather  think  not. 

Q.  Not  so  good  as  inshore! — A.  No. 

Q.  They  all  make  for  inshore  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  any  American  vessels  would  come  down  to  the  gulf 
uuless  they  were  allowed  to  fish  wituin  the  three-mile  limit  ? — A.  I  don't 
think  so. 

Q.  Have  you  knowledge  of  any  of  our  vessels  going  to  American 
waters  to  fish ! — A.  I  have  only  heard  of  one,  the  Lettie. 


'.  never  took  10 


1020  AWARD   OP  TOE   FISHEBY  COMMISSION. 

No.  70. 

Joseph  Dbaton,  resiUiuf^at  East  Point,  Prince  Edward  Tslund,  farinor 
and  fisherman,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Brituiinic 
Majesty,  sworn  and  exauiine<l. 

By  Mr.  Da  vies : 

Question.  Have  you  been  much  engaged  in  boat-fishing  ?— Answer. 
Yes. 

Q.  Boat-fishing  has  become  very  prevalent  at  your  end  of  the  Lsliiiid, 
I  believe  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  paying  well  f — A.  Yes  ;  of  late  years. 

Q.  The  people  are  largely  engaged  in  itf — A.  They  are. 

Q.  How  fur  do  they  go  from  shore  to  fish  f — A.  Front  half  a  mile  to 
two  miles. 

Q.  All  the  fish  is  caught  within  that  distance  from  shore? — A.  Nearly 
all. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  come  down  there  and  fish  much  f— A.  They  do 
a  great  deal. 

i.).  Where  do  they  fish  f — A.  They  fish  where  we  get  our  fish,  from 
half  a  mile  to  two  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  llave  you  seen  large  numbers  of  them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  htive  you  seen  fishing  on  those  grounds  at  one  tiiiiu  ?— 

A.  From  130  to  200  vessels  is  the  largest  fleet  I  have  seen  at  one  timu.    1 
bad  a  bird's-eye  view  of  it. 

Q.  Are  they  there  all  the  season  fishing?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  fish  within  the  distances  you  have  mentioned  ?— A.  A 
few  may  fish  off  shore. 

Q.  You  have  been  fishing  with  them  yourself? — A.  I  have. 

Q.  How  many  years  ?— A.  Four  summers.  In  1804  I  was  in  the  For- 
est Qoeen,  of  Gloucester.  Wo  made  three  trips  and  took  970  barrels. 
We  fished  ap  Bay  Chaleurs  and  along  Prince  Edward  Island.  We  took 
a  few  barrels  at  the  Magdalen  Islands,  perhaps  GO  barrels,  on  the  second 
trip.  Then  we  came  over  to  the  island  and  filled  up.  We  also  went  to 
Cape  Breton.  Four-fifths  of  the  whole  catch  was  taken  within  three 
mile«of  the  shore.  We  transshipped  one  cargo  f\t  Cause,  or  we  could 
not  have  made  three  trips.  1  was  next  in  Galena,  of  Gloucester.  We 
made  two  trips  and  caught  between  UaO  and  970  barrels.  We  ciuiglit 
most  of  them  along  the  island  coast,  on  the  north  side.  Perhaps  80 
barrels  we  took  at  Magdalen  Islands.  The  rest  we  took  off  the  island, 
Cape  Breton,  and  in  Itay  Chaleurs.  We  did  not  get  many  in  Bay 
Chaleurs.  We  caught  those  iu  Bay  Chaleurs  close  iushore.  We  tried 
the  center  of  the  bay,  but  did  not  get  any  there.  We  also  tried  Bradley 
and  Orphan  Banks,  but  did  not  get  any  there.  About  four-fifths  of  the 
catch  we  took  inshore.  The  last  trip  we  took  wholly  iushore.  I  believe 
as  a  general  rule  American  vessels  take  nearly  all  the  fall  trips  close 
inshore  of  Cape  Breton  or  Prince  Edward  Island.  During  spring  and 
summer  mackerel  are  more  scattered.  The  fish  at  those  seasons  are  not 
so  good ;  they  don't  bring  half  the  price  of  fall  fish  ;  the  rich  mackerel, 
as  a  general  rule,  are  inshore.    In  1867, 1  was  in  Joseph  F.  Allan,  Capt. 

B.  BeiatoD ;  we  made  two  trips  and  got  680  barrels.  It  was  a  little 
higher  than  the  average  catch  of  the  American  fleet ;  the  average  of 
the  vessels  would  be  from  550  to  600  barrels.  We  fished  on  the  same 
grounds  as  previously,  and  we  got  about  the  same  proportion  inshore.  1 
never  remember  seeing  an  American  vessel  make  large  catches  outside. 
In  1871 1  was  in  Isaac  P.  Bich,  of  Boston,  Captain  Pierce ;  we  made  one 


AWARD   OP  THE   KISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1021 


entioiioU  ?— A.  A 


trip  and  took  350  barrels.    About  400  American  vessels  were  in  the  bay 
that  year.    We  caugbttbe  fure  on  about  the  stime  gronnd. 

Q.  Your  ezfierience  is  that  during  the  time  yon  were  fishing  on  Ameri- 
can vessels  yon  toolc  four  fifths  of  your  catches  within  three  miles  of  the 
Hlinre,  and  that  the  iA\\  trips  were  nearly  all  taken  inshore  f — A.  Nearly 

ull. 

Q.  Did  yon  ever  hear  of  a  Cnnadinn  vesHel  going  to  fish  in  American 
waters  T— A.  I  heard  of  one.     I  do  not  remember  any. 

No.  71. 

James  McInnis,  SouriN,  Prince  Edward  Island,  tisherniiiti,  called  on 
.)(>lialf  of  the  Government  of  Uur  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  exam- 
inoil. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  Uave  you  fished  much  in  boats  of  late  years  T — Answer. 
Yes. 

i).  And  found  it  profitable  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Most  of  the  island  people  <lo  that  now  ? — A.  Yes. 

(^  Where  did  you  catch  the  fish  t — A.  Close  to  the  shore. 

(].  How  far  ontf — A.  From  half  a  mile  to  two  miles  and  a  half. 

Q.  Do  yon  fish  for  cod  t — A.  Yes. 

i}.  Where  do  you  take  them  T— A.  From  half  a  mile  to  three  miles 
from  shore. 

Q.  As  a  rule  are  cod  taken  beyond  three  miles  by  bouts  T — A.  Not  by 
boats. 

(i.  Vessels  do  so,  I  believe  ? — A.  I  never  fished  in  vessels  for  cod. 

i}.  Y'on  have  fished  in  American  vessels  ? — A.  Y'e« ;  during  ten  years. 
In  I.S."i,S  I  was  in  Freeman,  of  Maine.  We  caught  150  barrels ;  she  was 
ii  small  vessel  and  we  matie  one  trip — a  summer  trip.  In  1859  I  was  in 
Union,  of  Provincetown  ;  we  made  one  trip  and  caught  2<K)  barrels ; 
slie  was  a  medium-size  vessel.  In  1S((0  I  went  on  Congress,  of  Glouces- 
ter; we  nuule  two  trips  and  caught  220  barrels;  in  the  fall  trip  wo  got 
wrecked.  In  1801 1  was  in  Florence,  of  Gloucester;  we  took  350  barrels. 
In  1862  I  fished  in  J.  G.  Curtis,  of  Gloucester ;  we  caught  3.50  barrels. 
In  18(>4  I  was  in  a  British  vessel,  £.  E.  Hudson  ;  we  caught  250  barrels. 
In  1800  I  fished  on  Mary  Ellen,  a  British  vessel ;  I  left  her  before  the 
trip  was  finished.  In  1807  I  fished  in  Alexander  McKenzie,  of  Bar- 
iin<;toii,  N.  S. ;  we  took  3(K)  barrels.  In  1808  I  was  again  on  Alexander 
McKenzie;  we  caught  350  barrels.  In  1870  I  was  in  Kuth  Groves,  of 
(iloucester;  we  made  one  trip  and  took  210  barrels;  it  was  a  summer 
trip.  In  1871  I  was  on  Ruth  Groves  again  ;  we  caught  330  barrels.  In 
1872  I  fislied  on  Northerner,  of  Gloucester ;  we  took  350  barrels.  In 
187.'{  I  sailed  in  David  J.  Adams,  of  tialem ;  we  made  one  trip  and 
caught  300  barrels.  The  same  year  I  was  in  Etta  E.  Tanner,  of  Glou- 
cester; we  made  one  trip  and  took  200  barrels. 

Q.  When  in  those  eleven  vessels  where  did  you  catch  your  fares!— A. 
The  most  of  them  inshore,  along  the  island,  some  at  the  Magdalen  Isl- 
ands. We  did  not  catch  many  oflf  Gape  Breton  or  the  western  shore  or 
Bay  Chaleurs.  The  principal  fishing  ground  was  off  Prince  Edward 
Island.    We  caught  none  on  either  Bradley  or  Orphan  Banks. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  fish  caught  by  those  vessels  did  yoa  take 
witbiu  three  miles  of  the  shore  f— A.  Two-thirds,  I  think. 

Q.  Did  the  other  American  vessels  in  the  fleet  fish  in  the  same  places 
you  didT— A.  Yes. 

Q>  Did  they  maiie  their  catches  on  Banks  Bradley  and  Orphan ,  or 


1022 


AWARD  OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


within  three  miles  of  the  shore  f — A.  I  cannot  tell  mach  about  Bradley 
and  Orphan  Banks,  for  I  have  not  fished  there.  Those  vessels  I  saw 
fishing  were  taking  the  fish  inshore. 

Q.  What  was  the  average  namber  of  the  American  tleet  in  the  bay 
when  you  were  there  f — A.  I  could  not  tell  the  number.  There  would 
be  300  or  400  vessels  there ;  a  good  many  would  be  English  vessels. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 
Q.  Your  i^eople  have  now  pretty  much  abandoned  deep-sea 
and  taken  to  boat-fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 
Q.  They  don't  try  fishing  outside  ? — A.  No. 


lisbing 


No.  72. 

Alexander  MacDonald,  of  Bouris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  captain 
of  a  coasting  schooner,  called  on  behalt  of  the  government  of  Her  liii- 
tannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  H'»ve  yoa  been  fishing  for  many  years! — Answer.  For  six 
years. 

Q.  In  American  vessels  f — A.  I  was  in  the  Galena,  Warrior,  and 
Joseph  F.  Allen  (two  years),  fishing  in  the  gulf.  The  principal  pnrt  of 
our  fares  we  got  around  Prince  Edward  Island  and  Margaree. 

Q.  What  proportion  was  taken  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ?— A. 
Fully  two-thirds. 

Q.  Did  you  see 'American  vessels  in  the  bay? — A.  Yes;  perhaps  a 
hundred  sail  in  a  fleet  together. 

Q.  Did  they  fish  on  the  same  ground  as  you  did  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  were 
scattered  round  one,  two,  or  three  miles  from  shore. 

Q.  In  yonr  opinion  two-thirds  of  the  catches  of  the  vessels  were  taken 
inshore;  would  the  same  proportion  apply  toother  American  vessels f— 
A.  Yes. 

No.  73. 

John  McTjELLAN,  Souris,  Prince  Edward  Island,  fisherman,  called 
on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  ex- 
amined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Question.  You  have  been  fishing,  I  believe,  the  greater  part  of  yonr 
lifef — Answer.  It  is  about  16  years  since  I  first  commenced  tishin;;. 

Q.  Have  you  fished  in  American  vessels? — A.  I  fished  in  four  Ameri- 
can vessels. 

Q.  And  in  many  British  vessels? — A.  Two  or  three. 

Q.  W'here did  you  fish  in  the  gulf? — A.  All  along  the  bay. 

Q.  Around  what  coast  ? — A.  Most  of  the  cod-fishing  we  did  was  round 
Prince  Edward  Island  and  Gape  Breton. 

Q.  How  far  off  the  shore? — A.  The  most  of  all  the  flsL  I  ever  cuught 
in  vessels  were  taken  inside  of  three  miles  of  the  shore. 

Q.  Would  you  say  the  bulk  of  them  was  taken  one  or  two  miles,  or 
two  and  a  half  miles  from  the  shore  ? — A.  From  one  to  two  miles  I 
fished  on  Bank  Bradley  four  years  ago;  we  caught  75  or  SO  barrels 
there  on  4th  July.    The  vessel  was  the  Lydia  A.  Harvey. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  whole  catch  was  taken  inshore? — A.  3Iost 
of  the  fish  I  caught  in  the  bay  was  caught  iuside  of  three  miles. 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHEBY   COMMISSION. 


1023 


deep-sea  lisbing 


-Answer.  For  six 


sL  I  ever  caught 


Q.  Will  you  place  it  at  une-half  or  niDetenths  ? — A.  Three-fourths,  I 
should  say. 

Q.  In  the  fall,  I  believe,  all  Ihe  fish  are  taken  inshore  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  witness  the  American  fleet  fishing  during  the  years  you 
were  fishing  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  all  the  vessels  fish  about  the  same  places  you  did? — A.  They 
were  scattered  all  over  the  bay. 

Q.  What  you  saw  fishing,  were  they  fishing  out  in  the  deep  ce*^  or 
within  two  or  three  miles  of  land  ?  What  proportion  took  fish  in- 
shore f — A.  Three-fourths  of  the  fish  would  be  taken  inshore. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  have  spent  the  most  of  your  life  in  boat-fishing? — A.  A  good 
part  of  it. 

Q.  You  say  you  were  only  four  seasons  on  American  vessels  and  two 
or  three  on  British  vessels  out  of  16  years'  experience  fishing  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  'you  people  have  pretty  much  given  up  deep-sea  fishing  for  boat- 
lishingf— A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 
Q.  Our  i)eople  used  to  fish  a  good  deal  in  vessels  at  one  time  ? — A» 
Yes. 
Q.  You  find  the  shore-fishing  more  profitable? — A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  The  American  vessels  had  the  advantage  of  your  vessels  in  having 
better  bait  and  being  better  organized,  and  were  worked  by  your  own 
I)eople  to  a  large  extent? — A.  We  can  get  as  good  bait  down  there  as 
the  American  vessels  can. 

Q.  Mackerel  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Anything  as  good  as  menhaden  ? — A.  Yes ;  aud  I  believe  we 
have  the  best  men. 

Q.  The  American  schooners  are  better  vessels  and  better  supplied  ? — 
A.  Yes ;  the  vessels  are  better. 

Q.  Are  they  not  better  supplied  with  all  the  comforts  of  life  ? — A.  I 
iloii't  see  any  difference. 

Q.  Taking  all  together,  are  not  American  fishermen  more  success- 
ful  than  British  vessels  ? — A.  I  don't  think  it. 

No.  74. 

Benjamin  Chamimon,  Alberton,  Prince  Edward  Island,  fisherman, 
called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Iler  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn 
aud  examined. 

By  Mr.  Dayies  : 

Question.  How  many  years  have  you  prosecuted  the  fishery  busi- 
ness f — Answer.  Seven  years  in  vessels  and  four  years  in  boats. 

Q.  How  many  men  are  there  to  a  boat? — A.  Five  men  to  some 
boats. 

Q.  Where  do  you  catch  the  fish  at  the  west  end  of  the  island  ? — 
A.  Right  inshore. 

Q.  How  close  to  shore  ? — A.  One  aud  one  mile  aud  a  half  off.  Just 
MOW  the  fish  are  very  close  in. 

Q.  The  boat-fishing  is  all  inshore  ? — A.  All  inshore,  particularly  the 
la«t  few  years. 

Q.  Have  you  caught  much  cod  ? — A.  Great  quantities. 


1024 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Have  you  seen  manv  American  vessels  round  the  const  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  have  you  seen  at  Cascumpecqoe  Harbor! — A.  I  have 
not  seen  them  there  of  late  years,  as  the  harbor  is  a  little  shallow.  1 
have  seen  250  sail  in  there  some  years  ago. 

Q.  Where  used  the  vessels  to  catch  their  fish,  and  where  do  tbey 
catch  them  now  f — A.  They  fish  very  often  close  inshore.  I  bave  liuovrn 
some  of  them  lying  aground. 

Q.  Generally  when  American  vessels  have  come  to  the  island,  how 
far  from  shore  have  they  made  their  catches? — A.  They  fished  very  fre- 
quently close  in,  but  I  could  not  say  where  they  got  most  of  their  fish. 
We  generally  get  our  fish  close  inshore. 

Q.  I  believe  you  were  a  number  of  years  on  an  American  vessel  f— 
A.  I  was  six  years  captaiu  of  a  vessel  in  the  bay,  and  one  year  ou  an 
American  vessel,  but  not  as  captain. 

Q.  During  those  seven  years  where  did  you  catch  your  fish  ? — A.  Two- 
thirds  inside  of  the  three  miles. 

Q.  Would  any  American  fisherman  come  to  the  bay  uidess  he  had 
the  privilege  of  fishing  iuhiiore  f — A.  No ;  I  have  heard  several  captains 
say  they  woi  Id  not  do  so  unless  they  hud  permission  to  fish  inshore  or 
could  get  a  license. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  composed  the  American  fleet  f — A.  It  was  a 
large  fleet.  There  would  be  300  sail  together  at  a  time.  They  might 
not  all  be  Americans.  1  have  seen  L'50  or  300  vessels.  I  could  not  say 
how  many  composed  the  whole  fleet.  There  is  a  fleet  round  Bay  Cha- 
leurs,  anothar  at  Magdalen  Islands,  and  another  in  the  gulf. 

Q.  You  say  two-thirds  of  j'our  catch  were  taken  within  two  or  three 
miles  of  the  shore  ? — A.  That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  Does  that  apply  to  Bay  Chaleurs  and  Gai>e  Breton  as  well  as  tlie 
island  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  this  a  pretty  good  fishing  year  T — A.  It  is  a  very  good  year  up 
our  way ;  there  has  l>een  only  one  year  thatwa»  better  during  many  years, 
and  that  was  four  ^tears  ago. 

Q.  They  have  made  large  catches,  I  believe  ? — A.  Some  boats  have 
taken  150  barrels. 

Q.  It  is  looked  upon  as  one  of  the  best  fishing  years  you  ever  had  ?— 
A.  Yes ;  one  of  the  best  years.  One  stage  landetl  700  bari-els  with  five 
boats.    I  have  seen  them  and  packed  some  of  them  myself. 

Q.  Have  American  vessels  come  down  this  year? — A.  There  are 
about  30  sail  round  the  west  shore.    They  are  fishing  right  inshore. 

Q.  Are  they  making  good  catches? — A.  Pretty  fair.  I  should  think 
they  would  do  so,  as  mackerel  are  plentiful.  The  mackerel-fishing  at 
the  north  end  of  the  island  is  very  good. 

By  Mr.  Dana. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  Americans  have  come  back  from  there  and 
reported  very  iMwr  catches  f — A.  1  am  not  aware.  1  think  it  may  l>e 
because  the  fish  are  close  inshorv. 

Q,  You  know  what  the  papers  say  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  have  seen  the  papers ! — A.  I  heard  a  man  say  he  saw  some 
seiners  goiug  home  pretty  early. 

Q.  Don't  yon  know  that  the  reiwrt  is  of  a  i>ad  catch,  and  that  several 
witn<>8ses  called  by  the  British  Govi'rnment  bave  said  tliure  was  a  poor 
catch,  a  bad  catch  ?— A.  It  might  be  so. 

Q.  There  micht  bo  fish  enough,  but  a  bad  catch  ? — A.  I  heard  Cap- 
tain Macdonald  say  the  fish  wt>re  too  dost*  in  tor  the  seines. 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1025 


ur  fish  T— A.  Two 


:on  as  well  m  tlie 


ioine  boats  have 


lay  he  saw  some 


Q.  So  there  might  be  a  good  time  for  the  boats  and  a  bad  time  for 
the  vessels  f — A.  That  might  be  the  case. 

Q,  Do  you  know  how  it  is  that  some  vessels  which  went  there  have 
returned  f — A.  I  don't  know.  I  have  not  spoken  to  many,  only  to  two 
or  three  captains. 

Q.  Is  it  not  pretty  late  to  talk  aLout  the  prosiiects  of  good  fishing  if 
there  has  been  a  bad  catch  so  far  ? — A.  I  am  speaking  of  our  own  flsh- 
in^-^rounds ;  I  do  not  mean  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence,  but  I  refer  to  oar 
owu  lishinggrounds  at  the  north  end  of  the  island. 

Q.  Generally,  it  has  been  a  poor  catch  so  far  ? — A.  It  might  have 
been  for  vessels. 

Q.  All  prospects  lay  in  the  future? — A.  I  should  say,  from  my  expe* 
rience,  that  there  is  a  [iretty  good  prospect  for  vessels  at  Margaree  when 
the  mackerel  work  southward.  As  a  general  thing,  they  take  them 
there  every  fall  when  the  mackerel  are  in  the  bay. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 
Q.  September  and  October  are  the  great  months  for  taking  mack* 
ere!  ?— A.  Yes ;  they  are  taken  at  Port  Ilood,  Margaree,  and  the  east 
point  of  the  island  till  late  in  October. 

B3'  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  You  cannot  undertake  to  say  how  the  catch  will  turn  out  ? — A. 

No. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 
Q.  You  can  tell  pretty  well  how  it  will  turn  out  ? — A.  If  I  had  a  ves- 
sel and  was  trying  to  take  mackerel,  I  would  go  there  to  fish. 

No.  75. 

Monday,  Sejytember  17, 1877. 

The  Commission  met. 

.John  C.  Cunningham,  master  mariner,  of  Cape  Sable  Island,  N.  S., 
was  called,  on  behalf  of  the  Guvernment  of  Iler  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn, 
and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  Cape  Sable  Island  lies  in  the  southern  portion  of  the  county 
of  iShelburne,  Province  of  Nova  Scotia  f — Answer.  Y'es  j  it  is  the  most 
southern  part  of  the  Province  of  Nova  Scotia. 

i).  You  are  engaged  in  the  fishing  business  ? — A.  Tes ;  at  present. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  so  engaged? — A.  For  four  years. 

Q.  Have  you  on  your  coast  a  deep-sea  as  well  as  a  shore  fishery  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  a  large  boat-fishing  carried  on  in  that  neighborhood  ? — A. 
^ell,  I  think  that  there  are  about  150  boats  owned  around  Cape  Sable 
iHiaud. 

Q.  Is  this  boat-fishery  carried  on  along  the  whole  shore  of  the  county 
of  8helburne  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  number  of  boats  owned  in  the  county  of  Shel- 
burne,  as  far  as  you  are  aware  T — A.  I  think  about  five  hundred. 

Q.  What  fish  are  taken  inshore  T — A.  Cod,  pollock,  halibut,  mMk- 
erel,  herring,  and  lobsters. 

Q.  Is  the  boat-fishery  prosecuted  for  halibut  T— A.  No. 

Q.  What  fishery  are  the  boats  engaged  in  1 — A.  They  are  chiefly  en* 
g:igeU  in  the  cod,  pollock,  and  lobster  fisheries ;  they  also  use  nets  to 
catch  herring  and  mackerel. 
65  F 


1026 


AWARD   OF   THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  thev  uot  take  mackerel  with  liand-liiie8  as  well  as  nets  ?— A. 
No. 

Q.  Mackerel  Jire  taken  in  nets  ? — A.  Yes;  altogether. 

Q.  Are  the  ni'ts  hauieil  from  the  boats  or  the  shore  ? — A.  They  are 
set  along  the  shore  in  our  bays  and  harbors. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  mean  that  the  boats  are  altogether  used 
for  the  catchin^r  of  pollock  and  cod  T — A.  And  mackerel — yes. 

Q.  Do  you  take  large  quantities  of  cod  and  pollock  with  the  boats  i— 
A.  Yea — quite  a  quantity. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  the  cod  ? — A.  We  send  them  to  this,  the 
Halifax  market. 

Q.  Do  you  also  send  pollock  to  this  market f — A.  We  send  theiu 
mostly  to  the  States — to  the  Boston  market. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  fish  much  around  your  shores? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  close  to  the  shore — within  three  miles  of  the  shore?— 
A.  O,  yes.  A  great  many  of  them  fish  for  halibut  within  three  miles 
of  it. 

Q.  About  bow  many  vessels  every  year  ? — A.  I  could  not  give  the 
number. 

Q.  Can  you  give  an  approximate  to  it  ? — A.  Perhaps  one  vessel  might 
coraethere  ten  times,  and  lOU  vessels  fish  along  the  shores  of  the  couiily 
of  Shelburne. 

Q.  Nearly  100  vessels  come  there  for  that  purpose,  by  counting  one 
vessel  ten  times  f — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  each  vessel  makes  ten  trips? — A.  Invariably 
about  forty  vessels  fish  along  that  shore  every  year. 

Q.  And  they  make  ten  trips  each  f — A.  I  do  not  say  that  exactly. 

Q.  How  many  do  they  make  on  the  average  ! — A.  Perhaps  from  five 
to  ten  trips  each. 

Q.  Where  do  they  take  the  halibut  ? — A.  I  cannot  tell  you  that. 

Q.  But  these  fish  are  taken  there  by  the  Americans? — A.  Yes;  ami 
conveyed  to  the  American  market — to  New  York,  and  Gloucester,  ami 
other  points. 

Q.  Do  they  take  these  fish  there  in  the  fresh  state  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  do  they  so  preserve  the  fish  ? — A.  Some  are  carried  in  smacks, 
and  others  in  ice. 

Q.  Smai-ks  art  vessels \^ith  holes  having  water  in  them? — A.  Yes; 
they  are  provided  with  wells. 

Q.  They  have  false  bottoms,  and  water  in  them,  in  which  the  halibut 
are  kept  fresh  ? — A.  They  are  welled  oflf  amidships,  with  tight  bulk- 
heads, ana  the  water  fiows  in  and  out.  More  fish  are,  however,  takeu 
to  market  in  ice  than  in  that  manner,  in  smacks. 

Q.  VVhat  is  the  size  of  the  vessels  ? — A.  From  25  to  CO  tons. 

i^.  Are  there  none  larger  than  (K)  tons  ? — A.  Perhaps. 

Q.  If  some  of  them  make  ten  trips  in  the  course  of  the  season,  what 
number  would  you  say  the  average  of  them  would  make  f — A.  Perhai»s 
seven. 

Q.  When  do  they  commence  fishing  ?--A.  In  May. 

Q.  And  do  they  fish  the  whole  season  through  f-^A.  No ;  nothing  is 
done  in  halibut-fishing  alter  the  last  of  August. 

Q.  These  fish  then  disappear  ? — A.  A  few  may  be  caught  on  our  const 
in  September. 

Q.  How  are  they  taken  T — A.  By  trawling. 

Q.  Is  the  effect  of  trawling  ou  this  fishery  good  or  bad  f — A.  It  is 
bad,  as  it  kilts  the  mother  fish. 


AWARD   OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1027 


ell  as  iiet8  i—A. 


f— A.  They  are 


lid  uot  give  the 


them  f— A.  Yos; 


bad !— A.  It  is 


Q.  Do  yoa  think  that  it  will  destroy  this  fishery  eveatually  f — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  How  much  within  three  miles  do  these  vessels  which  fish  for  hali- 
but within  that  distance  from  the  shore  come  If — A.  I  conld  not  say ; 
some  perhaps  fish  within  1^  miles  of  the  sh  re.  Where  I  am  engaged 
ill  prosecuting  the  fisheries  8ome  of  the  Anerican  vessels  fish  within  1^ 
miles,  and  others  within  two  miles  of  the  shore,  and  so  on. 

(j.  Are  any  cod  and  halibut  taken  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit  ? — 
A.  O,  yes ;  but  this  is  not  so  much  the  case  with  halibut  as  with  cod. 

(}.  Do  many  American  fishermen  fish  there  outside  of  three  miles 
from  the  shore  ? — A.  Undoubtedly;  some  75  American  sail  do  so  around 
the  shores  of  the  county  of  :iholburne. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  their  bait? — A.  In  our  harbors. 

(j,.  Do  they  come  in  for  it  ! — A.  Yes. 

(^  What  bait  do  they  chiefiy  get  f — A.  Mackerel — the  large  spring 
mackerel. 

il  Are  these  a  poor  kind  of  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes,  they  are  rather 
thin. 

Q.  Conld  the  Americans  carry  on  the  outshore  or  Bank  fisheries,  or 
the  tisheries  oiitaide  of  three  miles  from  the  shore,  if  they  could  not  ob- 
tain l>ait  from  these  harbors,  and  inside  of  three  miles  from  tiie  coast?— 
A.  They  could  not,  on  our  shore. 

Q.  Do  they  come  over  and  get  the  bait  from  yon  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  come  from  their  shore  without  bait  f — A.  Yes ;  they  can- 
not get  bait  on  their  own  shore. 

i}.  They  tell  you  so,  I  suppose  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  we  know  it  without 
tlieir  telliiig  it. 

Q.  The  Americana  do  not  bring  bait  with  them,  and  afterwards  get 
supplies  of  it  from  you  f — A.  No.  ' 

Q.  When  do  those  who  fish  outside  the  three  mile  limit  begin  fish- 
ing ?— A.  Between  the  10th  and  15th  of  May. 

Q.  What  is  the  size  of  these  vessels  f — A.  They  will  average  50  tons. 

i].  About  how  many  barrels  of  bait  do  they  take  I — A.  The  trawlers 
will  take  25  barrels  a  trip. 

(^  How  often,  in  the  course  of  the  season,  will  they  come  in  for  bait  f 
—A.  Once  a  fortnight. 

(^  They  are  obliged,  in  this  fishery,  to  have  their  bait  fresh  f — A.  No; 
tliey  could  use  salt  bait,  but  with  it  they  could  not  prosecute  the  fishery 
to  any  advantage. 

(I  Then,  in  fact,  they  are  obliged  to  use  fresh  bait  if  they  desire  to 
1)0  successful,  are  they  not  f — A.  Yes. 

^>.  8]>eaking  as  a  practical  man,  do  you  consider  that  they  could  carry 
on  this  fishery  with  salt  bait  alone  ? — A.  No  ;  it  would  uot  pay  expenses 
if  salt  bait  was  employed. 

Q.  Then  I  presume  that  no  prudent  man  would  carry  it  on  with  salt 
bait?— A.  No. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  that  it  would  not  pay  expenses  with  salt  bait? — 
A.  From  the  very  fact  that  I  am  an  owner  of  fishing-vessels  and  fish 
myself;  and  I  thus  know  that  when  we  cannot  get  fresh  bait,  we  cau- 
uot  prosecute  the  fishery  and  pay  expenses. 

Q.  This  is  your  own  practical  knowledge  t — A.  Yes ;  it  is  practical  j 
there  is  no  theory  about  it. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  commanded  a  fishing- vessel  yoarselff— A.  Yes; 
many  years  ago.    Then  we  could  get  fish  anywhere. 

Q.  How  long  ago  is  that  f— A.  It  was  in  1857 


1028 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Did  you  then  use  salt  bait? — A.  No.  We  at  tbat  time  used  clams, 
\vhich  wo  dug  up  on  the  flats. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  then  ? — A.  On  the  same  ground  as  now. 

Q.  Outside  or  inside  ? — A.  Outside. 

Q.  And  then  you  used  clams  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  bo  you  use  clams  now  f — A.  We  cannot  get  them.  The  sui)i)ly  is 
exhausted. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  then  use  salt  bait  ? — A.  We  employed  it  very  seldom. 

Q.  And  you  then  fished  altogether  with  clums  ?— A.  We  tislied  mostly 
with  them.  We  also  used  a  little  bait  which  we  procured  on  the  ground, 
but  very  little  of  it.    Clams  will  keep  fresh  a  week. 

Q.  Do  you  own  fishing-vessels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  they  fish  ? — Some  on  the  Banks  and  others  near  Cape 
Sable. 

Q.  To  what  Banks  do  you  refer? — A.  To  Banquereau  and  Grand 
Bank. 

Q.  Do  they  fish  for  t:od  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  you  bait  with  ? — A.  Sometimes  with  mackerel,  sometimes 
T'ifi  herring,  and  sometimes  with  squid.    They  get  bait  wherever  tbey 

•';  Hnd  it. 

Ruppo  e  that  you  supply  them  with  bait  when  they  first  go  out  ?— 

Q.  An(i  afterwards  they  come  in  and  get  bait  wherever  they  can  ?— 
\.  Yes. 

Hovs  "     n  have  your  vessels  come  in  for  bait  ? — A.  Once  a  fort- 
night. 

Q.  How  loiig  does  it  ordinarily  take  one  of  your  vessels  to  get  a 
fare  ? — A.  That  is  a  hard  question  to  answer.  It  depends  on  the  abund- 
ance of  the  fish.  A  vessel  generally  makes  two  fares  in  three  mouths. 
An  ordinary  banker  is  of  60  tons  burden. 

Q.  Do  you  salt  and  pack  the  cod  on  board  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  would  be  a  full  fare  for  a  vessel  of  GO  tons  ? — A.  800  quin- 
tals, and  1,600  for  the  two  trips.  The  Cape  Sable  fishing- vessels  aver- 
age about  1,000  quintals. 

Q.  And  during  this  time  they  have  to  come  in  somewhere  on  the 
Nova  Scotian  coast  once  a  fortnight  for  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  without  this  privilege  you  could  not  carry  on  the  fishery  ?— 
A.  No ;  not  to  any  advantage. 

Q.  If  you  did  so  you  would  soon  be  bankrupt  ? — A .  We  could  not 
carry  on  the  fishery  at  all  under  such  circumstances.  It  would  not  pa}' 
expenses. 

Q.  Al)out  how  many  barrels  of  mackerel  have  been  caught  this  year, 
and  shipped  from  the  county  of  Shelburne  f — A.  About  14,000  barrels. 

Q.  Do  j'ou  ever  refuse  to  supply  the  Americans  with  bait  ! — A.  No; 
it  is  not  an  object  among  fishermen  to  refuse  other  flsherineu  bait. 

Q.  Though  this  occasions  the  former  loss? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  have  given  it  to  them  f — A.  We  do,  if  they  are  not  able 
to  pay  for  it. 

Q.  I  supiMse  that  a  man  in  your  business  would  not  be  thought  well 
of  if  he  allowed  any  Americans  to  go  ofi'  without  bait  f — A.  Tbat  is  the 

Q.  You  consider  that  such  a  person  would  be  rather  a  mean  sort  of  a 
man  f — A.  He  might  be  considered  so. 

Q.  There  is  a  sort  of  uuderstaudtug  among  you,  to  the  effect  that, 
whether  you  lose  by  it  or  not,  you  must  let  the  Americans  have  bait?— 
A.  We  are  not  obliged  to  do  so,  but  we  do  it  to  accommodate  theui. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1029 


ley  are  not  able 


I  mean  sort  of  a 


Q.  That  is  a  sort  of  understood  rule  amongst  you  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  A  man  would  not  be  thought  well  of  if  he  had  bait  and  would  not 
suj)ply  it  t — A.  He  would  not  be  thought  much  of. 

Q.  And  the  bait  the  Americans  take  is  chieHy  mackerel ! — A.  Yes. 

(j.  xVnd  I  suppose  that  you  could  salt  and  barrel  this  mackerel  i — A. 
We  can  take  care  of  all  the  mackerel  we  can  catch  without  selling  them 
in  the  fresh  state.  It  is  no  accommodation,  gentlemen,  to  us,  to  be  able 
to  sell  our  tiah  fresh — not  in  the  least. 


Q. 
Yes. 

Q. 


I  sui)pose  that  you  send  your  mackerel  chiefly  to  the  States  ? — A. 


Do  you  send  any  to  the  West  Indies  ? — A.  No. 
How  do  you  send  them  to  the  States  ? — A.  Salted. 
Do  your  mackerel  there  command  as  good  a  price  as  American- 
caught  mackerel  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  think  that  they  command  a  little  advance 
over  American-caught  mackerel. 

Q.  Do  you  take  much  advantage  of  the  privilege  you  possess  of  be- 
ing able  to  tish  within  three  miles  of  the  American  shore  ? — A.  No ; 
none  at  all. 

Q.  Is  it  of  any  use  whatever  to  you  ? — A.  No ;  not  in  the  least. 

(j.  I  believe  that  the  Americans  take  the  fi8h  on  their  shores  from  10 
to  15  and  20  miles  and  more  out,  as  a  rule  f — A.  They  cannot  carr^'  on 
the  fishery  within  two  or  three  miles  of  the  shore  in  their  mode  of  fish- 
ing ;  there  is  not  water  enough. 

i}.  Is  this  because  they  use  purse  seines ! — A.  Yes. 

i}.  And  these  re(piiro  deep  water  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  have  any  traps  on  your  shore  for  the  purpose  of 
securing  bait  f — A.  I  believe  that  one  trap  in  Sbelburne  County  is  in 
part  owned  by  an  American. 

Q.  Where  is  this! — A.  On  St.  John's  Island. 

(^  Do  they  take  much  in  this  trap  in  the  course  of  the  season  T — A. 
Yes ;  considerable. 

Q.  And  the  fish  thus  caught  are  chiefly  mackerel  ? — A.  They  are  all 
mackerel. 

Q.  Do  squid  come  in  on  your  shore  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Never?— A.  No. 

(J.  Do  they  come  in  around  Shelburne  County  at  all  ? — A.  No ;  I  do 
not  think  that  squid  are  to  be  obtained  until  you  get  east  of  Shelburne 
County.  There  are  none  to  the  westward  of  it.  No  squid  are  caught  off 
Cape  Sable  for  bait. 

Q.  Would  you  be  better  off  if  the  Americans  were  kept  altogether  off 
your  coast,  leaving  the  fisheries  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  to  your- 
selves ! — A.  I  do  not  see  what  advantage  is  obtained  by  us  owing  to  the 
presence  of  the  Americans. 

Q.  Would  you  rather  have  the  fisheries  to  yourselves,  and  pay  a  duty 
on  tish  sent  into  the  American  market  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  would  get  the  same  price  for  your  fish  there 
whether  a  duty  was  imposed  or  not  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Why  T — A.  Because  there  are  not  fish  enough  caught  by  the  Amer- 
icans to  supply  their  own  consumption.  They  have  got  to  buy  these  fish 
ill  some  other  market. 

Q.  You  think  that  the  supply  in  their  own  waters  is  limited  ? — A.  Un- 
doubtedly it  is. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 
Q.  I  understood  yea  to  say  that  an  American  was  part  owner  of  a  trap 
OQ  St.  John's  Island ;  who  is  be  f — A.  Mr.  Mayo,  of  Boston. 


1030 


AWARD  OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Does  lie  come  up  there  and  inhimge  it? — A.  No. 

Q.  Who  nmua};e8  it  fur  him  f — A.  Captaiu  Kinney,  who  lives  at  Bar- 
rington.    He  is  a  partner  with  Mr.  Mayo. 

Q.  So  it  comes  to  tliis :  that  this  American,  who  lives  in  ]toHton,  has 
in  Nova  Scotia  a  partner  who  carries  on  the  business,  while  Mr.  Muyu  is 
paid  his  portion  of  the  profits  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  IJow  many  American  mackerel-fishers  have  you  seen  this  summer 
in  the  vicinity  of  Shelburne  County  ? — A.  I  have  not  seen  any. 

Q.  How  many  American  halibut-fishers  have  }ou  seen  there  thi.s 
summer  f — A.  Perhaps  40. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  of  the  men  engaged  in  this  fishery  ! — A.  Nu ; 
not  one. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  the  names  of  the  vessels? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  their  vessels  come  from  ? — A.  I  could  not  now 
recollect.  Some  come  from  New  London,  some  from  Newport,  and  some 
from  Gloucester. 

Q.  And  you  estimate  that  their  number  in  all  is  75? — A.  If  I  had 
supposed  that  I  would  have  been  ijuestioned  on  this  point,  I  could  have 
got  the  names  of  all  of  them. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  name  of  one  of  them  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  near  have  you  been  to  them  f — A.  Within  a  mile ;  yes,  and 
within  a  quarter  of  a  mile  of  one  of  them  once,  I  suppose.  I  then  a.sked 
how  they  were  making  uut. 

Q.  What  were  you  then  doing? — A.  I  was  coming  from  Boston  in  my 
own  vessel. 

Q.  Were  you  acting  as  captain  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  make  trips  between  Shelburne  County  and  Boston  ?— A. 
Sometimes;  yes. 

Q.  And  sail  your  own  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  your  cargo  ? — A.  I  carry  mackerel. 

Q.  That  is  your  business? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  buy  these  mackerel  ? — A.  We  catch  them  ourselves. 

Q.  Do  you  carry  any  mackerel  besides  your  own  to  Boston  ?— A. 
Sometimes  we  do,  as  freight. 

Q.  Your  business  is  to  carry  the  tisli  you  catch  over  to  Boston  ?— A. 
It  is  a  portion  of  it. 

Q.  And  of  the  14,(M)0  barrels  you  mentioned,  how  many  have  you 
taken?— A.  900. 

Q.  How  were  the  rest  of  the  14,000  barrels  taken  ?— A.  In  diflerent 
vessels  of  our  own. 

Q.  How  many  mackerel  fishing  vessels  are  owned  in  Shelburne 
County  ? — A.  We  do  not  prosecute  the  mackerel  fishery  in  the  vessels  to 
which  I  reler. 

Q.  Are  there  any  mackerel-fishing  vessels  in  Shelburne  County  at 
all  ? — A.  I  think  there  are  a  few  ;  two  or  three,  perhaps. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  whose  they  are  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  The  bulk  of  your  mackerel  is  caught  in  boats  ? — A.  It  is  taken  iu 
traps. 

Q.  How  many  traps  are  there  ?— A.  20. 

Q.  How  many  do  you  own  ? — A.  I  own  shares  in  6. 

Q.  What  do  you  bring  back  from  Boston  ? — A.  Mostly  ballast. 

Q.  You  sell  your  fish  for  cash  there  ?— A.  Yes ;  and  I  fetch  back  the 
gold. 

Q.  And  it  was  on  a  return  voyage  from  Bostou  when  you  passed 
within  a  quarter  of  a  mile  of  an  American  halibut-fishing  vessel,  and 
asked  the  captaiu  how  lie  was  doing  ? — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1031 


bo  lives  at  Bar- 


bery ? — A.  No ; 


lu  Boston  it)  luy 


d  Bostou  i—\. 


iiue  Couutv  at 


It  is  takeu  in 


Q.  What  was  the  reply  T — A.  He  said  that  he  was  not  doing  maoh  ; 
tliat  be  had  got  130  halibut. 

Q.  Was  that  vessel  a  smack  ? — A.  I  tbiuk  so.  She  was  a  New  Lon- 
don  vessel,  at  any  rate. 

Q.  How  far  was  she  from  the  shore  ! — A.  She  was  abont  one  and  a 
quarter  miles  from  a  little  island  which  lies  off  Seal  Island  and  Cape 
Sable. 

Q.  How  far  was  this  from  Ca|)e  Sable  ? — A.  18  miles. 

Q.  How  large  is  Seal  Island  f — A.  I  think  that  it  is  about  three  miles 

Q.  Are  there  two  Sable  Islands  T — A.  There  are  Sable  Island  and 
Cape  Sable  Island.  This  vessel  was  close  to  Seal  Island.  There  were 
three  American  vessels  in  the  vicinity. 

Q.  Are  there  any  inhabitants  on  Seal  Island  ? — A.  Yes,  a  light-hon.«ie 
and  fog-trumpet  are  stationed  there ;  and  besides  those  who  take  care 
of  them,  [  think  that  there  are  two  families  on  the  island.  I  saw  the 
vessel  in  25  fathoms  of  water,  I  think. 

Q.  And  you  think  that  this  American  vessel  was  catching  halibut  in 
25  fathoms  of  water  f — A.  Do  I  think  itf  I  know  it.  There  is  no 
thinking  abont  it. 

Q.  Did  you  see  her  catching  halibut  T — A.  No  ;  but  they  told  me  they 
\rore  doing  so. 

i}.  Did  they  tell  you  they  had  caught  halibut  in  2a  fathoms  of  wa> 
terf— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  this  the  usual  depth  at  which  halibut  are  caught  T — A.  No ; 
the  usual  depth  is  from  10  to  200  fathoms. 

Q.  How  near  the  shore  are  200  fathoms  of  water  found,  say  near  Seal 
Island  T — A.  I  do  not  think  that  this  depth  is  to  be  found  in  the  Bay  of 
Fiindy.     We  will  say  that  it  is  to  be  met  with  40  miles  off  shore. 

(^  Did  you  see  any  other  American  halibut-catcher  in  that  vicinity 
this  summer  f — A.  They  had  been  there  all  summer,  more  or  less — not 
exactly  about  Seal  Island,  but  in  and  out,  and  along  the  shore  of  Cape 
ISable. 

Q.  Did  you  see  any  other  such  vessel  at  the  place  where  you  saw  this 
on«>,  which  was  fishing,  you  say,  in  25  fathoms  of  water? — A.  I  saw. 
three  of  them  the  same  morning. 

i).  Did  you  speak  to  the  others  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  they  came  from  ? — A.  No,  with  the  exception 
of  tliis  particular  vessel ;  and  I  do  not  remember  her  name. 

Q.  Nor  the  captain^s  name  f— A.  No.  I  know,  however,  that  they 
were  all  American  vessels. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  any  other  American  halibut-catchers  this  summer; 
nn<l,  if  so,  how  near  were  you  to  them  If — A.  They  have  laid  off'  the 
island  where  I  prosecute  the  mackerel  fishery  all  spring. 

Q.  How  nigh  were  you  to  them  f — A.  Within  1.^  and  2  miles,  and  so 
ou. 

(■i.  They  were  fishing  there  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Give  us  the  largest  number  of  them  which  you  have  seen  at  any 
one  time  f — A.  I  saw  three  of  them  once. 

Q.  When  t— A.  In  May. 

Q.  How  near  the  shore  were  they  t — A.  They  were  abont  IJ  miles 
from  it,  and  perhaps  2  miles.    I  did  not  measure  the  distance. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  any  others  besides  the  three  you  mention  as  hav* 
itig  seen  when  returning  from  Boston,  and  the  three  in  May  near  the 
place  where  your  trap  is  t — A.  Yes ;  and  plenty  of  them. 

Q.  Tell  me  about  them. — A.  I  cannot  tell  you  particularly  about 


1032 


▲WARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


them,  A8  [  (lid  not  take  mach  notice  of  them.  They  have  been  laying 
around  the  cape  all  summer. 

Q.  Will  you  mention  one  out  of  the  plenty  you  have  aeon,  besidos 
the  six  vessels  in  question  f — A.  I  could  not  name  any  of  them  iu  par- 
ticular. 

Q.  Will  yon  name  the  month  when  you  saw  them  f — A.  I  see  thctn 
every  day  when  at  home. 

Q.  During  what  months  ? — A.  May,  June,  July,  and  Anpust. 

Q.  How  many  is  the  most  that  you  have  seen  at  one  time  f — A.  Per- 
haps six. 

Q.  When  was  this  ? — A.  It  was  in  any  of  those  months.  Tliia  is 
something];  aliout  which  I  cannot  speak  iiurtioularly,  because  I  did  nut 
suppose  that  I  would  be  asked  about  it. 

Q.  Yes;  but  you  say  say  that  75  American  vessels  pursue  the  halibut 
fishery  off  your  coast,  and  that  forty  of  them,  from  "5  to  00  tons  burtluMi 
make  from  five  to  ten  trips  a  year  t — A.  This  is  wlir.t  I  suppose  to  bo  tlio 
case  to  the  best  of  my  judgment.  That  is  what  I  have  seen.  Of  course 
I  do  not  take  mnch  notice  of  those  vessels. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  me  when  you  saw  the  six  you  last  mentioned  ? — A.  I 
have  seen  more  tLin  six. 

Q.  Together  I — A.  No ;  but  around  the  coast. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  more  than  three  together  at  one  time?— 
A.  In  one  place?    I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  more  than  three  on  the  same  day? — A.  Yes, 

Q.  When  ? — A.  I  could  not  name  the  day  exactly. 

Q.  Was  it  this  summer? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  the  seventy-rive  vessels  you  spoke  of  get  their 
bait  ? — A.  From  our  tlshing  traps  and  nets. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  furnish  any  of  them  with  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  ? — A.  Hetween  the  15th  of  May  and  the  1st  of  July,  and  all 
through  the  fishing  season. 

Q.  Have  you  done  so  this  year  ? — A.  Yes ;  and  every  year. 

Q.  To  how  many  different  vessels  have  you  sold  bait? — A.  I  have  sold 
bait  since  I  have  owned  a  tra|>  to  over  -10  vessels,  say  40. 

Q.  Different  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  they  halibuttishing  vessels f — A.  I  do  not  know  whether 
they  were  halibut  or  cod  catchers. 

Q.  Have  you  sold  bait  to  forty  vessels  this  year  ? — A.  Yes;  but  tlioy 
were  not  all  American. 

Q.  How  many  of  these  vessels  were  American  this  year? — A.  About 
twenty,  1  think. 

Q.  Have  you  got  the  names  of  the  captains  on  your  books  ?— A.  I 
have,  but  I  haven't  the  books  with  me. 

Q.  Have  you  the  names  of  the  captains  and  of  the  vessel,  then  ?— A.  Of 
some  I  have,  and  some  I  have  not.  If  a  man  buys  for  cash,  I  do  not 
look  ont  for  his  name,  or  the  name  of  his  vessel. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  them  are  on  your  books? — A.  I  think  about 
six. 

Q.  What  did  yon  sell  them  ? — A.  Bait,  mnckerel. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  sell  them  ?— A.  From  ten  to  twenty  barrels 
each 

Q.  Do  yon  not  know  whether  they  did  not  form  part  of  the  seventy- 
five  halibut  catchers  fishing  off  your  coast  ?•— A.  A  portion  of  tbeia 
were  halibat  catchers. 

Q.  How  many  ? — A.  I'm  sure  that  I  could  not  tell. 

Q«  You  put  the  entire  number  of  halibut  catchers  at  seventy-five,  and 


AWARD   OF   TH£   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1033 


— A.  1  see  them 


entioned? — A.  I 


poke  of  get  their 


L.  I  tbiuk  about 


twenty  barrels 


forty,  yoa  say,  tish  insliore,  and  the  rest  more  than  three  miles  out ;  is 
that  correct  T — A.  I  did  not  say  that. 

Q.  How  many  of  thorn  tish  outside  of  the  three-mile  limit  ? — A.  I  do 
not  think  that  any  of  them  do  so. 

Q.  Then  you  think  that  the  75  flsh  inshore.  Repeat  the  number  of 
American  halibutcatchers  which  fish  otf  tihelburne  County,  and  state 
what  proportion  of  tbtun  fish  within  three  miles  of  the  coast,  and  what 
proportion  more  than  three  miles  out  i — A.  I  said  that  there  were  about 
40  sail  of  vessels  there. 

Q.  That  is  about  40  vessels  which  flsh  inside  the  three-mile  limit,  and 
'^}  around  the  county  of  Shelburne,  off  shore.  Ls  the  75  a  number  in 
addition  to  the  40,  or  is  the  whole  number  of  these  American  vessels 
7.*»  ? — A.  The  whole  number  is  75. 

Q.  How  many  American  halibut-catchers  are  there,  and  where  do 
tiiey  flsh  f — A.  We  will  do  away  with  the  halibut  fishing,  and  say  that 
tiiere  are  about  75  sail  of  American  vessels  which  fish  off  the  coast  there. 

if.  You  do  not  mean  to  say  that  all  these  75  vessels  are  halibut- 
catchers  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  estimate  that  the  number  of  American  halibut-catchers 
there  is  40? — A.  Yes;  that  is  the  number,  in  my  judgment. 

(,>.  Do  yon  say  that  all  the  American  halibut-fishers  fish  inshore  ? — 
A.  No. 

i).  What  number  of  the  American  fishing-vessels  fish  inshore  T — A. 
1  am  not  prepared  to  say.    I  could  not  give  an  idea. 

( j.  Do  yon  think  that  one  quarter  of  the  40  fish  inshore  f — A.  Yes ; 
and  more  than  that. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  one-half  of  the  40  do  so  T — A.  Perhaps  they  do. 

Q.  Is  this  a  fair  estimate,  or  a  high  one ;  do  you  estimate  the  number 
ot  American  halibut-catchers  that  fish  inshore  at  20,  or  more,  or  less  ? — 
A.  I  estimate  the  number  at  20,  and  they  rei)eat  their  voyages. 

Q.  That  is  your  best  estimate  f — A.  Yes. 

<^  Is  it  a  high  estimate? — A.  It  is  not  too  high. 

i}.  And  of  these  20  which  fish  from  1  to  2^  miles  otf  shore,  yon  can- 
:iot  give  the  name  of  one,  or  the  iiame  of  one  ol  their  captains  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  how  do  you  hapi>en  to  know  that  they  make  from  5  to  10 
trips,  and  an  average  of  7  trips  a  season  ? — A.  We  can  form  an  idea  as 
tu  the  number  of  tri[)s  which  they  make. 

ii.  How  do  you  judge  as  to  the  number  of  trips  at  the  distance  which 
you  are  from  them  i — A.  We  calculate  that  a  halibut  fisiierman  has  got 
tu  make  a  trip  in  a  fortnight,  as  he  cannot  keep  the  fish  longer,  to  be 
good  for  the  market,  in  ice. 

(,>.  Sut  how  long  can  he  keep  them  in  a  well  ? — A.  The  time  I  men- 
tiou  would  then  be  long  enough. 

(^  Do  not  these  20  vessels  get  their  bait  from  your  people  ? — A.  Yes. 

(i.  Where  do  they  procure  it  f — A.  They  obtain  it  from  us. 

(^.  Do  not  they  get  more  than  one-half  of  it  from  you  personally  f — 
A.  O,  no. 

Q.  Who  there  does  as  much  business  in  bait  as  yourself? — A.  There 
are  a  great  many  traps — 20 — and  each  supplies  bait,  though  some  do  sa 
luore  than  others.  I  am  not  so  conveniently  situaieii  for  the  purpose 
as  some  others  are. 

r  Q.  You  are  satisfied  that  these  20  vessels  get  bait  in  your  vicinity  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  for  how  many  years  have  they  been  resorting  there  for  it  ? — 
A.  I  have  only  been  in  the  fishing  business  four  years. 


1034 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  And  they  have  come  there  for  that  purpose  ever  since  you  hare 
been  in  the  tinhinf;  hnsiness  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  yet,  though  the  oaptainn  of  tliese  20  vensels  come  in  oncM^  a 
fortnight  to  get  bail,  you  cannot  give  the  place  wliere  ont^of  theui  co'iieN 
from,  with  a  single  exception,  or  the  name  of  one  of  the  captains  f  — A, 
No;  I  do  not  l( now  much  about  them  wifh  reference  to  their  names, 
iiualities,  and  qualiticationa. 

Q.  You  8tated  that  the  l)eKt  halibut  flnhing-groundH  were  found  in  200 
fathoms  of  water  1— A.  I  said  tliat  thin  tisliery  could  be  pro.secuted  in 
water  varying  from  25  to  2(H)  fathoniH  in  depth. 

Q.  But  what  ilid  you  say  was  the  best  depth  for  the  purpose! — A. 
The  best  depth  at  present,  during  certain  seasous  of  ''uur,  would  be 
20U  fathoms. 

Q.  What  seasons  of  the  year  is  this  the  case  f — A.  Early  in  the  sprin;;, 
before  the  bait  comes  on  the  shore. 

Q.  In  what  month  f — A.  We  will  say  March. 

Q.  What  is  the  best  depth  for  halibut-flshiiig  in  April  f— A.  I  could 
not  tell  you  exactly. 

Q.  What  is  the  case  in  May  ! — A.  It  is  then  inshore. 

Q.  Uow  near  it  1 — A.  Within  half  a  mile  of  it,  if  you  like. 

Q.  In  what  depth  of  water  f — A.  l*orhn|)s  from  2.")  to  31)  fathoTus. 

Q.  How  long  is  this  the  case  f — A.  Halibut  tishing  is  done  ou  liiu  1st 
of  July. 

Q.  is  it  over  then  f  —  V.  They  tish  for  halibut  after  that,  but  the  fishery 
is  not  then  so  good  as  it  is  when  the  mackerel  are  on  the  shore. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  imply  that,  from  May  to  July,  these  twenty 
vessels  will  be  found  olF  your  shore  f — A.  A  portion  of  them  will,  uo 
doubt. 

Q.  And  from  May  to  July,  in  twenty  fathoms  of 
mile  to  two  miles  from  the  coast,  there  is  good  halil 
burne? — A.  Yes — around  Cape  Sable. 

Q.  Do  your  own  i>eople  tish  for  halibut  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Why  not  ? — A.  We  have  no  market  for  them. 

Q.  But  the5  catch  these  tish  in  their  owu  boats,  in  twenty  live  fatlioms 
of  water  t — A.  Y'^es;  they  do  so  fur  their  own  consumption,  but  we  have 
no  market  that  will  warrant  fitting  out  for  the  halibut  fishery. 

Q.  How  many  halibut  do  your  own  people  catch  f — A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  anything  about  it  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Are  there  any  of  your  boats  which  make  a  practi<3e  of  fishing  for 
halibut? — A.  No  ;  but  the  cod-fishing  boats  get  two  or  three  some  days. 

Q.  Accidentally  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Y''ou  say  that  you  have  no  market  for  halibut;  but  could  you  not 
sell  them  to  the  twenty  American  vessels  which  lie  off  your  coast  for  a 
couple  of  months,  and  come  in  every  few  days  for  bait  f — A.  It  would 
not  pay  to  fit  out  for  halibut  fishing. 

Q.  Has  there  ever  been  any  halibut-fishing  done  by  your  people  as  a 
business  t — A.  No. 

Q.  Now,  since  you  yourself  have  been  in  the  cod  fishing  business  and 
are  interested  in  it,  will  you  tell  us  what  bait  you  seud  to  the  Banks?— 
A.  We  send  mackerel. 

Q.  In  ice  t — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  Do  your  vessels  come  back  and  bait  at  your  place  ! — A.  Y^'es. 

Q.  Do  all  of  them  do  so  !— A.  No.  They  go  ashore  at  any  port  where 
bait  can  be  conveniently  obtained — at  Canso  and  Cape  North,  and  iu 
Newfoundland. 


",  from  half  a 
.aiug  off  iShol- 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1035 


since  you  liavo 


y  in  the  sprin;:, 


il  ?— A.  I  (ioiild 


ur  people  as  a 


Q.  Do  they  uae  bait  other  than  mackerel? — A.  Yes;  herring,  squid, 
iVc. 

il.  Where  du  they  get  it  f — A.  I  am  sure  that  is  a  hard  question  to 
aiiHwer. 

i).  Do  yon  not  know  ? — A.  They  have  procureil  squid  this  year  on  the 
Biiiik  itself.  Our  vessHH  liave  also  obtained  squid  on  the  Newfuundland 
coiiNt,  at  Ca|>e  North,  C.  H.,  and  in  Cape  North  Jiay. 

(^.  What  else  do  they  use  on  the  Banks  besides  the  bait  which  they 
curry  there  and  squid  f  Do  they  not  use  the  insides  of  codtish  f — A. 
No;  not  for  trawling. 

if.  Have  you  ever  used  any  salt  bait  on  your  own  vessels  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  liut  you  do  not  ))erMonally  kn<»w  an  to  that  f — A.  As  a  substitute 
they  sometimes  take  a  few  Halt  clams,  but  this  does  not  amount  to  any- 
thing. 

Q.  You  assented  to  Mr.  Thomson's  statement,  that  a  man  who  should 
refuse  to  let  an  Atnerican  vessel  buy  bait  would  not  be  thought  much 
of,  whether  he  sold  it  at  a  loss  or  a  gain  ? — A.  It  is  never  a  rule  amoug 
liNliermeu  to  refuse  a  (iHlierman  bait. 

Q.  Are  there  places  in  Hlielburne  County  where  bait  is  sold  as  a  busi- 
ness to  Auiericans  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  no  people  who  advertise  such  sale  f — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  not  the  owners  of  any  of  your  traps  advertise  the  sale  of  bait  ? 
—A.  No.  I  believe,  however,  that  Wrayton,  who  keeps  an  ice  house  at 
Biirrington,  advertises  the  sale  of  ice,  and  bait  furnished  by  traps,  but 
tbat  hiis  nothing  to  do  with  our  traps. 

Q.  That  is,  he  keeps  ice,  and  ta!  os  the  risk  of  being  able  to  get  bait  f 
—A.  Yes. 

(^  It  is  your  ])ractice  then  to  sell  bait  to  a  brother  flshermun,  of 
whatever  nationality  he  may  be,  even  though  you  do  so  to  your  own  dis- 
advantage ? — A.  Well,  yes — us  a  general  rule. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  You  say  that  these  American  vessels  fish  inshore;  about  how  many 
of  tliem  are  tishingaround  the  coast  of  Shelburne  County  outside  of  the 
three-mile  limit  altogether! — A.  I  think  about  75  sail. 

Q.  And  all  the  other  vessels  you  speak  of  fish  inshore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  spoke  of  20  vessels,  did  you  mean  that  they  fished  close 
in  around  your  coast  ? — A.  About  Ca|»e  Sable — yes ;  I  do  not  know  as 
to  the  whole  county  of  Shelburne.  1  believe  that  the  American  vessels 
iish  all  round  there.  As  to  the  names  of  the  masters  of  these  vessels, 
&('.,  I  know  nothing  about  them. 

Q.  And  around  Cape  8able  during  the  fishing  season,  there  are  at 
least  twenty  American  vessels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  as  to  the  who!o  coast  of  Shelburne  County,  you  cannot  say 
nhat  number  of  American  vessels  fish  inside  the  three-mile  limit  ? — A. 
No. 

Q.  Hut  a  number  of  them  do  there  fish  inside  of  three  miles  from  the 
shore? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  do  the  traps  cost  ?— A.  $1,500. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  tried  to  find  whether  there  is  a  market  for  halibut 
iu  Nova  Scotia?— A.  This  is  a  business  I  was  never  in  ;  aud  I  do  not 
suppose  we  have  a  market  that  would  pay  iu  connection  with  the  pros- 
ecution of  the  halibut  fishery. 

Q.  But  suppose  that  you  sent  them  to  the  States,  and  fresh  fish  can 
«nter  that  market,  without  regard  to  this  treaty — what  is  to  prevent 
your  doing  that? — A.  We  could  hardly  go  to  Boston  aud  retail  halibut. 


1036 


AWABD  OF   THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  yoa  mean  to  say  that  the  Americans  wait  there  and  retail  tbcir 
fish?— A.  Of  course. 

i^  Do  they  not  sell  out  their  whole  cargo  to  fish  dealers  7 — A.  They 
may  do  so. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  such  a  thing  as  of  »  vessel  going  over  with  a 
full  fare  of  fresh  halibut,  and  waiting  in  the  port,  in  order  to  sell  it  by 
retail  I—  A.  No.    They  sell  the  fish  at  wholesale  prices. 

Q.  W^by  could  you  not  do  the  same  thing  t  In  fact,  you  know  noth- 
ing about  the  matter? — A.  No.  We  never  got  into  that  mode  of  fish- 
ing. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Did  you  say  that  you  were  one-quarter  of  a  mile  from  the  vessel 
when  you  spoke  to  the  captain  and  anked  how  he  was  doing  ?— A.  We 
spoke  to  men  who  were  in  a  boat  taking  up  trawls. 

Q.  How  near  to  them  were  you? — A.  We  were  within  fifty  yjirds  of 
them. 

Q.  How  many  men  were  in  the  boat? — A.  Two. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Michael  Wrayton,  of  Harrington  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  He  lives  pretty  near  you  ? — A.  Yes — some  3  or  4  miles  off. 

Q.  Is  he  engaged  in  fishing  business? — A.  No. 

Q.  What  does  he  do  ? — A.  He  keeps  an  ice-house,  and  farms. 

Q.  Does  he  know  anything  about  fisbing  ?  I  notice  that  Mr.  Thom- 
son put  him  this  question : 

Q.  They  ciitrh  haHbut  and  cod  T— A.  Yes.     Fresb-halibut  fisherH,  I  mean. 
Q.  That  is  chietly  a  deep-sea  tishery,  is  it  not? — A.  Yes. 

What  do  you  call  a  deep  sea  fishery  ? — A.  Anything  outside  of  the 
harbors. 
Q.  However  near  the  shore  ? — A.  Yes. 

No.  70. 

B.  H.  RuGGLES,  of  Brier  Lsland,  in  the  county  of  Digby,  called  on 
beliaU  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  exam- 
ined. 

By  Mr.  Weatherbe: 

Question.  You  reside  at  Brier  Island,  Digby  ? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  At  Westport  ? — A.  Westport  is  the  township,  and  comprises  Brier 
Island  and  Long  Island. 

(i,.  It  is  at  the  mouth  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  resided  there? — A.  Since  1833.  It  will  be  45 
years. 

Q.  You  are  a  justice  of  the  peace  for  the  county  and  collector  of  cus- 
toms?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  fisheries  ?n  the  two  islands,  Briar 
Island  and  Long  Islaiui  ? — A.  Froji  observation  I  am.  I  never  followed 
the  business. 

Q.  During  all  that  time  you  have  been  acquainte<l  ? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  The  residents  of  the  two  islands,  I  believe,  are  almost  wholly  do- 
voted  to  the  fisheries  ? — A.  They  are. 

Q.  There  is  very  little  farming?— A.  Very  little.  There  is  some.  A 
few  persons  raise  their  own  vegetables,  their  potatoes. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  extent  of  the  fisheries  on  the  two  i 
islands ;  I  mean  the  exports  of  fish  ? — A.  Yes,  to  a  oertain  extent.  I  do  j 
not  know  that  I  could  give  you  exactly. 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1037 


ithin  fifty  jarils  of 


il  collector  of  cus- 


!here  is  some.    A 


Q.  About  bow  mucb  does  it  amount  to? — A.  Probably  some  $150,000 
or  $200,000. 

Q.  Those  are  the  two  islands  alone  ? — A.  Yes.  That  is  including  the 
fishing  district,  Tiverton,  Petit  Passage,  and  Grand  Passage. 

Q.  What  kind  offish  are  caught  there! — A.  Codfish,  haddock,  bake, 
pollock,  halibut,  herring,  and  some  mackerel,  when  they  strike  our 
shores. 

Q.  Is  it  an  inshore  fishery  ?— A.  With  the  large  proportion  of  the  in- 
habitants it  is  an  inshore  fishery  in  small  boats. 

Q.  Do  5  ou  know  where  Cape  Split  is? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now,  does  this  fishery  extend  up  the  north  coast  of  the  island  and 
ott  Digby  Neck  as  far  as  Cape  S|)lit  ?— A.  Yes.  It  is  quite  an  extensive 
fishery  up  at  the  Isle  of  Haute,  and  that  is  well  up  to  Cape  Split. 

Q.  From  Capo  Split  it  extends  all  the  way  to  your  island.  Around 
the  shores  of  the  bay,  are  there  fisheries  there  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Around  on  botlj  sides  of  the  bay  t — A.  That  is,  Digby  Neck  side 
and  Clare. 

Q.  And  down  the  coast  as  far  as  Yarmouth  ! — A.  Perhaps,  on  the 
south  side  ot  St.  Mary's  Bay,  on  the  French  shore  or  township  of  Clare, 
it  la  not  so  extensive. 

Q.  It  is  not  so  extensively  carried  on,  but  is  the  fish  as  good  ? — A.  I 
could  hardly  say  it  was  as  good  on  the  south  side,  but  still  there  are  a 
number  that  prosecute  the  fisheries  there.  It  is  increasing  annually. 
The  inhabitants  are  turning  their  attention  more  to  the  fishery  busi- 
ness. 

Q.  About  how  many  miles  from  Cape  Split  is  Yarmouth  along  the 
coast;  that  is,  the  inshore  fishery  of  which  you  speak,  where  this  fish  is 
caught  ? — A.  If  I  had  a  map  I  could  probably  measure  it  ofif.  I  should 
think  it  was  250  or  300  miles. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  amount  of  the  exports  of  any  other 
phices  than  these  two  islands  of  which  you  have  spoken  I — A.  No  ;  I 
could  not  give  the  figures  of  them. 

Q.  What  is  the  width  of  the  bay  across  Petit  Passage  to  Clare ;  that 
is,  above  the  islands  ? — A.  Probably  it  is  in  the  neighborhood  of  C  or  7 
iui<es. 

(>.  Do  you  know  whether  it  is  over  six  ?— A.  I  do  not  know.  I  should 
think  something  like  six  miles. 

Q.  The  people  of  the  two  islands  live  altogether  by  fishing  ! — A.  Yes, 
altogether,  1  might  say. 

Q.  With  regard  to  the  other  parts  of  the  coast,  do  they  carry  on  any 
farming  at  all  t — A.  I  think  about  Sandy  Cove,  that  is,  alvmt  the  center 
ot  Digby  Neck,  there  are  some  few  that  do  a  litMe  farming.  About 
Diiiby  Neck,  again,  there  are  some,  and  through  \    ira. 

Q.  Except  those  three  places,  they  carry  on  fishing  nearly  altogether  f — 
A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  With  regartl  to  those  two  islands,  beside  your  own  people,  what 
oth*'r  fisheries  are  carried  on ;  who  else  fish  there  f — A.  The  American 
fishermen. 

Cj.  Are  the  fisheries  confined  entirely  to  your  own  inhabitants  and  the 
Americans? — A.  I  know  of  none  others. 

Q.  What  kind  of  fisheries  do  they  carry  on  there  ! — A.  The  Amen- 
urn  f    The  same  as  the  inhabitants. 

Q.  They  oatoh  the  same  fish  that  you  catch  ?— A.  Yes.  Sometimes 
the  AmericanH  fit  out  exclnsively  for  halibut  in  the  spring  of  the  year. 
There  would  be  a  few  vessels  across  from  Portland  and  Gloucester  for 
fretih  halibut 


,..-'»H  ■ 


.  1-  'i*'.'^ 


1038 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  That  is  exclasively  for  halibatf — A.  Yes;  I  may  say  exclusively 
so;  they  fit  out  exclusively  for  it,  but  iu  setting  their  uets  they  will 
sometimes  take  cod. 

Q.  Besides  that  they  carry  on  the  same  fisheries  with  your  own  peo- 
ple?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  ia  that  the  inshore  fishery  ?— A.  That  which  I  last  speak  ot  is 
the  inshore  fishery. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  the  Americans  who  fish  the  same  as  your  own 
people  do.  Besides  that  there  are  a  number  of  large  vessels  tliat  come 
for  bait  and  ice! — A.  Yes;  we  have  not  very  many  at  Westport  for  bait 
and  ice?  The  heft  is  taken,  I  think,  at  Grand  Manan  ;  but  still  there  is 
a  large  number  of  vessels  that  come  to  our  place.  Up  in  St.  Mary's 
Bay  they  go  into  Sandy  Cove,  where  the  herring  strike  in  rather  earlier 
than  with  us. 

Q.  What  sort  are  the  small  vessels  that  the  Americans  fish  insliore 
with  ? — A.  Perhaps  9  or  10  tons. 

Q.  They  are  a  smaller  class  of  vessels  altogether? — A.  An  entirely 
difi'erent  class  of  vessels.  They  come  in  and  conje  to  anchor  in  the  har- 
bor, and  go  out  in  their  small  boats  generally. 

Q.  They  bring  vessels,  but  they  usually  fish  in  small  boats,  the  same 
as  your  own  people  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Now  take  your  own  place,  within  your  township,  what  proportion 
of  the  fish  do  you  s  .ppose  are  caught  by  the  Americans;  the  inshore 
fishermen  I  am  speaking  of,  altogether  f  You  say  that  $1UU,0(K)  or 
$200,000  is  the  amount  exported  from  these  two  islands.  What  propor- 
tion would  you  suppose  would  be  fish  caught  by  the  Americans  ?— A. 
Well,  it  would  be  only  an  ideal  thing  1  wouTil  have  to  give  you. 

Q.  I  want  j'ou  to  give  us  a  fair  estimate,  to  the  best  of  your  judg- 
ment ? — A.  Perhaps,  to  take  the  whole  thing,  the  Americans,  large  and 
small,  that  fish  what  we  call  the  inshore  fishery,  I  would  say  it  is  some- 
thing like  a  quarter  or  a  third. 

Q.  That  is  a  quarter  or  a  third  of  the  quantity  you  export? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  We  had  an  estimate  given  the  other  day  by  the  inspector  of  lisli- 
eries,  from  statistics  which  he  made  himself,  giving  200,000  for  tlie.-«o 
islands? — A.  Yes;  he  could  give  you  a  bettor  idea.  Ho  took  quite  a 
considerable  pains  in  obtaining  this  information  last  season.  I  should 
think  something  like  a  quarter  or  a  third  was  caught  by  the  Ameri- 
cans. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  give  an  estimate  of  any  other  parts  out8i<le  ot 
those  islands  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Where  is  the  halibut  fishery  carried  on  ;  how  far  from  shore? — A. 
Well,  iu  St.  Mary's  Bay,  it  is  carried  on  from  half  a  mile  to  two  iiiiNs 
otl'  shore. 

Q.  Then  it  is  an  inshore  fishery? — A.  Yes;  that  is  of!  Cape  St.  Mary's 
in  the  spring.    The  lialiltut  strike  there  first. 

Q.  I  believe  your  fisheries  there  are  somewhat  dirtereut  from  what 
they  rre  on  the  other  side  of  the  province.  I  don't  think  we  have  had 
much  e\!ic:!"e  of  those  American  vessels,  small  vessels,  coming  in  as 
they  do  at  St.  Mary's  f — A.  1  don't  thuik  they  fish  across  IJrand  Manan. 

Q.  I  am  si)eaking  of  the  other  side  of  the  province,  the  Atlantic 
coast? — A.  1  dou'i  think  they  fre(iueut  that  part  at  all.  It  is  aa  ex- 
posed shore. 

Q.  Where  do  your  people  sell  the  large  amount  of  fish  they  catch 
there? — A.  W'e  have  dittereDt  markets  for  them;  wherever  wo  can  get 
most  for  them. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1039 


sans  tish  inshore 


boats,  the  same 


arts  outside  of 


Q.  Wliere  generally  ? — A.  Last  season  Halifax  afforded  the  best 
market. 

Q.  Do  you  sell  any  at  Yarmouth  f — A.  Yes ;  and  at  St.  John's.  Oc- 
casionally we  send  a  cargo  to  the  United  States,  of  pollack,  &c. 

Q.  Why  not  send  all  there  ? — A.  Well,  we  act  there  upon  the  same 
principle  as  elsewhere.    We  send  them  where  we  can  get  most  for  them. 

Q.  Now,  take  the  time  of  t!e  Reciprocity  Treaty  ;  how  did  prices  then 
compare  with  prices  afterward  under  the  duty;  were  the  prices  higher 
or  lower  ! — A.  During  the  Keciprocity  Treaty  we  had,  perhaps,  more 
trade  than  ever  since;  but  after  '64  the  fish  were  commanding  a  higher 
price.  I  think  it  was  generally  admitted  that  we  received  more,  even 
paying  the  duty,  than  we  did  under  reciprocity. 

Q.  Then  since  the  Washington  Treaty  are  the  prices  as  high  ?  Take 
the  average. — A.  They  haven't  been  until  this  present  time.  Just  now 
the  prices  are  pretty  well  up  in  the  United  States. 

Q.  lint  the  average  price  ? — A.  It  has  been  higher  at  Yarmouth,  Hali- 
fax, and  St.  John. 

Q.  Then,  previous  to  the  time  of  the  duty,  do  you  say  the  prices  were 
more  or  less? — A.  I  am  not  sure  I  understand  you  rightly.  It  was  gen- 
erally considered  that  we  got  as  much  or  a  little  more  for  fish  during  the 
time  of  the  duty  than  since. 

(I.  You  often  see  those  American  fishermen,  and  have  for  years  I — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Why  do  they  come  to  your  shores  to  catch  fish  ?  W^hy  don't  they 
lish  their  own  shores  ? — A.  Well,  they  say  they  have  not  any  fish  on 
their  own  shores  to  catch. 

Q.  How  long  have  they  been  coming  from  the  first  I — A.  I  cannot  tell 
jon  from  the  first.    They  were  there  when  I  first  went  to  Westport. 

Q.  Is  this  fishery  on  the  increase;  this  that  the  American  fishermen 
carry  on  there! — A.  I  canno'.  say  it  is  on  the  increase  in  the  Bay  of 
Fundy ;  but  there  is  an  iuciease  in  this  way,  that  the  Americans  come 
iu  for  bait  and  ice. 

Q.  I  am  s|>eaking  altogether  of  your  own  place.  Is  the  American 
fishery  there  on  the  increase  ? — A.  I  cannot  say  that  it  is. 

i).  There  is  an  increase  of  the  icing  and  baiting  ? — A.  There  is  an 
iiiercase  of  the  small  class  of  boats  we  were  speaking  of  in  the  first 
instance. 

Q.  That  is  the  very  thing  I  was  asking  you. — A.  Well,  there  is  an  in- 
crease of  that. 

A.  The  Americans  have  no  boat  fishing  except  those  little  schooners ; 
you  call  them  boats  f — A.  They  generally  call  them  boats. 

<^  Well,  there  is  an  increase  of  that  fishing  f — A.  Yes. 

ij.  And  they  told  you  that  they  have  no  fishing  on  their  own  cojist ! — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  yon,  seeing  that  your  people  are  entirely  de- 
voted to  the  fisheries,  do  you  know  of  any  destitution  among  them  at 
that  place  t — A.  I  never  have  heard  of  any  in  the  county  of  Digby. 

(^  I  am  speaking  of  those  islands  ? — A.  I  have  freciuently  heard  the 
Americans  speak  of  <lestitution  on  the  coast  of  Maine,  regretting  that 
tliey  had  not  the  privilege  of  coming  over  and  living  as  we  did. 

(^  Are  there  not  a  good  many  poor  villages  on  your  coast  1 — A.  No. 
At  Westport  we  do  not  pay  one  cent  for  poor-tax. 

Q.  Don't  you  ooutribute  to  the  whole  county  ! — A.  No, 

(^  The  county  is  divided  into  districts,  and  each  district  takes  care 
of  its  own  poor  ! — A.  Yes. 


1040 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Does  it  not  cost  a  great  deal  to  take  care  of  those  who  are  poor 
and  destitute  f — A.  No. 

Q.  You  say  you  do  uot  pay  a  cent  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Then  you  have  no  poor*rate  at  all  f — A.  No. 

Q.  And  the  only  destitution  you  have  heard  of  is  the  destitution  of 
the  fishermen  on  the  coast  of  Maine  ? — A.  Well,  I  have  frequently  bad 
conversations  with  skippers,  speakiuj^  of  the  privilege  we  enjoyed  uiid 
regretting  that  they  could  not  do  as  we  did.  They  say  they  have  to  tisb 
summer  and  winter,  and  scarcely  drag  out  an  existence,  and  I  should 
suppose  it  was  so,  from  the  appearance  of  some  of  them ;  whereas  our 
fishermen  only  fish  five  months  in  the  year  and  live  comfortably. 

Q.  It  is  a  very  short  run  across  there  from  the  State  of  Maine?— A. 
Tes;  a  few  hours;  probably  six  or  eight.  Sometimes  they  come  iroiii 
Mount  Desert,  which  would  be  ten  or  twelve  hours. 

Q.  Taking  the  season  through,  about  how  many  of  those  little  fishing 
boats  run  across  there  f  I  mean  to  your  own  ports  there. — A.  I  remeiu- 
ber  last  season,  I  think  it  was,  I  was  up  at  Tiverton  and  Petite  Passage, 
and  1  thiuk  they  told  me  there  were  thirty  of  their  boats  there  at  tbut 
time. 

Q.  The  average  is  about  how  many  tons? — A.  They  would  probably 
average  from  seven  to  ten  tons.  Some  would  be  large  open  boats  tbut 
would  not  be  registered  at  all. 

Q.  How  often  do  they  cure  their  fish ;  do  they  salt  it,  or  carry  it 
home  fresh  ? — A.  I  think  they  generally  salt  their  fish  on  board.  1  am 
not  prepared  to  make  a  statement  of  it. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  any  complaints  from  our  own  flsherraen  on 
the  coast  with  regard  to  gurry  f — A.  Yes;  that  has  been  a  source  of 
complaint,  throwing  the  garbage  offish  overboard ;  also  the  trawl  tisb- 
ing.  The  Americans  introduced  the  trawling  process,  and  are  thus  de- 
stroying the  inshore  fishery  altogether. 

Q.  Do  your  people  complain  of  that  ? — A.  Yes ;  but  they  have  to 
adopt  it  themselves  in  self-defense. 

Q.  They  have  to  take  up  the  same  kind  of  fishing  as  others  ?— A. 
Yes.  The  American  captains  all  admit  that  it  is  ruining  the  fisbin;,' 
grounds,  that  it  has  destroyed  the  fishing  grounds  on  the  American 
coast,  and  now  it  is  going  to  destroy  them  in  Nova  Scotia.  There  is  no 
trouble  about  it.  If  the  process  is  kept  on  we  will  uot  have  inshore 
fisheries  ten  years  hence. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  two  vessels,  schooners,  devoted  to  halibut  fisbinfj ; 
what  size  were  they  t — A.  I  spoke  of  two.  No,  there  were  several  iu 
ditterent  years. 

Q.  What  size  would  they  bet — A.  They  would  be  vessels  ranging 
according  to  the  registry  act  of  the  United  States,  which  is  souietliiiii; 
the  same  as  that  of  the  Dominion,  from  40  to  70  tons. 

Q.  There  are  several  of  those  devoted  exclusively  to  halibut  ?— A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Then  with  regard  to  those  other  fishermen,  do  they  take  other 
fish  f — A.  Yes  ;  anything  they  can. 

Q.  But  these  are  fitted  out  exclusively  for  halibut  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  they  take  the  fish  home  fresh  ? — A.  Yes ;  they  ice  them. 

Q.  Have  th"y  not  wells  also  f — A.  I  never  knew  of  it  but  in  one  ves- 
sel. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  their  ice  ?— A.  They  generally  fetch  a  small 
supply  from  home. 

Q.  Now,  with  regard  to  other  vessels.  Yon  spoke  of  large  vessels 
coming  in  for  bait  and  ioe ;  that  is  for  codfish  f — A.  Yes. 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHEfiT  COMMISSION. 


1041 


)  who  are  poor 


It  they  bave  to 


Q.  Do  yoa  know  where  they  get  their  bait  f — A.  Well,  I  have  it  ODly 
from  hearsay  that  they  bait  on  Grand  Manan  and  Campobello,  a  great 
many  of  them.  Then  again  in  Sandy  Cove  on  oar  side  they  get  some, 
and  many  of  them  come  up  to  Digby. 

Q.  Sandy  Gove  is  on  St.  Mary's  Bay  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  go  up  to  Digby  Gut  some  of  them  and  bait  up  there  f — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  know  of  their  carrying  herring  nets,  those  vessels  I — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Why  do  they  carry  those  nets  ! — A.  Sometimes  they  set  the  nets 
themselves,  and  tlie  inhiibitaiits  I  have  been  informed  take  nets  and  set 
for  tbem. 

Q.  To  catch  bait  ?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  is  bait  tor  uodtiHb  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  these  vessels  pay  light-duties  T — A.  They  were  paying  the 
same  liKht-money  previous  to  confederatiou  as  os^r  own  vessels. 

Q.  Now  can  you  give  us  an  idea  how  many  of  these  vessels  were  ever 
bouided  f — A.  The  greatest  number  I  ever  boarded  in  one  day  was  22. 

Q.  How  many  would  come  in  in  the  course  of  the  season  I — A.  Prob- 
ably some  30  or  40.  A  great  many  pass  through  the  Passage  and  go 
right  into  St.  Mary'H  Bay  up  to  Sandy  Cove.  Many  would  pass  through 
iti  the  night  when  I  would  have  no  knowledge  of  them. 

Q.  How  many  mackerel  vesvsels  have  you  seen  fishing  at  one  time  in 
St.  Mary's  Buy  ? — A.  1  never  saw  many. 

Q.  How  many  is  the  largest  you  ever  saw  T — A.  I  have  heard  of  as 
many  as  180  at  one  time.    I  think  soiue  four  or  five  years  ago. 

Q.  One  hundred  and  eighty  American  fishermen  fishing  in  your 
bay  ? — A.  Yes.  There  might  l)e  others.  They  were  scattered  all  through 
the  bay  from  Cape  St.  Mary's  to  within  four  or  five  miles  ot  the  head  of 
the  bay. 

Q.  Now,  you  have  giveu  u.s  an  idea  of  the  extent  of  the  fisheries  down 
oil  tiiese  islands.  In  Digby  Gut  and  thereabouts  I  am  told  that  the 
fiHhiiig  is  better  than  any  other  places  f — A.  There  are  good  fisheries 
aboui  Digby  Gut. 

Q.  You  don't  like  to  admit  there  is  any  place  like  homef — A.  Well, 
generally  the  fishermen  find  out  where  the  l)e8t  fishing  grounds  are.  I 
Wlieve  iibout  Di^by  (rut  they  are  as  good  as  anywhere  in  the  Bay  of 
Fuiidy. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  vessels  resort  to  any  other  places;  that 
is,  of  those  Anieriran  Imats  f — A.  No ;  I  could  not  speak  of  other  places. 

Q.  I  am  told  that  some  of  those  that  come  to  your  place  haul  up 
i»r  aiiehor,  and  fish  in  their  boats  altogether? — A.  Yes.  Not  so  many  in 
Weatport,  but  at  Petite  Passage. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  the  islands  and  the  passage  between. — A.  They 
iiiichor  and  take  small  skitl'-boars  or  wherries,  as  they  call  them,  and 
they  go  out  to  fish  and  set  trawls. 

Q.  Where  do  they  livet — A.  On  board  their  boats. 

t^.  Do  they  keep  them  hauled  up  at  anchor  ?— A.  They  are  at  anchor 
(lining  the  fishing  season. 

By  Mr.  Dana: 

Q.  You  say  that  Halifax,  Yarmou  ,  and  St.  John  furnish  better 
markets  now,  or  have  for  some  years  past,  than  the  United  States? — 
A.  They  have  for  some  years  past  until  the  present  season. 

(^  For  how  many  years  past  do  you  think  that  has  been  the  case  t — 
A.  1  could  not  say  exactly,  but  the  last  four  or  five  years  in  particular. 

(J6p 


1042 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Too  speak  of  fresh  fish  f—  A.  I  speak  of  salt  flsb. 

Q.  Yon  mean  cured  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Well,  then,  you  hav6  .oent  your  salt  and  cured  fish  to  your  own 
ports  in  preference  to  sending  them  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  We  sent 
some  to  the  United  States. 

Q.  But  in  preference  the  greater  quantity  go  to  your  own  ports ?~ 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  are  go%'erned  by  market  considerations  altogether  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  on  the  wliole  a  better  price  is  got  here  than  in  the.  United 
States!— A.  Yes.  Our  {K)IIack  mostly  go  to  the  United  States,  and 
some  of  the  large  codtlsh. 

Q.  The  best  UMually  ! — A.  The  beat  quality. 

Q.  Why  do  you  suppose  tlie  market  is  better  in  Halifax,  St.  .lolin, 
and  Yarmouth,  than  in  the  United  States  f  What  do  you  suppose  is 
the  reason  ? — A.  1  suppose  we  exjwrt  more  to  the  West  Indies  from 
these  ports.  All  our  West  India  ti^h  goes  to  Yarmouth  and  Halifax,  or 
Lunenburg. 

Q.  There  is  not  enough  lish  brought  into  these  ports  of  Nova  Scotia 
to  supply  the  <lemaiid  abroad  which  they  undertake  to  supply,  atul  also 
their  own  consumption  t — A.  1  would  not  like  to  give  an  opinion  about 
that.    ]  have  too  limited  an  idea. 

Q.  When  you  send  them  into  your  own  ports  you  pay  no  duty  ?— 
A.  No.    Of  course  not  in  the  Dominion. 

Q.  And  you  paid  no  duty  in  the  States  for  some  years  ? — A.  Durlnj,' 
reciprocity  we  paid  no  duty. 

Q.  And  since  1871  f—A.  No. 

Q.  Then  you  speak  of  the  time  when  there  was  no  duty,  when  you 
say  that  the  market  was  better  in  Halifax,  St.  John,  and  Varinoutli  ?— 
A.  At  the  time  there  was  a  duty  after  reciprocity,  the  flshcrmon  con- 
sidered that  they  got  fully  as  well  compensated. 

Q.  That  was  not  the  question.  My  question  was  this:  After  the 
Washington  Treaty  was  adopted  there  was  no  duty  on  your  tish  goin<r 
into  the  United  States  market — that  is,  for  the  last  tive  years,  we  will 
say.  During  that  time  you  found  the  markets  of  your  own  cuuntiy 
bringing  better  prices  than  the  markets  in  the  United  States ! — A.  For 
certain  descriptions.  With  our  West  India  fish  and  pickled  tish  we  do 
better  in  the  ports  of  the  Dominion. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  West  India  fish!— A.  Codfish,  haddock, 
and  hake. 

Q.  They  are  dne<l !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  do  not  undertake  to  send  them  in  any  large  quantities  to  the 
ports  of  the  United  States  ? — A.  We  have  sent  several  cargoes. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  would  like  to  change  what  you  said,  and  say  that 
you  sent  more  to  the  United  States  than  you  did  to  Halifax ! — A.  No ; 
I  do  not  think  it.  I  said  the  heft  of  our  fish  were  sent  to  Halifax,  Yar- 
mouth, and  Lunenburg. 

Q.  You  gave  as  a  reason  that  the  markets  were  higher! — A.  Yes: 
and  I  can  tell  you  an  instance  of  a  cargo  of  haddock  sold  this  season  at 
Portlaml,  after  which  the  vessel  returned  and  loaded  up  for  Lunen- 
burg, where  he  found  that  this  fish  had  been  reshipped,  and  they  met  biiu 
in  Lunenburg. 

Q.  Then,  tish  Is  rather  a  drug  in  the  United  States  market !— A.  I 
am  not  posted.    I  do  not  know  as  to  the  United  States  market. 

Q.  Yon  still  think  your  reason  for  not  sending  them  there  is  the 
smaller  price  you  would  get! — A.  Yes;  that  is  a  very  natural  roasou/ 


AWARD   OF  TH£   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1043 


No.  77. 


ir  own  ports?— 


odtisli,  biuldock 


JosiAH  Hopkins,  of  Barrin^ton,  in  the  county  of  Shelburae,  Nova 
Scotia,  c»lled  on  bebalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

(jaestion.  You  hve  at  Barrington,  in  the  county  of  Shelburne  ? — An- 
swer. Yes. 

Q.  What  businena  do  you  prosecute  f — A.  I  am  engaged  in  supplying 
tisliermen  witii  general  outtits. 

Q.  Were  you  engaged  fishing  a  number  ot  years  ? — A.  Yes,  two  years; 
in  1853  and  1851.     After  that  I  went  to  sea,  up  to  1858. 

Q.  Then  did  you  carry  your  flsh  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  recollect  when  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was  abolished? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  taking  fish  to  the  American  market  then  ! — A.  I 
have  been  there  every  year,  right  along,  both  before  and  alter. 

Q.  Well,  did  you  realize  as  much  after  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  was 
abolished  as  before  ! — A.  Well,  of  course  the  markets  varied  in  diflerent 
years,  but  I  don't  know  that  the  abolition  of  the  treaty  made  any  ditfer- 
euce. 

Q.  Did  you,  before  this  Treaty  of  Washington  came  into  force,  make 
as  nincb  money  as  since  1 — A.  Yes,  as  much,  and  did  better,  I  think.  I 
tliitik,  as  a  rule,  the  prices  have  ruled  lower  since. 

ii.  Then  the  treaty  has  not  Innietited  you  much  ? — A.  Not  as  fiir  as 
prices  are  concerned,  I  don't  think. 

Q.  What  duty  had  you  before  this  treaty  upon  salt  fish  ? — A.  A  half 
cent  a  pound  in  gold.  On  m.ickerel  I  think  it  was  $2  a  barrel,  and  on 
halibut  I  think  $1  a  barrel ;  on  oil,  20  per  cent. 

Q.  The  prices  you  realized  during  the  time  the  duty  was  exacted  were 
just  as  remunerative  as  since  ¥ — A.  I  think  they  were;  that  is,  theaver- 
ajje.  Of  course,  as  1  said  before,  they  varied  in  ditterent  years.  But  I 
think  there  was  as  much  money  in  the  business  then  as  there  is  now. 

(J.  Well,  you  have  a  pnuitieal  acquaintiince  with  the  matter,  and  you 
think  there  was  as  much  money  in  it  before  as  since  the  Washington 
Tieat.v  ?— A.  Yes. 

ii,.  Is  there  much  tisb  caught  within  the  three-mile  limit  by  your  own 
people  on  yonr  own  coast  ? — A.  Yes. 

(^  IJow  many  boats  are  owned  in  Barrington  alone? — A.  I  could  not 
say,  but  I  should  suppose  in  Barrington  Township  there  were  400  or 
:mk 

Q.  Well,  take  the  whole  countv  of  Shelburne  ? — A.  I  should  think 
SOU  or  1,000. 

(i.  These  prosecnte  the  fisheries  entirely  within  three  miles? — 
A.  From  three  to  five  miles. 

Q.  What  do  they  take  I — A.  Codfish,  haddock,  pollock,  herring,  and 
macrkerel. 

Q.  Halibut  ? — A.  Some.  I  do  not  think  any  great  quantity  of  halibut, 
as  tar  as  1  know. 

Q.  The  halibut,  I  think,  is  chiefly  taken  by  the  Americans  with  a 
trawl !— A.  As  far  as  I  know. 

Q.  This  boat-fishing  is  not  carried  on  by  trawls  at  all  ? — A.  To  some 
extent  it  is.    More  of  late  years  than  there  used  to  be. 

Q.  What  has  led  to  that ;  is  it  not  injurious  f — A.  It  is  and  it  is  not. 


1044 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


It  is  remuDerative  for  the  preseut^  bat  we  think  it  is  injurious  in  the 
eud. 

Q.  You  enjoy  a  present  gain  with  the  certainty  of  future  loss;  is  tliat 
what  you  mean  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  has  driven  you  into  this  trawl  fishery  f — A.  Well,  it  has 
come  to  be  adopted.  The  man  who  adopts  it  gets  a  little  more  fish  than 
the  one  that  does  not,  and  so  another  and  another  does  it. 

Q.  Who  first  started  it,  your  people  or  the  AmericanH  f — A.  Where  f 

Q.  In  that  neighborhood  t — A.  Well,  when  we  speak  of  our  buut- 
flshing,  our  own  people  started  it. 

Q.  Of  course  the  Americans  do  not  boat-fish  there  at  all  ? — A.  But 
there  are  a  number  of  American  schooners  that  come  in  and  use  the^e 
trawls.  I  have  understood  that  from  reliable  authority.  They  come  in 
from  New  London,  I  think,  but  I  am  not  very  well  acquainted  with  that 
matter.  Mr.  Cunningham  would  know  more  than  I  do.  I  think  the 
American  ))eople  srarted  the  trawl  fishing,  because  up  to  the  last  4  or 
5  years  we  used  to  have  a  school  of  large  codfish  come  on  the  coast  late 
in  the  fall,  and  our  baots  used  to  take  large  tiuantities,  but  since  the 
large  fleet  of  Americans  has  come  we  do  not  get  any  at  all.  The  im- 
pression was  that  these  trawl-fishers  caught  up  all  the  fish,  and  they 
did  not  come  in. 

Q.  Do  yonr  people  make  any  use  of  the  American  waters  for  fish- 
ing Y — A.  I  only  know  one  vessel  this  year.  That  is  the  first  and  only 
one  I  know. 

Q.  Where  was  she  from  f — A.  Cape  Negro.  She  was  over  there  this 
spring  mackerel  fishing. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  she  made  out  to  catch  anything  ? — A.  1 
saw  the  captain  to  day  and  he  said  he  had  done  about  nothing. 

Q.  Did  this  captain  tell  you  where  he  fished  f — A.  Not  to-day  ;  but  I 
have  understo(Ml  fru:n  other  sources  that  he  was  down  south  where  the 
American  fishermen  go.  1  think  it  is  down  about  George^s  or  Nautuckct, 
and  from  that  to  Cape  Cod. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Was  he  for  mackerel  or  cod  ? — A.  For  mackerel.  Since  that  he 
has  been  in  the  North  Bay. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  How  did  he  do  there? — A.  I  understood  not  very  well.  I  have 
reference  to  Captain  Whitney  of  the  sclmoner  Harriet. 

Q.  Did  the  Americans  come  in  for  much  bait  in  your  neighborhood  ?— 
A.  Yes,  considerable. 

Q.  Can  they  carry  on  the  outside  cod  fisheries  without  that  bait  ?— A. 
Not  so  well,  I  think. 

Q.  Can  they  at  all,  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  it  pay  t — A.  Not  to 
make  it  as  lucrative  as  at  present. 

Q.  Would  it  i)ay  at  all  f — A.  I  could  not  answer  that  question. 

Q.  How  often  did  they  come  in  for  bait  f — A.  I  have  known  vessels 
this  summer  come  in  every  week  or  every  fortnight,  depending  upon  the 
quantity  they  threw  out  at  a  time. 

Q.  Could  they  possibly  haive  carried  on  a  remunerative  business  if 
they  had  had  to  go  once  a  week  or  once  a  fortnight  to  their  own  coast  f 
— A.  I  don't  think  they  could.  The  bait  is  the  back-bone  of  the  biisi- 
oesd. 

Q.  In  fact  they  can't  get  along  with  salt  bait  now,  can  they  T — A.  No, 
not  very  well.    The  days  for  salt  bait  in  cod  and   halibut  fishing  are 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1045 


i  over  there  this 


.    Since  that  he 


al>out  pant.  Years  ago  they  used  to,  bat  now  they  never  do  at  all  if 
they  can  avoid  it. 

Q.  They  can  do  nothing  as  against  vessels  with  fresh  bait  f — A.  Not 
to  compete  with  them  ;  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  How  many  vessels  do  you  supply  in  the  course  of  the  year,  or  how 
many  are  you  aware  of  coming  in  to  be  supplied  f — A.  I  personally  don't 
supply  any  at  all.  I  could  hardly  tell,  but  there  is  one  of  those  fish 
traps  there,  and  every  three  days  out  of  the  week  there  is  one,  two, 
three,  or  four  vessels  there  looking  for  bait.  Sometimes  they  don't  get 
any,  but  as  a  rule  they  do. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  halibut  is  taken  inshore  by  boats  as  well  as 
cod  and  pollock  ! — A.  By  our  boats  ?    Yes ;  it  is  taken  inshore. 

Q.  I  think  you  said  you  had  heard  of  Americans  coming  in  within 
three  miles ;  but  you  did  not  know  ? — A.  1  do  not  know.  Mr.  Cunning* 
bam  will  know  more  than  I  do.  It  is  a  little  aside  from  where  my  busi* 
iiess  takes  me.  I  have  understood  they  have  been  in  a  good  deal  around 
Saint  John  Island  just  west  of  where  I  am. 

i).  That  is  within  three  miles  ? — A.  Close  in. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  I  wonder  if  you  can  give  the  names  of  any  New  London  halibat 
catchers  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Or  the  names  of  the  captains  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  any  of  their  vessels  ? — A.  I  have  seen  them  at 
a  distance.     I  never  was  aboard. 

ii.  How  many  of  them  have  you  seen  f — A.  I  might  see  one  three  or 
four  times,  and  would  hardly  know  whether  it  was  the  same  or  not. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  whether  three  or  thirty  halibut  catchers  from 
New  London  have  come  up  in  your  neighborhood  f — A.  From  informa* 
tion,  I  should  suppose  a  large  fleet.    Tbey  come  in  for  bait. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  those  vessels,  many  of  them,  fish  in- 
shore!— A.  The  information  I  have  is  not  positive.  1  have  heard  of 
some. 

Q.  But  it  was  spoken  of  as  rather  a  surprising  thing f — A.  No;  it 
was  just  stated  as  a  fiict  that  the  American  vessels  did  sometimes  fish 
ri<;ht  in  handy  for  halibut. 

Q.  Now,  when  you  fished  yourself,  what  did  you  fish  for? — A.  Codfish. 

Q.  From  vessels  ? — A.  From  vessels  on  the  Bank. 

i}.  That  was  in  1853  and  1854  t— A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  was  no  such  thing  as  using  any  b.iit  exc?pt  salt  bait,  and 
what  was  caught  on  the  Banks  at  that  time? — A.  No;  not  that  I  was 
aware  of. 

Q.  By  the  way,  were  you  in  an  American  vessel  f — A.  No ;  in  a  Brit- 
ish vessel. 

Q.  Do  you  really  mean  to  leave  the  impression  that  you  consider  it 
would  be  just  as  well  for  you,  in  the  American  market,  with  the  old 
duties  as  it  is  without  any  duties?— A.  That  depends  upon  circum- 
stances. 

Q.  Is  it  a  matter  of  ''ulifterence  whether  a  duty  is  imposed  or  not?— 
A.  it  comes  just  in  this  way  :  one  year  I  pay  a  duty  on  my  fish  when  I 
go  over  there,  and  the  fish  net  me  so  much  money.  One  or  two  years 
afterward  I  go  and  there  is  no  duty,  and  the  fish  do  not  net  me  any 
more  money. 

Q.  That  is  not  the  question.  I  asked  you  whether  you  really  think 
you  are  as  well  off,  in  the  American  market,  with  the  duty  on  as  with 
it  oft? — A.  Let  me  understand  what  is  the  question. 


1046 


AWARD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Ton  state  what  yon  believed  the  question  to  be.  It  ia  r  ver}' 
simple  one. — A.  I  don't  know  what  the  effect  of  a  duty  would  be  at  the 
present  day. 

Q.  I  am  not  asking  yon  that.  I  anked  yon  if  it  was  a  matter  of  in- 
difference  to  you — it  yon  don't  care  whether  the  duty  is  on  or  off  f — A.  [ 
would  prefer  having  them  go  in  free. 

Q.  lou  think  it  would  be  more  proHiable  ? — A.  I  don't  know  about 
that.    It  might  or  it  might  not. 

Q.  Do  you  care  much  about  it  f — A.  Not  a  great  deal. 

Q.  What  do  yon  send  there,  mackerel  f — A.  No;  pollock  arid  codlisli. 

Q.  Fresh  t — A.  Salt  cod,  large  ciMltish  ;  shore  oodtish  chietly. 

Q.  That  is  not  a  very  large  trade,  is  itt — A.  Well,  it  is  quite  a  littlo 
trade  out  of  our  place. 

Q.  How  many  dollars  T — A.  (Jmlflsh  alone  f  Well,  I  should  sjipposo 
from  live  to  ten  thousand  dollars  a  year. 

Q.  And  haddock  f — A.  No  haddock. 

Q.  Nor  hake! — A.  No. 

Q.  What  other  flsh  f— A.  Pollock. 

Q.  How  much  of  that  f — A.  I  suppose  from  .'i,(MM)  to  5,(MM>  (iiiiiit;ils 
from  our  place  in  the  ;,c»r.  The  price  varies.  They  are  only  wortli 
$2. 

Q.  What  duty  was  there  on  them  ? — A.  A  half  cent  a  pound. 

Q.  How  much  mackerel  go  there  from  your  place  f — A.  I  am  not  pre- 
pared to  say. 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Q.  Mr.  Foster  askeil  you  if  it  made  any  difference  whetht^r  the  duties 
were  put  on  or  not.  Suppose  the  duty  were  put  on  and  the  AinericiiDs 
kept  out  of  your  waters,  would  that  hurt  you  much  ? — A.  No,  I  doift 
think  it  would. 

Q.  If  they  are  kept  out  you  are  willing  to  pay  the  duty  ?— A.  Yes ; 
taking  the  prt^seut  condition,  and  the  condition  of  things  before  tlie 
treaty,  1  would  just  as  lief  go  bivck  to  the  old  system. 

Q.  And  when  you  say  you  would  rather  have  no  duty,  it  is  just  that 
it  saves  you  the  trouble  of  paying  it  out  and  collecting  it  from  the  pur- 
chaser afterwards? — A.  It  saves  us  the  trouble. 

Q.  But  if  the  Americans  were  kei)t  out  altogtber  you  would  be  better 
ottf— A.  Yes. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  You  really  think,  then,  that  you  would  get  more? — A.  Counting 
the  years  that  are  passed  by  we  did  as  well  when  we  paid  the  duty  as 
now. 

Q.  They  were  more  prosperous  years,  were  they  not?  Everything 
had  been  sufl'ering  from  depression  for  the  past  few  yearH  f — A.  That 
may  have  had  something  to  do  with  it. 


No.  78. 


The  Conference  met. 


Tuesday,  September  18. 


William  H.  Harbinoton,  commission  and  flsh  merchant,  residing 
at  Halifax,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty, 
sworn  and  examined : 

By  Mr.  Davies : 
Qaestion.  Have  yea  been  dealing  in  fish  for  many  years  t — Answer. 
Since  1863. 


▲WARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1047 


*t  know  altoiit 


honld  Hupposo 


I.  1  am  not  pre- 


vould  be  better 


Q.  Yoar  dealings  ooDsisted  in  the  purchase  and  sale  of  fish,  I  sap* 
p).so? — A.  Yes, 

Q.  You  purchased  flsh  in  Halifax  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  sell  it  where? — A.  In  tlie  United  States. 

Q.  I  aslced  you  to  make  up  for  the  Comnissiou  a  statement  from 
your  books,  of  the  sales  made  by  you  from  1803  to  the  present  time ; 
iuive  you  made  up  that  statement  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Uave  you  it  with  you  f — A.  Yes.     [Statement  produced.] 

Q.  What  does  it  show  f — A.  Tlie  prices  obtained  during  the  winters 
of  l.S03-'64  to  l87C-'77. 

Q.  During  what  montlis  is  your  trade  principally  carried  on? — A. 
During  December,  January,  an«!  Februnry. 

Q.  And  yon  have  sales  off  and  on  during  other  periods  of  the  year? — 
A.  During  tlie  spring  months  we  have  sales  of  fish  which  come  up  in 
uurly  8pring;  it  is  an  iiiMigniticant  quantity. 

Q.  The  statement  you  submit  practically  comprises  your  business? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  the  winter  of  1803-T4  what  was  the  average  price  obtained  for 
mackerel  ? — A.  For  No.  1  SU  75  in  December,  8Ili  in  Jauuiiry,  $14  in 
February;  average  of  three  months  1112.58. 

Q.  Give  your  prices  of  No.  1  mackerel  during  the  next  years  ? — A. 
18()4-'G5,  Deceml>er  «//;  .lanuary  $9.50;  February  812 ;  average  for  three 
months  $10.75.  1805-'G0,  Decern l)er  nil;  January  nil;  February  $15. 
18(5G-'«7,  Deceml)er  $9.25;  January  $10;  February  nil.  1867-'68,  De- 
cember  $0.25;  January  $9.50;  February  $9.  18C8-'6J,  December  nil; 
January  $10.87 ;  February  $18.  18C9-'70,  December  $18  ;  January  nil] 
February  $19.  1870-'7l,  December  $18.12 ;  January  nil ;  February  $18. 
1871-72,  DecemlKjr  nil;  January  $10.75;  February  nil.  1872-'73,  De- 
cember $0.50;  January  nil;  February  $9.50,  1873-74,  Deceml)er  $13; 
January  $13;  February  nil.  1874-'75,  December  nil;  January  nii ;  Feb- 
ruary ii*t7 ;  March  $10.  1875-70,  December  nil ;  January  $14 ;  February 
nil.    187<}-'77,  December  $12;  January  $12;  February  nil. 

Q.  You  purchased  the  lish  in  the  Halifax  market  and  shipped  them  to 
Boston? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  purchase  them  on  commission? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  For  American  houses  ? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  And  those  are  the  prices  you  paid  here  ? — A.  Those  are  the  prices 
we  paid  here. 

Q.  You  received  orders  from  the  States  from  time  to  time  to  buy  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  a  fair  market  pric«  for  them  ? — A.  We  paid  the  or- 
dinary market  price  at  the  time. 

il.  According  to  your  statement,  what  would  be  the  average  price 
paid  bv  you  for  No.  1  msickerel  from  1803  to  1800,  inclusive  ? — A.  $12.78. 

Q.  From  1807  to  1873,  inclusive?— A.  $13.30. 

Q.  From  1874  to  1877?— A.  $12.25. 

(Statement  preimred  by  witness  put  in  and  filed,  and  is  as  follows:) 


i 


ars  ?— Answer. 


1048 


▲WARD  OP  THE   FIRHEKY   COMMISSION. 


Prkea  obUintd  durina  H>tmt«r»  of  1863-'G4  to  ie7A-'77,/(»r  No.  1,  3.  aMd  3  macktrel,  »nld  tn 
VnUtd  Stak*  bujf«r$,  dtlivertd/.  o.  b.  at  Hatifax,  in  yoUi. 

(RilrMtMl  (htm  book*  of  Meaan.  Lawmo,  Harrington  St  Co.] 


Tear. 

DoMiBber. 

January. 

Fabmarjr. 

Marota. 

Avcrene. 

1883-'84— Nal 

•11  75 
0  fiO 

•18  00 
7  00 
5  75 
0  50 
553 
5  37 

•14  00 

7  85 

•13  :>a 
(1  'ti 

No.a  

Na3  

:,  •;', 

l864-'85— No.  1   

ia  66 

6  75 

6  00 

15  00 

11  00 

8  75 

10  Ti 

No.8  

5  79 

t)  1^1 

Vo.3 

S  IH 

186S-'6A— No.  1  

l.^  INI 

Nan  

11  110 

Na3 

f  'h 

186»-'C7— No.  1   

9  as 
H  a.^ 

7  as 
»  as 

8  00 
6  39 

1(1  00 
H  SO 

7  SO 
9  SO 

8  50 
fl  SO 

1«  H7 
U  7S 

9  6i 

Naa  

H  :n 

No.3  

7  :n 

1867-68— Na  I   

9  00 

7  7.'. 

7  00 
IH  (10 
17  00 

H  a.'. 
19  00 
13  M 

H  .VI 
IH  00 
13  00 

7  00 

9  '.'.'i 

jiaa 

h  (M 

Na3  

H  Iv 

1968-69— No.  1   

1*  43 

NaS  

15  87 

No.  3 

H  Itf 

lM»-'70— Nal  

18  00 
18  no 

8  00 
IH  13 
10  90 

H  00 

18  M 

No.9  

•••• 

Vi  ':^ 

Na3  

H  3." 

1S70-'71— No.  1  

1^  INi 

No.a 

11  i") 

No.3      

7  ia 

10  75 

'     «  8.% 

3  M 

7  :tT 

1871-'7a— Nal  

10  7.'i 

No.a  

li  3:> 

No.3 

;;;;;;••■■ 
o'so 

6  10 
5  75 



,, 

;)  Till 

187»-'73— No.  1 

9  SO 

It  .'ill 

No.  3 

6  37 
ft  85 
13  00 
10  SO 

li  tt 

No.3 

4  35 
13  00 

9  00 
8  Sit 

S  I'i 

1673_74_No.  1 

i:i  (XI 

No.3 

No.3 

!•  7S 
H  .'id 

ie74-"75— No.  1 

•in  no 

10  on 

No.a 

i;  c-j              11  6i 

No.3 

5  li;<                  5  6i 

lf'75-'76— Nal 

14  00 

U  0(1 

No.3 

No.3 

7  75 
13  00 

0  00 

13  00 

0  M 

7  SO 





8  37 

1876-'77— No.  1 



18  no 

Na9 

11  .w 

No.3 

7  as 



7  :i: 

GENERAL  AVERAGEa 


No.l. 

No.  a. 

No..T 

186.3  to  1866 

•  13  88 
13  30 
13  85 

»7  9H 
9  t>.l 
8  68 

•li  73 

1867  to  It'TJ 

li  Ii3 

1874  to  1877 

7  411 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  I  suppose  No8. 1  and  2  mackerel  woiil«i  I;  ;>  at  »\h)u{  the  same 
proportiouate  rate  as  compared  with  No.  ig  the  wbi>'    poriod  you 

have  named  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  reason  of  the  increased  ,  i  ice  in  1870  and  1871.  In 
1870  it  was  $18.50,  and  in  1871,  $18f— A.  I  picMUu  mackerel  was  scarce 
daring  those  years. 

Q.  Scarce  in  your  market  here? — A.  Yes,  one  cause  would  be  tlmt. 

Q.  YoQ  buy  on  order ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  usually  limited  in  price  f — A.  Usually. 

Q.  Of  course  the  houses  in  Boston  are  well  informed  of  the  rates  in 
your  market  1 — A.  Y'es. 


i. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMI88ION. 


1049 


d  3  macktret,  Hold  to 
id. 


Marob. 

Avorajte. 

114  :>i 

10  *'i 

ti  01 

5  fix 

1.1  no 

11  00 

f  :.i 

9  61 

H  ;i7 

7  :n 

9  41 

H  OH 

H  .'>^ 

n  4.1 

1.1  f7 

H    lii 

1(?  .'lO 

I'J  7.1 

H  4.1 

1^  (M. 

'1^ 
10  7.1 
ti  45 
3.KI 
9  .10 

mi 

5  I'J 
i;i  Oil 

!.  7.1 

H  ,10 

10  00 
ti  6i 
.1  lii 

14  00 





tl  (!•.' 

'•i  37 

18  no 
y  .10 
7  :i7 

No.  a 

No.  3. 

|7  Of 
9  «« 
8  62 


|ti73 

t>  ii:i 

7  4(i 


K>iit  the  same 
u«'    iK'iiod  you 

and  1871.    In 
erel  was  scarce 

ould  be  that. 


>f  the  rates  in 


Q.  You  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  price  tlie  flsh  bring  in  Boston  f — 
A.  No. 

Q  DoeM  the  state  ment  show  the  amount  of  .your  business  or  only  the 
prices  paid  for  maclterelf — A.  Only  the  prices  paid. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  me  from  recollection  how  the  amount  of  your  busi* 
Dess  for  the  last  five  years  compare<l  with  that  for  the  preceding  five 
years  f — A.  As  far  as  our  business  is  concerned  it  was  much  less  during 
the  last  five  years. 

Q.  Was  that  from  local  or  specnnl  causes, or  was  it  so  with  all  the  mer- 
chants here  who  fill  orders  for  the  United  Idtates  ? — A.  I  think  it  has 
l)c><>n  pretty  general. 

Q.  The  flsh  you  Hend  are  salted  ? — A.  They  are  cured,  salted  mack- 
erel. 

(^  You  think  that  during  the  last  Ave  years  the  mackerel  trade  of 
the  merchants  in  this  port  has  been  considerably  less  than  during  the 
live  preceding  years;  to  what  do  yon  attribute  it ;  has  there  not  l>een 
as  much  in  the  mark«>t,  or  has  there  been  a  less  demand,  or  what  is  the 
cause  f — A.  There  has  certainly  Ix'en  a  less  demand. 

Q.  The  supply  does  not  sensibly  depend  on  the  demand.  About  the 
same  number  of  vessels  go  out,  and  they  cannot  know  what  the  pricf 
will  l)e.  If  the  demard  is  great  the  price  will  ri.se,  and  if  the  demand 
is  small  the  })riceH  will  fall  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  prices  cannot  bo  known  beforehand  ? — A.  Tiiey  cannot  be 
known  beforehand. 

Q.  There  has  not  been  as  nuieli  demand  for  mackerel  from  the  United 
States  for  the  last  flvi*  years  as  formerly  f — A.  Not  so  great. 

(}.  To  what  do  you  attribute  that? — A.  I  cannot  say  what  is  the 
cause. 

Q.  There  must  be  an  abundant  su|>ply  at  home,  I  suppose! — A.  1 
should  say  so,  unless  the  people  are  using  other  articles  of  food. 

Q.  They  are  either  snbstituting  something  else,  or  have  an  abundant 
supply  T — A.  [  could  tiardly  say  what  the  cause  is;  no  doubt  a  variety 
of  causes. 

No.  79. 

John  Purney,  fisherman  and  ti.sh  merchant,  residing  at  Sandy  Point, 
Slielburne  County,  Nova  Scotia,  called  on  behalf  of  the  Goveriiment  of 
Iler  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined — 

By  Mr.  Thomson  : 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  the  flsh  business  ? — A.  About 
13  years. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  fish  in  any  vessel  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  commanded  a  vessel  f — A.  I'^es.  I  went  two  years  as  a 
b.iiid,  and  afterwards  always  as  master. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  at  any  time  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawreuce  T — A.  I  fished 
2r>  years,  during  which  time  I  fished  there. 

Q.  How  many  years  did  you  fish  in  the  gulf? — A.  I  could  not  tell 
you  exactly  ;  four  or  Ave  years. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  there  for  mackerel  ? — A.  No ;  for  cod. 

Q.  You  did  not  fish  for  mackerel  ? — A.  No  more  than  for  them  as  bait 
for  cod. 

Q.  Where  did  you  catch  the  mackerel  you  used  as  bait  f — A.  Along 
Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  Had  yon  to  go  inshore  to  get  them  ?— A.  Almost  always. 

Q.  Is  mackerel  an  inshore  fish  f — A.  Tes. 


0 

i 


1060 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  YoQ  fished  close  inshore  for  cod  f — A.  la  my  time  yon  did  not 
need  to  go  off  the  island  shore  for  codtish. 

Q.  Off  the  coast  of  Shelburnc,  what  tlshiug  has  been  done  during;, 
say  the  last  four  or  five  years  ? — A.  Close  in  they  mostly  catch  hadiUick 
and  ood. 

Q.  Is  halibut  caught  inshore? — A.  Not  many. 

Q.  Do  the  Americans  come  there  much  f — A.  A  good  deal. 

Q.  Do  they  come  in  to  fish  tor  bait ! — A.  Sometimes ;  not  oftoii. 
They  have  !)een  in  there  this  last  week  fishing  for  bait. 

Q.  IJow  many  vessels ! — A.  Three  or  four. 

Q.  They  were  in  Slielburne  Harbor  ? — A.  Yes  ;  inside  the  lights. 

O.  Fishing  fr  bait  f — A.  Yes;  for  small  mackerel. 

Q.  How  were  they  catcliiug  them  f — A.  With  a  bob. 

Q.  With  a  hook  and  line  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  did  not  use  nets  ? — A.  Xo. 

Q.  Y'ou  say  there  were  five  or  six  of  them  ? — A.  About  that.  A.  good 
mauy  were  in  for  bait;  1  don't  think  more  than  five  or  six  witu  en- 
gaged in  catching  mackerel. 

Q.  The  others  came  in  to  buy  bait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Ilow  <lid  they  buy  bait !  Did  they  ask  the  people  to  fish  for 
them  ? — A.  They  got  the  small  mackerel  out  of  nets ;  they  would  sooner 
get  them  out  ot  nets  than  out  of  traps. 

Q.  Did  they  give  orders  beforehand  to  the  fishermen  to  get  bait  ?— 
A.  They  come  in  and  the  fishermen  board  them  ;  they  sentl  dories  along 
to  the  different  stages  and  speak  tor  bait. 

Q.  The  vessels  send  out  their  dories  and  apeak  for  bait,  and  the  fish- 
ermen go  after  bait  and  fish  it  for  them  f — A.  The  vessels  come  in  and 
send  their  dories  out  to  the  stages  and  s|»eak  for  bait. 

Q.  The  bait  is  not  then  caught  T — A.  No.  Some  will  go  alongside  on 
their  own  account  without  the  vessels  speaking  for  bait. 

Q.  When  the  vessels  speak  to  them  for  bait,  the  fishermen  go  and 
catch  the  herring  7 — A.  Yes ;  and  go  alongside  the  vessels. 

Q.  They  set  their  nets  that  night  ?~A.  They  set  their  nets  whether 
the  vessels  speak  to  them  or  not. 

Q.  Then  the  tishernjen  set  their  nets  and  take  bait  to  the  vessels  ?— 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  there  a  large  buisuess  of  that  kind  done! — A.  Yes,  a  good 
deal.    They  come  a  gooti  deal  for  bait. 

Q.  The  bait  is  not  kept  in  hand  to  be  sold? — A.  No.  If  they  don't 
sell  it  in  that  way,  they  salt  it.  Some  would  rather  salt  their  bait,  and 
some  would  rather  sell  it  than  salt  it. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  that  it  pays  Jis  well  to  salt  as  to  sell  the  bait  ?— 
A.  Some  think  so.    The  men  who  ca^'h  it  think  so. 

Q.  What  is  your  judgment  ? — A.  1  think  they  do  Just  as  well  to  sell 
it  as  to  salt  it. 

Q.  Do  you  say  they  would  do  as  «^ell  to  salt  it  as  to  sell  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Would  they  make  as  much  money  by  keeping  the  fish  an<l  salting 
it  as  by  selling  it? — A.  Sometimes  they  would  wake  more  and  sometimes 
less. 

Q.  Would  the  average  be  about  the  same  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  It  is  a  rule  that  no  bait  is  given  to  the  vessels  unless  it  is  first  be- 
spoken ? — A.  No ;  sometimes  the  fishermen  go  to  the  vtvtsels  and  see  if 
the  vessels  want  it. 

Q.  As  a  rule,  which  is  the  way  adopted? — A.  They  go  sometimes  and 
offer  bait  without  being  asked. 

Q.  Which  is  the  greaUist  part,  that  which  is  l)eNpoken  or  that  which 


AW4RD   OF  THE   FISUEBT  COMMISSION. 


1061 


iuie  you  did  not 

Ben  done  dnrinfj, 
ly  cat(5h  haddock 


go  alongside  on 


i8  not  f — A.  A  great  deal  goes  alongside  that  is  bespoken,  and  a  great 
deal  not  bespoken.    I  cannot  tell  yon  which  is  the  greater  quantity. 

Q.  Within  the  last  year  or  two  have  American  fishermen  fished  much 
within  three  miles  of  the  shore  in  your  locality  f — A.  They  don't  gener- 
ally fitih  within  three  miles  of  shore.  Sometimes  they  do  for  haddock 
and  halibut,  but  not  often.  They  go  out  into  deep  water.  They  tlsh  a 
great  deal  otf  Shell turne. 

Q.  Have  they  within  the  last  year  or  two  fished  inshore  much? — A. 
They  have  fished  some,  some  few  have  done  it. 

Q.  TIow  many  have  you  seen  fishing  within  three  miles  of  shore  ? — A. 
Not  many ;  there  are  a  few  who  fish  in  for  haddock. 

Q.  How  many  have  you  seen  f — A.  Two  or  three,  just  oft' where  I  live. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  lately  fishing  within  one  or  two  miles  of  the 
shore? — A.  Not  lately. 

Q.  When  did  you  last  see  them  f — A.  They  fished  off  there  last  sum- 
mer some,  not  this  summer. 

Q.  How  many  fished  there  last  summer! — A.  Two  or  three.  There 
were  a  great  many  more,  but  I  did  not  see  them  fishing. 

Q.  How  far  from  the  shore  were  those  two  or  three  vessels  fishing  ! — 
A.  I  could  hardly  say  ;  not  far  off'. 

Q.  Can  you  give  an  idea  of  how  far  oft  1 — A.  About  two  or  three  miles 
oft' Shelburne  light. 

Q.  Was  it  one  or  two  miles  ? — A.  Two  miles. 

Q.  They  were  fishing,  1  presume,  forced? — A.  For  haddock. 

Q  Are  there  any  halibut  in  your  locality  ? — A.  There  are  uot  many 
caujjht  down  there. 

Q,  Do  you  know  that  Americans  come  in  and  fish  for  them  ? — A.  Not 
of  late  years ;  I  saw  them  fishing  for  them  four  or  five  years  ago.  Two 
of  them  were  oft'  Baccaro,  which  is  four  miles  from  Cape  Sable  Island, 
eastward.     I  have  not  been  there  lately. 

Q.  When  were  you  last  there  ? — A.  Four  years  ago. 

Q.  How  near  the  land  were  they  fishing  f — A.  About  two  miles  out. 

Q.  They  were  fishing  for  halibut? — A.  Yes. 

().  How  many  vessels  did  you  see  then  ? — A.  Two. 

(^  Whether  American  vessels  tish  all  round  the  coast  of  Shelburne 
or  not,  you  don't  know  ? — A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Do  you  hear  that  they  do  so  ? — A.  We  hear  a  good  deal. 

Q.  Do  you  hear  that  ? — A.  We  hear  that  they  fish  in. 

(}.  You  have  heard  that  they  fish  inshore? — A.  Yes;  we  hear  that 
tbey  fish  inshore,  but  I  do  not  see  them. 

Q.  The  other  day,  you  have  said,  vhey  were  fishing  for  bait  inside  of 
yhelburne  lights ! — A.  Yes;  in  fact,  the  captain  of  one  of  the  vessels 
eame  to  my  store  and  bought  some  things,  and  he  told  me  that  he  had 
taken  three  barrels  that  day  in  the  harbor. 

Q.  That  was  small  mackerel  for  l)ait  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Could  American  fishermen  prosecute  their  sea-cod  fishing  without 
this  bait  f — A.  They  could  not  now  at  all.  It  has  got  ^o  be  so  much  the 
habit  to  get  fresh  bait,  they  cannot  do  without  it  an<i  get  fish. 

Q.  Salt  bait  would  not  answer  ? — A.  They  say  not. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  xVmerican  captains  say  not? — A.  Yes;  Amer- 
ican captains. 

Q.  How  often  do  they  come  in  for  fresh  bait  ? — A.  Two  or  three  times 
ill  one  trip. 

Q.  How  long  does  a  trip  occupy? — A.  1  suppose  five  or  six  weeks. 


!H 


i 


1052 


AWABD   OF  THE  FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


SometimeH  tbey  cnnnot  get  bait  at  oar  place,  and  have  to  ruu  as  far  as 
Grand  Manan.    They  have  had  to  do  it  lately. 

Q.  Did  they  tell  you  that  f — A.  I  know  they  had  to  do  it.  They  have 
very  often  to  g^et  flrom  us  money  to  buy  bait,  and  they  give  us  drafts  on 
the  owners ;  they  tell  us  they  want  the  money  to  buy  bait.  I  know 
they  have  had  to  run  up  to  Grand  Manan. 

Q.  Did  they  tell  you  whether  they  caught  bait  close  in  to  Grand 
Manan  T — A.  They  told  me  they  had  to  go  to  Grand  Manan  for  it.  I 
also  know  some  could  not  get  it  there ;  at  Grand  Manan  they  are  pro- 
hibited taking  it  during  a  certain  time. 

Q.  They  said  they  could  get  it  during  the  close  season  T— A.  Yes ; 
these  very  men  who  were  down  catching  mackerel  at  our  harbor  baa 
been  there  for  bait,  and  could  not  get  it. 

Q.  The  American  tisherroen  say  they  cannot  get  on  without  the  bait  7— 
A.  Of  course  they  cannot.  Neither  American  nor  Nova  Scotiau  tisher- 
roen can  get  flsh  without  bait.  Nova  Scotia  fishermen  don't  trawl  as 
much  as  the  Americans,  and  American  vessels  require  more  of  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  Americans  trawl  close  by  Shelburne? — A.  No 
more  than  what  I  have  told  you. 

Q.  How  did  they  take  halibut? — A.  They  fished  in  about  ninety  fath- 
oms of  water,  just  within  sight  of  land.  That  is  where  they  catcli  most 
of  their  halibut  up  and  down  the  coast. 

Q.  As  far  as  you  are  aware  from  the  Americans  Ashing  there,  ooukl 
they,  without  the  privilege  of  coming  into  our  waters  to  get  l)ait,  carry 
on  their  outside  fishery  f — A.  I  don't  know  how  they  could,  unless  tboy 
went  to  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Can  they  get  bait  on  their  own  shores  ? — A.  I  don't  think  so.  At 
certain  times  they  can  get  squid  and  bring  it  from  home. 

Q.  In  spring  do  they  run  in  and  catch  bait  ? — A.  Not  so  much  as  in 
summer.  June,  July,  and  August  are  the  principal  months  when  they 
cunie  in. 

(J.  Where  do  you  send  your  flsh? — A.  I  have  always  marketed  mine 
in  Halifas,  and  sent  a  few  to  St.  John.  I  have  always  sent  my  dried 
fish  to  Halifax. 

Q.  You  do  not  send  any  fish  to  the  United  States  ? — A.  No. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

[  Q.  Have  you  fished  for  cod  yourself  on  the  Banks  ? — A.  I  never  fished 
on  Grand  or  Western  Banks,  but  have  fished  along  the  shore,  in  tiie 
gulf,  and  in  Bay  Chaleurs. 

Q.  In  speaking  in  regard  to  Americans  obtaining  bait,  you  spoke  of 
six  weeks  as  the  duration  of  a  voyage;  do  you  mean  to  say  that  a 
banker  leaving  the  United  SUites  to  fish  on  the  Grand  Banks  is  abseut 
from  home  only  six  weeks  ? — A.  No ;  four  or  five  months. 

Q.  If  he  visits  your  shore  to  get  fresh  bait  it  will  be  three  times  in 
the  course  of  the  whole  voyage? — A.  There  is  a  certain  class  of  vessels 
which  come  in  every  eight  or  ten  days  for  bait. 

Q.  Those  are  vessels  which  fish  near  the  shore  ? — A.  They  fish  on  tbe 
small  Banks,  and  sometimes  go  to  the  Western  Bank  ;  but  those  wblcb 
g'j  for  a  long  salt  voyage  to  tbe  Grand  Bauks  are  away  five  and  six 
mouths. 

Q.  Those  which  are  away  four  or  five  mouths,  if  they  come  in  for  bait 
at  all,  come  in  two  or  three  times  during  the  voyage?— A.  They  hardly 
ever  come  in. 

Q.  Have  you  known  any  case  of  those  vessels  which  go  on  the  long 


AWABD  OF  THE  FISHEBY  COMMISSION. 


1053 


to  rau  as  far  as 


go  on  tbe  long 


voyages  runuing  in  to  yonr  shores  for  bait  f — A.  Hardly  ever.  Tliey  go 
sometimes  to  Newfoundland. 

Q.  Do  you,  of  your  own  knowledge,  know  what  bait  they  use  f — A. 
No,  I  do  not. 

Q.  Mackerel  is  good  bait? — A.  I  don't  think  they  use  mackerel.  I 
think  tbey  fetch  pogies  and  olams  from  home  and  get  herring  on  the 
Banks. 

Q.  Do  not  a  great  many  American  bankers  still  fish  with  hook  and 
Hue  f — A.  Most  of  them  trawl,  but  some  fish  with  hook  and  line. 

Q.  Do  they  not  find  it  about  as  profitable  as  trawling  in  the  long 
run  ? — A.  1  could  not  pretend  to  say.    They  do  both. 

Q.  But  for  book  and  line  tidbing  do  tbey  not  nae  a  rather  <I liferent 
kind  of  bait  f — A.  Tbose  who  use  lines  fetch  more  bait  from  buiiie,and 
use  clams. 

Q.  Clams  are  not  found  so  good  for  trawling  ? — A.  Tbey  dou'c  do  at 
all. 

Q.  Mackerel  will  do  ? — A.  Mackerel  and  herring  are  used  most;  squid 
is  also  used. 

Q.  And  other  flsb  cut  up,  sucb  as  cod,  will  dof — A.  Yes  ;  sometimes 
for  halibut;  but  herring  is  tbe  best  bait  they  can  get.  Tbe  tisibermeu 
say  so. 

Q.  The  halibut  fishery  is  oit'iihore,  in  deep  water  f — A.  Sometimes, 
au(l  sometimes  quite  close  in.  Tbe  Americans  are  not  particular  about 
tbe  depth  of  water  so  long  as  tbey  get  the  bsb. 

Q.  But  is  not  tbe  greater  part  of  tbe  halibut  tisbery  iu  30  or  50  fath- 
oms f — A.  The  greater  part  is. 

Q.  Far  tbe  greater  part ! — A.  I  don't  know  that  it  is. 

Q.  Your  shores  are  ratber  sballow^  and  you  have  to  go  out  sotue  dis- 
tiiiice  to  get  into  80  or  1)0  fathoms  ? — A.  You  cau  see  laud  plainly  from 
where  there  are  00  fathoms. 

Q.  There  has  .  at  been  much  halibut  fishing  done  by  Americans  within 
three  miles  of  your  coast? — A.  fSometimes  tbey  do. 

Q.  Is  it  not  rare? — A.  They  don't  generally  do  it.  Sometimes  tbey 
ilo.    Tbey  generally  go  out. 

Q.  You  call  mackerel  pretty  good  codtish-bait  for  trawling  ? — A. 
They  don't  like  it  nearly  as  well  as  herring ;  but  mackerel  is  good  bait 
for  trawling.     It  is  next  best  to  herring. 

Q.  With  regard  to  tbe  trade  in  bait,  there  are  a  good  many  of  your 
people  who  have  traps  where  tbe  bait  is  kept  alive  ? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  I  Huppose  if  there  is  not  a  sufiicient  supply  of  tisb  caught  the^'  will 
take  them  from  tbe  traps  ? — A.  Tbey  would  ratber  have  them  from  the 

lU'tS. 

Q.  Do  the  fishermen  make  a  regular  business  of  catching  fish  for 
bait  * — A.  No ;  tbey  catch  it  to  salt  it,  and  when  tbe  vessels  come  along 
they  sell  it  to  them. 

Q.  Some  prefer  to  salt  it? — A.  Yes;  and  others  prefer  to  sell  it. 

Q.  Tbey  keep  at  work  catching  the  tisb  whether  vessels  come  iu  or 
not  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Tbe  vessels  which  come  in  prefer  to  buy  fresh-caught  bait  ? — A. 
American  fisbermen  do. 

(■i..  If  men  have  bait  freah  caught,  what  do  tbey  do? — A.  They  gen- 
erally go  round  and  let  tbe  veHsels  know. 

Q.  They  go  round  and  tell  them  they  have  the  fish  ? — A.  The  men  tell 
them  tbey  want  bait. 

Q.  And  If  they  have  it  ready  tbey  take  it  as  it  is  ? — A.  They  will  set 
their  nets.    Some  will  take  it  to  the  vessels  and  some  will  not. 


1054 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISUOK. 


Q.  Some  prefer  to  salt  it  and  some  to  sell  it  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Those  who  prefer  to  sell  it  take  it  on  board  and  sell  it,  I  suppose. 
How  is  the  fish  sold  f — A.  By  the  hundred.    I  never  sold  any. 

Q.  Snp|H>se  an  American  vessel  comes  in  and  does  not  find  the  bait 
they  want  ready  caught,  what  does  the  captain  dot — A.  He  waits. 
Sometimes  they  have  to  wait  a  good  while,  and  sometimes  have  to  go 
to  Grand  Mauan. 

Q.  When  an  American  comes  in  and  wants  bait,  and  cannot  find  all 
he  wants,  then  the  men  set  their  nets  as  usual  every  night  f — A.  They 
set  them  more  when  the  vessels  are  in  for  bait. 

Q.  When  vessels  are  in  and  short  of  bait,  then  your  men  are  pretty 
active  in  trying  to  catch  bait  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  They  set  more  nets  probably  t — A.  Yes,  because  they  can  clear 
them  without  dressing  them. 

Q.  And  then  what  they  get  they  sell  to  the  Americans  by  the  bun- 
dred  ! — A.  Yes.    1  never  sold  any. 

Q.  You  know  that  such  is  done? — A.  I  know  it  from  getting  looiiey 
from  them  by  drafts. 

Q.  They  are  not  paid  for  services  whether  they  catch  fish  or  not,  ouly 
for  the  tish  they  sell  ? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  Every  man  has  the  same  chance  of  catching  and  selling  fisb, 
whether  siwken  to  beforehand  or  not  f — A.  If  a  captain  speaks  to  a  man, 
he  will  take  his  tish  first,  and  not  take  that  of  a  man  who  might  come 
alongside.  Very  often  men  go  away  dissatisfied,  and  will  not  sell  it  to 
other  vessels. 

Q.  You  never  knew  any  other  way  of  getting  bait  followed  by  Anieri 
cans  ([  do  not  mean  tishiug  for  it),  exoeiit  that  of  buying  it  by  the  huD< 
dred  in  this  way  ! — A.  No. 

Q.  They  pay  for  the  tish,  not  for  the  services  of  the  men  I — A.  Yes. 

By  ^Ir.  Thomson  : 

Q.  They  bespeak  from  certain  fishermen  the  fish,  and  will  not  take  it 
from  anybody  else  f — A.  No,  ouly  from  them. 

Q.  When  fish  is  bespoken  the  fishermen  go  to  fish  and  bring  it  to 
them  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  sell  it  at  so  much  per  hundred  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  suppose  a  bargain  is  miide  beforehand  ? — A.  Yes.  They  have 
a  settled  price  among  them. 

Q.  Does  that  price  never  vary  ? — A.  Yes.  Sometimes  when  the  lisli 
are  plentiful,  vessels  will  not  give  as  much  as  wiieu  tUey  are  scarce. 

Q.  Then  when  you  say  a  "  settled  priije,"  you  meau  a  price  agreed 
upon  between  the  parties  at  the  time  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  lu  answer  to  Mr.  Dana,  you  said  it  was  rather  rare  for  Americans 
to  come  in  and  fish  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  for  halibut.  Is  tliiit 
the  factf — A.  I  don't  think  they  fish  a  great  deal  within  three  miles 
of  the  shore. 

Q.  It  is  not  a  rare  thing  f — A.  They  do  it ;  but  they  generally  go  more 
out. 

Q.  You  have  yourself  seen  them  inside  I — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  said  that  halibut  sometimes  come  inshore ! — A.  They 
are  not  so  plentiful  inshore. 

Q.  And  you  say  American  fishermen  are  not  particular  whether  they 
take  them  inshore  or  not. — A.  No. 

Q.  If  halibut  were  plentiful  inshore  the  Americans  would  follow  the 
fisb  in  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  have  said  that  Bankers  which  make  long  voyages  do  not 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1055 


eu  ? — A.  Yes. 


come  in  to  your  shores  for  bait  f— A.  Not  those  which  went  on  salting 
voyages. 

Q.  It  is  too  far  for  them  to  come  ? — A.  Yes;  and  some  of  our  own  ves- 
seU  do  not  come  back. 

Q.  About  how  many  American  vessels  come  into  the  small  harbor  of 
Sbelburne  every  year  for  bait !— A.  1  could  not  M\  you  exactly.  There 
are  4,5,  8, 10,  or  15  at  a  time  there. 

Q.  Ilow  many  in  the  course  of  the  season  ? — A.  I  could  not  tell  you 
unless  I  made  an  estimate. 

Q.  You  say  there  are  4,  5,  10,  or  15  at  a  time ;  they  would  come  in 
every  fortnight  f — A.  They  are  in  and  out,  those  which  fish  off  there. 

Q.  They  each  come  in  three  time  during  a  trip  ? — A.  Yes  ;  but  when 
one  goes  out  another  comes  in.  Some  of  them  are  in  mostly  all  the 
time. 

Q.  In  other  wopls,  the  waters  are  never  free  of  American  vessels 
coming  in  for  bait .   -A.  No. 

By  Hon.  Mr.  Kellogg : 

Q.  Is  SShelburneon  a  bay  or  river? — A.  It  is  up  Shelhurne  River. 

i}.  Do  you  live  on  the  bay  f — A.  I  live  five  miles  below  the  town.  I 
aui  a  little  off  the  point. 

Q  ilow  long  is  the  bay  ? — A.  It  goes  up  five  miles.  I  live  down  at 
tbe  point. 

Q.  Do  you  live  where  you  can  command  the  bay  ? — A.  Yes  j  right  at 
tlie  point. 

By  Mr.  Thomson  : 

Q.  You  can  see  over  the  bay  from  where  you  live  ? — A.  I  cannot  see 
exactly  from  my  establishment,  but  a  quarter  of  a  mile  distant,  where 
uiy  buHiness  calls  me,  I  can  see  right  out.  Almo»it  all  American  vessels 
anchor  off  my  place  and  come  right  round  tlie  point. 

No.  80. 


es.    They  have 


lierally  go  more 


KoBEiiT  G.  NonLE,  fish  merchant,  residing  at  Halifax,  called  on  be- 
half of  the  Government  of  Uer  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies: 

Question.  Ilave  you  been  engaged  for  some  yeans  in  the  fish  trade? — 
Answer.  I  have. 

Q.  Where  have  you  conducted  your  o|)erations? — A.  In  Halifax. 

Q.  Are  you  a  meniher  of  the  firm  of  Noble  &  Sons  ? — A.  I  was. 

Q.  Have  you  made  up  from  your  books  a  return  showing  the  prices 
paid  by  you  for  fish  to  fishermen  in  Halifax  during  a  number  of  years  ? — 
A.  Ye»;  this  (statement  produced)  is  a  statement  taken  from  the  returus 
of  Robert  Noble  &  Sons,  extenditjg  from  LSJil  to  1870,  inclusive. 

Q.  What  does  it  show? — A.  The  price  paid  for  No.  1  and  No.  2  mack- 
erel. 

Q.  Where? — A.  Paid  to  fishermen  in  Halifax. 

Q.  State  what  the  average  prices  were. — A.  1801,  No.  1,  $12;  No.  2, 
87.    1802,  No.  1,$  10;  No.  2,  $0.     1803,  No.  1,  $11 ;  No.  2,  $7.     1804,  No. 

1,  $9;  No.  2,  10.     1805,  No.  1,  $14;  No.  2,  $11.     ISOO,  No.  1,  $10 ;  No. 

2,  $9.  1807,  No.  1,  $9j  No.  2,  $8.  1808,  No.  1,  $14;  No.  2,  $11.  1809, 
No.  1,  $10;  No.  2,  $13.  1870,  No.  1,  $18;  No.  2,  $12.  1871,  No.  1,  $9; 
No.  2,  $7.  1872,  No.  1,  $8 ;  No.  2,  $0.  1873,  No.  1,  $11 ;  No.  2,  $9.  1874, 
No.  1,  $9;  No.  2,  $7.  1875,  No.  1,  $12;  No.  2,  $10.  1870,  No.  1,  $10;  No. 


6i>3 


1056  AWABD  OF  THE   FISHERY  C0M1II8SI0M. 

Statement  prepared  by  witness,  pat  in  and  filed,  and  is  as  follows : 

l*rice»  paid  toJUhermen  by  Me$$r$.  Noble  ^  Son, 

No.  1.     No.  'i. 

leei-*? 12      7 

ItW^-'S 10  (i 

1863-'4 11  7 

lS64-'5 U  « 

1866-'6 14  11 

Averaf^ 11.  *20    7.40 

1866-7 ~W  ij 

1»67-'H 9  8 

1868-'9 14  11 

leeO-TO 16  13 

1870-'l Id  \'i 

1871-'2 y  7 

lifl2-'3 8  6 

Average IvJ.lMi    [).M) 

1873-'4 Tl  0 

lH74-'5 9  7 

1875-'6 12  10 

1876-7 10  8.25 

Average 10.50    8.G'2 

Q.  I  am  instrncted  that  you  liavo  prepared  a  statement  from  the  books 
of  5lr.  A.  H.  Crowe,  tish  merchant,  Halifax,  covering  a  period  of  years. 
— A.  1  have. 

Q.  What  does  it  show  ? — A.  The  statement  shows  the  prices  at  which 
3Ir.  Crowe  sold  tish  to  merchants  in  Halifax  who  received  onlers  from 
the  United  States  to  buy. 

Q.  During  what  years?— A.  From  18GI  to  1875. 

Q.  Will  you  give  the  averages  1 — A.  18(»()  to  1866,  No.  1  mackerel, 
$13.12;  No.  2,  $8.74.  1867  to  1873,  No.  1,  $13.(>5;  No.  2,  $0.43.  1871 
to  1877,  No.  1,  $12.37 ;  No.  2,  $10. 

Q.  A  slightly  higher  price  was  obtained  between  1867  and  1873  tliaa 
since  the  Washington  treaty  has  been  in  operation  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  No.  3  mackerel  averaged  $6,05  from  1860  to  1866,  $6.55  from  18G7 
to  1873,  and  $8  from  1874  to  1877  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  There  is  greater  demand  for  them ! — A.  There  appears  to  be  a 
greater  demand  for  the  lower  numl)ers. 

Q.  Has  the  commercial  depression  had  anything  to  do  with  it  ?— A. 
Probably. 


ia  as  follows : 

No.  1.     No.  2. 

12 

10 

11 

9 

14 


AWARD    OP   THK   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


1057 


7 
() 
7 

r. 
11 


n.'H)    7.40 

lU          9 

9          8 

14        11 

•  •  •     •  •  - 

1(3        lit 

18        1> 

9          7 

8      ♦; 

12.00    9.40 

11         9 

9         7 

12        10 

10          8.25 

10.50    8. 02 

Dt  from  the  books 
k  period  of  years. 

le  prices  at  which 
Mved  ortlers  from 


^o.  1  mackerel, 
2,  $0.43.     187 1 

67  and  1873  tlian 
Yes. 
$0.55  from  18G7 

appears  to  be  a 

do  with  it !— A. 


Statemeot  prepared  by  witness  from 
put  in,  filed,  and  is  as  follows: 


the  books  of  Mr.  A.  H.  Orowe 


Kind  of  fl8h. 


No.  1  inarkcrel. . 
No.  3  iii«rk<Tt>l . , 
No.  ;t  niBokurel. . 

Ih'ii'iiiK  

ItT.l-tW: 

Ki).  1  mnckprel. , 
No.  "J  iiMckorel . . 
No.  ;J  miickortil. . 
Ilerriiig 

No.  I  mnokorol . . 

No.  3  iiiackert*!  . 

Nil.  ;i  iuacktT«'l. . 

IIi'irioK 

I?tl3-'M  : 

No.  I  iiiackerpl. . 

No. 'i  iiia<'kor«l. . 

No.  :i  iiiacker>>l. . 

IltTring 

!«•(-'(•..'■>: 

No.  I  inurker»>l  . 

N». '.i  muckercl. 

No.  'A  mackerel  . 

llfiTing , 

Xo.  1  inackfiol 
No.  2  nuH'ki'n'l  , 
No.  .t  iiiHckt>r(<l 
ll>>iriu)i: 


1  »(■>()-  t)7  : 

No.  I  mackerel. . 
No.  t!  markvrol. . 
No.  3  markerel . . 
liHrriiiK 

l?67-'fiH; 

No.  1  niai'kprel. . 

No.  'i  mackerel . . 

No.  3  mitckerol. . 

HiTrinu  

160;:- ti'J: 

No.  I  mackerel . . 

No.  V!  mackerel.. 

No.  :i  mavkerel . . 

Ilerrini; 

1^611- '7U : 

No.  I  mackerel . . 

No. 'J  mackerel. . 

No.  W  mackerel.. 

H(>rriui{ 

1870-71: 

No,  I  mackerel  , 

No.  2  mackerel. . 

No.  3  mackerel. 

liorrinii 

WA-I'i: 

No.  1  markerel. , 

No. '.2  mackerel. 

No.  3  mackerel. 

IIe'.Tinj{ 

li?7a-7;t : 

No.  I  miickerel. 

No.  3  mackerel 

No.  3  mackerel. 

IIiTiiiig 

l'«7;i-'74 ; 

No.  I  mackerel. 

No.  2  mackerel. 

No.  3  mackerel. 

HerrluK 

lH<-'75: 

No.  1  mankerel 

No.  ^mackerel. 

No.  3  mackerel. 

UerrioK 

67  F 


B 


ja 


110 
13 

4 

1.3 
4 

a 


oo 
no 

00 

00 
00 
75 
i» 


n  50 


tl3  00 
6  50 
4  75 
3  00 

13  00 


|13  00 
6  SO 
5  .W 
3  40 


18  00 


00 
75 


6  00 
4  iU 


7  75 
4  6-J 


10  00 


00 


00 

00 

00 
00 


6 
4 
3 

13 

II 

9 

4 


75 
SO 
SO 

M 
00 
(10 
50 


10  t» 
7  00 
4  75 
3  00 

11  00 


4  00 

11  00 
7  00 

5  .50 
2  SO 


9  50 


00 
95 


(i  00 
4  00 


9  00 
7  00 
6  00 
4  23 


> 


$10  00 

13  00 

t)  00 

4  00 

13  00 

6  :« 
:>  00 

3  23 

11  7.5 


14  75 
11  25 

8  87 

5  33 

9  83 

8  16 
7  16 

3  30 

9  S5 
e  00 

6  35 

4  35 

IR  00 

13  SO 

7  50 
4  SO 

18  00 

14  00 
»  00 
3  83 

Id  00 


7  9« 
4  54 

1)  50 
d  00 
4  m 
4  00 

10  81 
(!  92 
4  92 

3  0<l 

11  75 
11  00 

9  00 

4  30 

9  35 
7  00 
6  00 
4  18 


1058  AWARD   OF  THB   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 

Statement  frum  the  bookt  0/  A.  H.  CroM)»— Continued. 


Kind  of  flth. 

December. 

1 

s 
a 

February. 

t. 

s 

> 
< 

187!^'76: 

No.  1  mar  ktrel 

•1.100 

Vi  00 

»  87 
4  00 

14  00 

115  00 
Vi  flO 

No.  3  mackfrel.  ............ ......  •.•...•.•... ......  •....• 

No.  3  uiAokoiel 

•MOO 
4  M 

13  00 

10  00 

800 

4  90 

H  IK) 

Herring 

4  'A) 

iffre-'T: : 

No.  1  mMkerel. 

13  SO 

10  00 

Xo.  3  iDAckenl 

H  00 

Herrlns 

4  SO 

OENBRAL  AVtRAOEa. 


Tew. 


lemtoieM 

in7tol873 
1674  to  1877 


Mackerel. 


N0.I. 


113  18 
13  09 
13  37 


No.  8.         No.X 


18  74 

9  43 

10  00 


•6  65 
6  95 
800 


Herring. 


•4  00 

3  99 
435 


Q.  You  hnve  made  op  a  statement  also  from  the  books  of  Young  & 
Dart?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Covering  what  period  f — A.  From  1861  to  1877.  This  statement 
shows  the  prices  realized  in  Halifax  on  flsh  consigned  to  United  States 
markets. 

Q.  Does  the  statement  show  the  different  places  where  the  consign- 
ments were  sold  f — A.  No.  They  were  sold  in  Boston,  New  York,  and 
Philadelphia. 

Q.  Do  ,yoa  know  that  to  be  a  fact  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Give  the  aggregate  results. — A.  From  1861  to  1866  average  price 
of  No.  1  mackerel,  $1U.10  United  States  currency,  or  $13.81  gold.  From 
1867  to  1873  average  price  of  No.  1  mackerel,  $L»1.71  Unitod  States  cur- 
rency, or  $17.77  gold.  From  1874  to  1877  average  price  of  No.  1  matik- 
erel,  $15.44  Uuiteil  States  currency,  or  $14.01  gold.  They  are  sold  duty 
paid. 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1069 


A 

£ 

< 

•15  00 

Vi  on 

8  IKi 

4  !J5 

13  50 

10  01) 

800 
4  50 

• 

Herring. 

Ko.3. 

16  65 
6  55 
800 

•4  00 
399 
433 

ks  of  Young  & 

Ibis  stateiuent 
United  States 

e  the  consigu- 
New  York,  and 


average  price 
Jl  gold.  From 
ied  States  cur- 
of  No.  1  mack- 
y  are  sold  duty 


Statements  prepared  by  witness  from  the  books  of  Messrs.  Young  & 
Hart,  handed  in,  filed,  and  are  as  follows : 

Staiemeni  showing  prices  in  United  Statee  currency  and  net  prireH  in  gold  realized  in  BaU/ax, 
on  ft»k  consigned  from  Halifax  to  the  United  States,  during  the  months  of  Febrnary  and 
March,  from  1861  to  1877. 

I  Extraote«l  from  nocount  of  salea  rendered  by  consifcncea.  I 

No.  1  MACKEREL. 


t 

Year. 

Currency. 

Value  of  cur- 
rency. 

.3 

If. 
|1l 

1 

1861 

•10  50 
16  63 
10  50 
91  00 
98  SO 
IS  50 

•1  00 

98 
58 
63 
SO 
73 

•19  SO 
16  90 
11  31 
13  93 
11  95 
11  31 

•1  47 
1  31 
1  06 
1  16 
1  06 
1  06 

•18  03 

1809 

It  9" 

1863 

10  95 

1864 

19  07 

1869 

10  19 

1866 

10  9S 

ToUl 

114  63 

4  49 

89  89 

7  19 

75  77 

Average 

19  10 

73 

13  81 

1  19 

19  66 

1867 

17  00 
90  00 
98  SO 
97  00 
96  50 
13  00 

18  00 

71 
71 
7« 

87 
90 
90 
87 

19  07 

14  90 
91  66 
93  49 
93  85 
13  SO 

15  66 

3  10 
390 
3  50 
3  47 
3  47 
3  IS 
395 

8  97 

1868 

11  00 

1869 

18  08 

1870 

90  09 

1871 

90  38 

1879 

10  Xi 

1873 

13  41 

Total 

159  00 

5  73 

194  43 

33  99 

101  21 

Average  .•..••.••••>••••••>>••••>••■.•••••-. 

91  71 

89 

17  77 

3  31 



14  46 

l«74 

18  00 

8  75 

17  50 

17  50 

89 
87 
90 
95 

16  03 
7  61 

15  75 

16  66 

1  30 

88 

1  98 

1  33 

14  73 

1H75 

6  73 

lH7fl 

14  47 

1S77 

15  33 

Total 

61  75 

3  61 

56  04 

4  79 

51  35 

l.'i  44 

90 

14  01 

1  90 

13  81 

No.  8  MACKEREL. 


1861 

•  16  50 

8  75 

9  M) 
13  90 

13  SO 

14  00 

j        •lOO 
'              98 

5H 

63 
60 
73 

•  16  .10 
8  58 
5  31 
8  50 
7  75 
10  23 

1        •!  33 

1              93 

'        ■      77 

1              92 

88 

1  00 

•IS  18 

1862 

7  66 

1P63 

4  74 

1H64 

7  58 

li*<53 

6  87 

Itl6« 

9  99 

Total 

77  73 

4  43 

37  06 

5  81 

51  35 

Average 

19  06 

73 

9  51 

97 

8  54 

1867 

16  00 

17  75 
35  50 
99  00 
16  00 
10  50 
13  00 

71 
71 

76 

87 
90 
!0 

87 

11  ae 

18  60 

19  38 
19  14 
14  40 

9  45 
10  44 

3  06 
3  13 
3  46 
3  45 
3  83 
3  97 
3  13 

8  30 

l!l«8 

9  47 

18«9 

15  93 

1870 , 

15  69 

1871 

11  18 

\'m 

6  48 

18TJ , 

7  39 

Total 

119  75 

5  73 

96  77 

93  41 

74  36 

Average  •••••.•••••..•••••.••••••.■••*.•••*> 

17  11 

81 

13  84 

390 

10  63 

IWl 

15  00 
7  63 

13  75 
9  75 

89 
87 
00 
95 

13  35 
663 

13  37 
997 

1  16 
83 

1  11 
95 

13  10 

1875 

5  eo 

1876 

11  96 

1877 

8  39 

Total 

46  19 

3  61 

41  69 

405 

37  57 

A verag* 

11  53 

90 

10  40 

1  01 

9  39 

1060 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


8tatem«nt  $h9wi»g  prices  in  I'nited  Slak$  CMrreNoy,^o. — Continued. 
No.  3  MACKEREL. 


V«ut. 

i 
i 

6 

U  50 
t<  85 
e  75 
9  50 
14  83 
13  33 

SH  50 

1. 

•1  00 

08 
!W 
03 
50 
73 

4  43 

Price  in  gold. 

ii. 

•0  93 

eo 

69 

8t» 
H5 
9>i 

5  04 

52 

a 

11(1 

I>8  50 

6  18 
3  90 
3  9H 

7  13 
9  67 

41  39 

♦7  58 

5  :i3 

nm : f 

MO 

1!  81 

MM 

T)  IH 

)MS 

tl  -27 

)gN . 

^  Oy 

ToUl 

IMi  iJ5 

'   A  vOT»g(i 

0  73 

13  50 

13  00 

14  50 
13  50 
13  00 

6  75 
U  00 

73 

6  im  \              M 

6  04 

9  5e 

8  S3 

leti 

lew 

71 
71 
76 

87 
90 
<H) 

H7 

8  97 
Q  09 

fi  (il 
.'i  fiO 

lew 

11  08  !          a  lU 

7  !I7 

IgTO 

10  68 

10  80 

«  07 

7  83 

3  04 
3  04 

a  80 

8  89 

7  f4 

Hf7l 

7  76 

liJTS 

3  •,'7 

1873 

4  <H 

Total 

M  35 

5  73 

64  70 

SO  71 

4:i  99 

A  nnfpf 

11  46 

9  50 

«  73 

10  75 

a  75 

H8 

9  34 

3  96 

(i  38 

1874 

eo 

H7 
90 

8  45 
5  87 
0  67 
8  33 

93 
79 
08 
93 

7  53 

•875 

I87C 

5  0« 
8  69 

IflTJ 

7  40 

Total 

35  75 

3  61 

i        33  31 

{         3  til 

88  70 

Ayeraftt 

e  04 

M 

8  08 

j             90 

7  16 

AWARD   OF   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


1061 


tinoad. 


1 

M 

i 

c 

8ii 

1 

C 

w-wg     1 

a 

I 

it-d 

i, 
'A 

|0  94 

|7  5A 

('O 

.■)  ;« 

r>u 

s  iJl 

8t> 

5  18 

85 

6  27 

98 

869 

5  04 

;«i-J5 

1 

M 

6  04 

» 

9  97 

6  til 

1 

9  99 

r>60 

i 

3  05 

7  97 

H 

3  04 

7  84 

I 

3  04 

7  76 

T 

9  80 

3  •.'■ 

3 

9  89 

4  !)4 

0 

90  71 

4:1  99 

4 

9  96 

(iS8 

5 

99 

753 

7 

79 

5  08 

7 

98 

8  69 

» 

99 

7  40 

II 

3  01 

88  70 

18 

90 

7  18 

• 

3 


K 

°s 

K 

8 


5 


1. 

< 
s 

'i 


Ji 
5 

'< 


a 
a 


'8a{.uoii 


« 


O  I*  V  1.  !• 


"•^xStM 


■SitiJj.iii 


£ 


?? 


V  7in  M  i2r«  2^<e  <e  i? 


a  A  te  S'S'i's  •5'in  S**  Sfw « 


e>-»e 


■>a}J4aii 


r^irtr-Q 


£ 
« 

3 


I  aETte « srurj' 


i  10  »•  a;  rtw  » 


|5SS» 


SI 


3" 


I" 


'80|XI0H       5  ■*  ■*  ^'^  iS'iS'aDflPr* 


1 

(t 

;3 


M 


I  ao  » jS**"*  !?S''Ji  ^ 


I  m  'J!'(S'!?«  w  r-  <fi 

(  t>4  »i«  ^  ^  .M  *«  Of 


SEsaaJusS' 


J3 


S 


■SaiJjou 


ei 


a  9>  3*1-  S** 

a  x  o)  o>  n  o 


*8iivuoiI 


issssa 


f ■♦  ^  '•  IS* 


127 


I 


T» 


^■S 


iiy^" 


73V 


)3r3W 


ffteJa 


>  Tots' 


S'S'to 


.-3r 


?:> 


or«"<« 


loPufs 


1(.C2 


i 

I 

4 


1 


1 


an 


5 


5 


I 


I 


i 

a 

o 
'A 


a 
6 


s 
I 


0 


■Vnixiaii 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


i 


1 


I* 


•Sa|xi»n 

H 

i 

M 

9* 

i 

^ 

f 


I     'Vaiuan 


i 


2? 


Zl 


5a 
•sa 


■Vniij^H 


I 


9< 


«4 


'fn|xiaii      2 


8 

as 


«l 


I 


? 


«09>l-> 


at-.  3? 


•«i       I  Wi  IP 

on  »  n  II 
irt  t-  »-"  I-  * 


sasiS'^ 


S  P«  «3  ti« 

S'^a* 


3'*'aa 


««in 


saa 


S2 


kI' 


>TiSif<e 


.ffiri? 


9i^r*Ot9t 


S£vV(&9)XwwqCQDQD10QDQ0vaD 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1063 


Q.  DuriiijEi:  the  pnriod  botweeD  1807  and  1873,  No.  1  mackerel,  dnty 
paid,  realized  $17.77  in  f;old,  and  from  1874  to  1877  tbey  realized 
$14.01  f— A.  Veil,  that  is  the  average. 

Q.  These  flgureH  were  made  np  by  yon  from  the  books  themselves  f — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  A  qnestion  was  asked  the  last  witness  as  to  whether  the  demand 
for  mackerel  in  nalifax  market  had  declined  of  late  years.  Has  the 
demand  declined  f — A.  I  think  for  the  past  two  years  the  demand  for 
mackerel  has  not  been  quite  so  good. 

Q.  Previous  to  the  last  two  years,  would  you  say  there  hail  been  any 
decrease  in  the  demand  ?  Take  1874;  was  t  ere  good  demand  for  mack- 
erel that  year  f — A.  1  think  the  demand  was  equally  good  in  1874. 

Q.  Are  you  aware,  from  an  examination  of  the  statistics,  whether  the 
im])ortations  of  British-caught  mackerel  in  the  United  States  have  in- 
creaseKl  or  decreased  during  the  last  few  years  f — A.  I  have  not  exam- 
ined  the  statistics. 

Q.  How  is  the  demand  this  year  ? — A.  The  demand  is  far  greater  than 
it  has  been  for  many  years. 

Q.  Mackerel  are  bringing  high  prices  f — A.  ^lackere1  are  bringing 
high  prices  at  present.    Almost  every  sale  they  are  higher. 

Q.  What  are  the  present  prices  f-> A.  There  are  no  No.  1  in  the 
market,  for  it  is  too  early  for  them.    No.  2  large  are  selling  at  $10.50. 

Q.  That  is  a  larger  price  than  is  usually  paid  for  tlsh  of  that  descrip- 
tion ? — A.  Not  larger.  It  is  larger  than  was  paid  last  year  and  the  year 
before. 

Q.  The  demand  is  good  ?— A.  The  demand  is  good  at  present.  There 
are  orders  here  which  cannot  l>e  filled,  in  consequence  of  the  fish  not 
coming  forward.  At  every  sale  there  appears  to  be  a  slight  increase  in 
the  price  realized  at  former  sales  this  month. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  what  price  1*.  E.  Island  number  ones  realize? — 
A.  We  have  none  of  tiieiii  here. 

Q.  I  see  that  the  quotatiouN  in  to  day's  paper  are — P.  E.  Island  num- 
ber ones,  $17  to  $18;  large  twos,  $17  to  $18;  and  shore  twos,  $12  to 
$11  ? — A.  Those  are  liostou  quotations. 

By  Mr.  Dana: 

Q.  Will  you  tell  me,  from  NoWo  <S:  Son's  account,  the  average  price 
paid  in  Halifax,  say  from  18U1  to  IhOO,  inclusive  ?— A.  It  is  $11.20  for 
number  ones. 

Q.  Anil  what  is  it  from  18G7  to  1873?— A.  $12  for  number  ones. 

(i.  And  from  1874  to  1876?— A,  $10.r>U. 

ii.  With  Noble  «&  Sous,  from  1861  to  1866,  number  one  mackerel  cost 
$11.20  here,  on  the  average! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  Young  &  Hart,  during  the  same  period  of  time,  from  1861  to 
1806,  sold  them  in  the  United  States,  duties  paid,  at  an  average  of 
*13.81 1— A.  No ;  but  for  $19.20. 

Q.  I  speak  of  gold;  they  sohl  at  $13.81;  and  how  much,  then,  would 
be  the  difterence,  not  the  protit,  between  the  prices  in  question  ? — A.  It 
would  l>e  $2.60. 

(J.  Then  comes  freight,  insurance,  &c.  • — A.  Yes. 

(■i.  From  1867  to  1873,  a  duty  of  $2  in  gold  i>er  barrel  was  levied  ;  and 
I  think  that  Young  &  Hart,  during  that  period,  sold  these  fish  in  the 
United  States  at  an  average  price  of  $17.77  ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  paid  their  own  duties? — A.  Y'es. 

Q.  And  what  was  the  price  which  Kobert  Noble  &  Sons  gave  during 
the  same  period  f^A.  it  was  $12  from  1866  to  1873. 


1064 


AWARD    OF    THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


Q.  Tbeu,  aa  the  flsh  could  bo  bought  in  the  market  for  $12,  aiul  as 
they  were  soUl  in  the  United  States  lor  $17.77,  duties  paid,  which  price 
might  really  be  called  $ir>.77,  that  margin  wan  loft  lor  proht  t — A.  Yfs. 

Q.  Prices  have  been  high  this  year? — A.  Yea. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  the  repports  which  have  come  in  from  the  lishories 
have  been  such  as  to  raise  the  prices?— A.  The  catch  has  been  short, 
aud  the  demand  hiis  bc^u  large. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  mean,  when  .you  quote  the  prices  obtaineii 
by  Young,  Hart  &  Company,  that  these  were  net  re<;eipts  received 
from  the  sale  of  their  fish,  or  did  they  pay  their  expenses  out  of  them?— 
A.  They  had  to  pay  their  expenses,  certainly,  from  these  receipts. 

Q.  Yon  speak  of  $13.81  as  the  average  price  received  from  18C()  to 
18GG;  were  these  the  net  or  gross  receipts? — A.  They  are  gross  recei})ts. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q,  Does  not  the  price  of  mackerel  vary  very  much  from  year  to  vear, 
according  to  the  prospective  and  the  actual  catch  ? — A.  Certainly. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  very  speculative  commodity? — A.  It  is  regulated  iu 
price  altogether  by  tbw  catch. 

Q.  And  if  at  the  beginning  of  the  season  the  prospects  betoken  a 
small  catch,  the  piice  runs  ud  very  high  ? — A.  We  never  can  judge  at 
the  beginning  of  the  season  what  the  catch  is  going  to  be. 

Q.  Does  the  price  not  vary  very  m"ch  between  July  and  September? — 
A.  Certainly,  because  by  September  we  can  ascertain  what  the  catcii 
is  going  to  be. 

Q.  It  is  speculation  on  the  probable  catch  that  makes  this  great  vari- 
ation ? — A.  That  is  not  always  the  case. 

Q.  Does  it  not  account  for  a  large  part  of  it? — A.  Of  course  it  ac- 
counts for  some  of  it. 

Q.  Is  it  a  strange  thing  to  have  mackerel  vary  $.">  a  barrel  in  ;ii0.se 
two  mouths? — A.  I  never  i  now  this  to  be  the  case. 

Q.  How  much  is  the  greatest  variation  you  have  known  during  those 
two  months  ?  Here  is  a  statement  oJ'  a  vaiiatiou  of  Irom  $'25  to  ilLS.— 
A.  No  ;  those  ligures  relate  to  sales. 

Q.  Between  July  and  Sei)tember  of  the  same  year,  the  prici»  varied 
from  $25  to  $18.  making  a  dift'erence  of  .*5  ;  this  was  in  1805,  I  believe. 
What  caused  it? — A.  I  laiderstood  \ou  to  question  mc  with  rehTcnce 
to  the  prices  of  tish ;  that  is  a  statement  concerning  fish  sohl  in  the 
United  States. 

Q.  What  difference  would  this  make  ? — A.  That  is  a  statement  of  fish 
sold  ifi  the  Tnitt'd  States. 

Q.  The  dirtercnce  li)etween  prices  in  Halifax  and  Boston  do  iiot  van 
much,  except  as  to  the  cost  of  tiansportatio's,  do  they  f — A.  l>ut  tliat 
has  no  reference  to  the  trade  of  Halilax.  Those  are  prices  lor  lish  sold 
in  the  United  States. 

Q.  Suppo'^e  that  is  so,  then  th'Tc  would  be  as  mach  vi«ri;(tiuii  in 
))ri(CH  in  llalil'ax  as  in  Boston? — A.  That  year  we  luid  no  such  li^li  n\ 
Halifax  during  the  months  .vou  nauic. 

Q.  They  were  all  sohl  out  ? — A.  Yes;  all  shipped  from  here. 

Q.  How  late  is  it  in  the  .season  before  ,\oii  gi't  rid  of  your  No.  I  niack 
erel? — A.  This  is  generally  done  in  the  winter  months.  They  are  tlicii 
shippcil. 

Q.  So  you  have  no  sto'rk  here  in  July  ? — A.  Those  are  |ui<*es  at  wli  ch 
the  tlsh  were  sohl  in  and  ciuisitviments  made  to  the  Unitetl  States. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHKKY   COMMISSION. 


1065 


No.  81. 

James  Baijky,  uicmher  of  the  civil  service,  statistical  (>rancli,  cii8- 
toins  department,  Ottawa,  was  called  on  belalf  of  the  Governriient  of 
Her  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  anci  exaniine<l 

By  Mr.  Davies: 

(Question.  You  have  made  an  examination,  I  believe,  of  the  Canadian 
statistical  returns  respecting  lumber,  coal,  and  salt  ? — Answer.  Yes. 

Q.  As  contained  in  tlic  trade  and  navi{jation  returns? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  1  want  you  to  tell  tlio  Commissiou  in  reference  to  the  articles  of 
lumber,  coal,  and  salt,  exported  from  Canada  to  the  United  States,  what 
tbe  values  of  these  articles  were  during-  the  years  extending  from  18G7 
to  1870,  when  the  duties  on  thtm  were  imposed  t — A.  This  is  shown  in 
the  Ibllowing  table : 

No.  1. — Statement  showing  the  annual  dutiet  accrued  upon  coal,  nalt,  and  lumber,  upon  impor- 
Uition  into  the  United  Statin  from  Canada,  dwlng  the  Jiacal  yearn  ended  June ',i<},  !e67, 
lfi63,  lW]y,  and  1870,  regpectively. 


Articles, 

ItftST. 

186e',       i       liWa. 

i 

1870. 

Totul,  iefi7 
to  1870. 

Aimnal  av- 
erago. 

Liirobi>r 

(;<)ul 

»l,«ai,640  1  |l,i«?9,735  !  #l,:n!>,  760 

4VU,0I7  1        a«i.,lS-l           \S'i\,4i'A 

n,.5-ja  1         <t,r.o  '        4i<.6i>-i 

$1,07^,585 

210,  "jas 

20,evt9 

fi,  .'■<6.%,  720 

1,  839,  907 

94,103 

ti,  391. 430 

309,  977 

Salt... 

23, 526 

Toltil 

DeiliM't  (tutici  «tUe«'t«<t  on 
Liiniber..... 

import*  from  Uuited  States: 

1,  <M>,  709 

«,  bW,  730 

18,  fr20 

Zi.  4i»3 

33S 

.... 

1,734,93;» 

Coal    

SrU - 

3H,  (>47 

9,162 

1,715.771 

♦i,7ir..m  V  12^ C80,.'W9,a52 

LosM  two  year!*'  duty  on  luiulwr* M,  78:i,  t<<iO 

AKgn-KAto  ii'uji»«loi)»  for  twelve  years 17,  S06,  ;»9'J 

.TAMEl*  B.4RRY. 

*  Tina  ilednctlon  Is  in.itio  hroaiino  tho  ""juiiRnion  of  dvitio."*  on  liimlipr  otforrdliv  thp  X'niiftd  Staffs 
(.'oinniiiutiont'i'H  iit  tlt*<  .ioiiit  llitili  ('<>mini«.sioii  wati  u<.>t  toooiii'!  mtufurco  until  t>^o  vears  Aricrtht.  tKuly 
cauiv  tutu  upi-ratiou. 


itateinent  of  fi^h 


:fe^ 


1066 


AWARD   OP   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


No.  2. — Statement  nhowing  the  ralue  of  timber  and  lumber  of  aV  kin(U  exported  to  and  im- 
jtorled  from  the  United  States  by  the  Dominion  of  Canada  ;  also  the  duty  payable  thvnon 
in  each  country,  respectively,  from  18G7  to  1870,  incluBive, 


Exported  to  United  States. 

Iniitorted  from  United  States. 

Quantity. 

Value. 

Dutypayable 

ill  United 

Statos. 

Quantity. 

Viilup. 

Doty 

col!>ct<'(l  in 
Canada. 

18«7. 
OntArio  and  Oaebec 

•6, 804.977 

f  .'57,  4H3 

ai,  :»7 

11,675 
."i,8»4 
1,«6.'> 
1,975 

Froe. 

i)o     ;. ' 

$3,  920  M 

Kova  Sootia,  9  montha ! 

74,  .vii 
37, 593 

Do '  

.IS  K) 

Prince  Edward  Island  ... 

598 

letiri.                    

6, 656,  (M»  tl  !H1  «I40  i>n 

99,588 

3,  97(!  75 

: 

Ontario  and  Oiiobec  - .- 

6,in3,664 

109.5-' 

4,368 
104 

l"'rei» 

Do    

3,  995  47 

NovaSootia 

96,735 

Do 

10  40 

New  HrunHwick . 

33i,7Sl 
394 

Prince  Kdward  Inlaud 

1,  134 

l!*69.                             

7,  lOa,  574 

1.  ■.'»<»  t:j5  10 

141.400          A  ti:u>    ' 

.-^-^ 

Ontario 

4, 03;},  090 

140,  ««> 

16,984 

.%,  759 

9,  3.17 

Kree. 

Do 

9,  547  77 

Qupbeo. 

Do  !  

3, 179, 785 

338  35 

Kova  Scotia 1 

303, 048 

13,  931 

80 

Do 

......     ..••• 

1     <M 

Xew  BriinaH'ick 

430,166 

40,194      

Do  

XK\                 i;i  H5 

Prince  Kdwarti  Island 

.V) 

3  377      

Hj70.                            j     

6,  ta-i,  147  1   1,  379,  7li0  00 

8tJ3,  .VJ7           9,  9IT  iK) 



Ontario 1 

4,693,735 

147,  37'2  ;  Free. 

Do 1 



H,  i»:n        9. 2;(9  4(> 

Qu<>l)ec 

Do 

3,930,811 

1 

.......... 

f>o,  o;«) 

1,  :»*3 
iti,.i3:i 

■M,  515 
1,9.18 

i.;i38 

937  37 

.Vova  Sootia 

807, ftJ4 
473,898 

Fre.'. 

Nt'W  Brunswick 

Ki'-f. 

Do 

183  70 

Prince  Ed  wo  '•■I  Island 

1,9.11    

Fro(>. 

fl,  30«,  273      1  074,  .-VHS  00 

9(i9,  340 

9.  liti'J  .■)3 



Total  (4  years) 

a?,  908, 043     3, 565.  •^:o  00 

19,  8\'t)  00 

Annual  average 

i 

,   l,:iyi,430  00 

3,  905  00 

Vide  .SUti'Uieut  No.  1. 


J.\MES  BARKY. 


AWARD   OF   THE   FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


1067 


I  exported  to  and  im- 
duty  payable  thinon 


Slateinetit  No.  3,  tihowing  the  qHantiiy  and  value  of  coal  exported  to  and  imported  from  the 
United  States  by  the  Dominion  of  Canada  ;  aim,  the  duty  payable  thereon  in  each  country, 
respectively,  from  1??67  to  ld70,  imluaice. 


1  rroni  Uolted  SUti>g. 


Dntv 
Value.     ool!'ct<><liii 
;    CauBila. 


»S7, 4tn     Free. 

ai,;«J7  ,     |3,-J2()  CO 

ll,fi75    

5,894  ; 

I,86r)  '              55  K, 
1,975  ' 

itit,  588  i        3. 876  75 

lofl. '.-     TiT-.' 

•'•     ai  3, 925  47 

4,)W«  I 

104  10  40 

i4t.4a(>  M 

140,  fiHJ  i'm.. 

IB,  9f<4  8,  547  77 

5,7511  : 

9, 957  i            338  35 

13,931    

80  i:  93 

40,124 

333  CI  H5 

3,377    

223.  527  2,  SMT  !K) 

147,372      Vnv. 
14,  !t3I            2,2;i!)  4(1 
:m,dm    

l.-VO  237  37 

It),  .333     Free. 
:«1,  515  I  Fn-i". 

],%\H  ■  185  70 

1,338     Free. 

tf»i!),  34(1  9,  ti(i2  .')3 

7. 12,  H-.'O  IW) 

,        3.205  Oil 


Exported  to  United  States.  Imported  from  United  .States 


iQnantity.    Value. 


1867. 


Ontario  nnil  QupIjcc 

Nova  Scotia  (i)  tncntha) 

Xitw  JtrunHwick  (6  mouths). 
I'riuce  Kdward  Islaud 


Totu. 


Ilroken  jHTlotl  in  Canada  (nnan- 
titv  taken  from  Uiiitt'd  States 
reiunis) 383,492 


1868. 

Ontario  and  (jiiel>eo 

Nova  Scotia IUb.'.uO 

New  lininawick 19,534 

Prince  Edward  Island 


\sm. 


911. 4.M 
10 


Olltfllio 

linelMi- 155 

Nova  .Scotia j  376,135 

N'i'w  lliMinHwick  j  8,175 

I'riiico  K(l ward  IhIuiuI :  40 


1870. 


Ontario 

Do 

(Uii'bec 

".       Do , 

Nova  Scotia 

Do 

New' Itrtins  wick 

■  Do 

rrinou  Kdwurd  Island 


Total  (four  years) 

Annual  avcin):!'. 


90 

974 

578.  190 

79,  980 

89 


384,  515  I     65!),  316         321,  481  00 


I 


144.071 

(U)7,934  ' 

48,  146 

187,  443  i 

!>,  061 

21,847  ! 

6,  9!K) 

30,  105 

170 

769 

127 
269.  ■II-' 
""5.465 


61 
"1,257 
'3!>8,(i3i 
"H777 


9!i,!..''  ;    454.716         210.225  00 

~ . .  ~.  IsT^ri,  tWiS     1 ,  ilO,  907  60 
1 309,977  00 


204,  375 

848,  098 

114,739 

490,660 

Free. 

31,  725 

1.56,  479 

15, 862  57 

51.743 

1.55,  2;»o 

Free. 

13,  676 

5.3,131 

6. 838  20 

8.%2 

7,101 

Free. 

348 

1,673 

173  75 

6.018 

29,236 

Free. 

654 

2,  6.50 

326  75 

101 

ti66 

Free, 

219.  8.56 

905.826 

23,201  27 

23,  493  Ofl 
5.  873  00 

Vide  titatenient  No.  1. 


J.\ME:5  HARRY. 


I 

I 
II 


.lAMKS  IJARUV. 


!^ 


i 


1068 


AWARD   OF   THE    FISHEIIY   COMMISSION. 


Stalement  Xo.  4,  tftoiriwj;  the  quantity  and  value  of  salt  exported  to  and  imported  from  the 
United  Statet  by  the  Dominion  of  Canada ;  aho  the  duly  payable  thereon  in  each  country, 
respectively,  from  IHtiT  to  l>f!0,  inctimve. 


Kxj>orted  to  Un 

itPd  Stutcs. 

Duty  imyable 
In      I'uitad 
Stat«a. 

Iui|)orted  from  I'nItetl  Stales. 

rri)vlnw8. 

Quantity. 

Value. 

Quimtity. 

Value. 

Duty    col. 
lortod  in 
CiiiiiKla. 

1867. 

OntArin  and  QneliM) 

Kova  Scotia,  9  months  onl 

.bush 
t'..do. 
*  only, 

679, 085 
4,  634 

311 

78 

1188,  !)53 
1,  371 

1,535 



New  Branswlck,  6  luonthi 

117  25 

.bush 
...do. 



7, 347,  S-W 

•35,537 

•14,  541  94 

301.984 

196.897 
1,665 

17  25 

1868L 

Ontario  Aod  Qnebeo 

Nova  tSootia 

498,558 
13,  193 

.bush. 

..bush 
...do. 
...do. 
..bbis 
.l>kj£» 

bush . 

400 

131 

18,048 

4,  709. 948 

9. 970  83 

513,150 

198.  683 

lew. 

Ont.'.rio 

.501, 330 

3,300 

11,437 

1,159 

161 

147,  138 

1.801 

1,160 

8,  057 

506 

Quebec 

Nova  Sootta 

Prince  Kdwanl  Isluiid 

70,  345 

33,  186. 834 

48.  G93  00 



153.663 

1870. 
Ontario 

250, 358 
.3,  IM 
4,153 
TJfi 
2.335 
3,109 

i,:»3 

351 

300 

66,  894 
1,137 
706 
4.VJ 
691 
374 
1,396 
381 
113 

Free, 

Do 

I!i7  75 

Quebec  

Free. 

^  T)„ : 

36  70 

Nova  Scotia 

Free. 

Do  

105  <:> 

New  Brunswick 

Free. 

Do.  .                      

17  .Vi 

Prince  Edward  Island 

.   .      ......... 

Free. 

34,  017 

9,  m%  043 

30,  8!I9  00 

864,  .586 

71,864 

317  45 

Total  (4  yonrs) 

147.849 

94,  103  00 

1 

:m4  00 

Annaal  average  .. 

,           33,530  00 

84  UO 



1 

Vide  Mtatement  No.  1. 
RRCAPITULATIO.V. 


Average  an  una  I  dnties  niton  the  Tol-                        i'  Arorage  nnniial  duties  irniM>H<>d  on  the 

\oT:Uif^  fHHtt\ii  e-ip<trU»i\  t'roiu  Cauada                         {I  fullowliig  ^immIn  huiNittou  into  Canada 

to  II niti-d  States  :  from  the  l.'ulted  States: 

Lumber |1,»91,4.W  00  Lumber |:i,'.').')  iw 

Co-al soft, '.I??  00  Otal 5.  H7U  o» 

Salt 3:»,53«00i  Salt ^^  00 


1,  734,  933  00 


II 


9, 16ii  UO 


Vide  Statement  No.  1. 


JAMKS  BAKltV. 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


1069 


'  imporUil  from  the 
eon  ill  ettvh  country, 


I  from  United  Stiiles. 


Viiliie. 

Duty    ml. 

Ivrtfil  in 
Ciiiuula. 

1188, 953 

1,371 

1,  535 

6<' 

tl7  M 

301.984 

17  -r. 

196,897 

1.665 

131 

198,683 

147,  138 

1,801 

1.  160 

8,  0,'>7 

506 

153.663 

66.894 
1,187 
706 
453 
691 
.174 
1.996 
381 
113 

Free. 

1.S7  75 
Free. 

36  70 
Free. 

105  t:> 
Free. 

17  .Vi 
Free. 

71,864 

317  45 

:i34  00 

84  00 

i)«»mI  on  llio 
into  Canada 

|3.'.>35  00 

5, 873  (K) 

H4  00 


It,  16i«  110 


.I.\MK*<  BAUI.'V. 


SMemetit  Ho.  5,  Bhowing  the  quantity  and  value  of  timhei-  and  lumber  imported  into  the 
I'nitfd  States  from  the  Dotninion  of  Canada;  alto  the  duly  payable  thereon,  annually, 
from  1HG7  to  1870,  inelusire. 


ICimipiltHl  from  United  Stati-n  retnrna.l 


1  iiiiUtr  and  Iinnliei. 

Imiwrted 

uto  the  United  States  fioni  Dominion  of  Canada. 

Quantity. 

Value. 

Duty. 

Rateof  dx»y. 

1867. 
I'lnn,  iinfactiitod 

»2,  .1.59 

8."),  061 

3,  KV.\  960 

175,  793 

413,  101 

1 ,  .'i3<,l.  364 

78,  (i.34 

136,  103 



Free 

Sliiii)!l«  biiltH  utnl  stavt>  Ik>Iih 

Do. 

lioariiii,    )lank,  and  aciiiitliuK  . . 

Timber,  li«wii 

rough 

...M.  ft 
...M.ft. 

413.375 
2.833 



J707.  993  00 
3.5,  158  60 
88.  680  30 
307,  873  80 
1.5,  :K6  80 
18.  610  80 

30  ]mr  cent. 
Do. 
Do 

OtlllT 

I.BlIm 

...M.  ft. 

iM 

M 

1(11,303 

ti4.  33t' 

(i.  381 

Do. 
Do. 
10  por  cent. 

6,  358,  874 

I.  381.  640  60 

1868. 
Unninniifarliired  

3,  on 

119,395 
8,  630,  843 
109,354 
51.5,  76;t 
3,033,  '77 
113.300 
116,879 

6,  638,  .587 

38,  197 

7,  093,  885 

7,  i:«,  083 

Free. 

Shin^lo  lM>ltH  and  Htavt^  bolts 

"'.524.  i 68  40 

31,  8.->0  80 

103,  1.53  60 

606,  435  40 

•i^i,  440  00 

11,687  90 

Do. 

KoardH,  planki*,  Hcaiitliu);,  iVti. . 

Timber,  hewn  

rou^li 

...M.ft 
..M.ft 

355.  4!»4 

3,  '.m 

80  per  cent. 
Do. 
Do. 

Other  lunibf  r 

I.iiths 

...M.ft 
M 

.300.  si  4 

1(10.  733 

1,181,409 

Do. 
Do. 

.Staves 

M 

10  per  c«nt. 

1, 389,  735  10 

1889. 
I'miiaiinfaotiiifd 

i,  379,  7C6  66 

Free. 

Mauulactui-es  of 

Average  19  45  percent. 

No  detail*  given. 

1,  379,  760  00 

1870. 
rnnianiil'a<'lnri*d    

37,  874 
8,  610.  733 

8,  638,  597 

ManutacturcH  of 

1,674,585  00 

Average  19.45 per  cent. 
Xo  (ietailH  given. 

1,674,585  00 



JAMES  BARRY. 


Statement  Xo.  6,  showing  the  quanliti/  and  value  of  coal  imported  into  the  United  States  from 
the  Dominion  of  Canada;  also  thf  duty  payable  thereon,  annually,  from  ltiC7  to  1870, 
inelusire. 

f Compiled  from  United  States  returns.] 


Coal. 

Imported  into  United  States  from  Dominion 
uf  Canada. 

Qnantlty.     Value. 

Duty. 

Rate  of 
duty. 

llitiim!nou<i   

(ItlUT 

1867. 

338,  377     1855,  007 
115               6.13 

1433,  971  25 
46  00 

Per  ton. 

fl35 

40 

1668. 

338,493 
338, 133 

855,  639         433,  017  35 

nitnmliioua 

S3.  951         985.  165  00 

1  35 

Uthcr 

48  ;            369  {                 19  80 

40 

1869. 

>■       .......           .■ 

338.  180 

653,  530 

3a5.  184  90 

Ilituminotis 

357,  185 

630,  .571 

331.  481  00 

1  3 

1870. 

— ; _ .j.,^— _ 

1 
168,  180       3M.  387 

910,935  00 

1  35 

JAMES  BARRY. 


1070 


AWARD   OK   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Slatcment  S'o,  7,  ahotvlnf)  ihf  qitanHtfi  and  rohie  of  snll  imported  into  the   I'nited  Staler /nm 
the  Dominion  of  Canadn;  til»o  the  diilji  pajfiihle  thereon,  from  1^^(57  to  1610,  indusive. 


lOmpllod  from  Vnlted  Sfal«>ii  rctiinm.] 

Snlt. 

Iinportocl  into  riiit«d  SUtoH  from  Doniiuion  of  Canada. 

Quantity. 

Value. 
tl7  .174 

Duty. 

liato  of  duty. 

IS<57. 
In  bulk  iMMinMd..^ 

\  l.M,  775 

8<l,  970  71» 
5,865  15 

18  rent*  ]>or  100  imuiid!*. 
'■ii  vttuto  per  100  puuiulH. 

18  cent*  per  100  ponndn. 
84  cents  per  100  JMxinds. 

Average  81  cents  per  100 
Average  31  cents  per  100 

a,  l!t;i,  f»M  1        f ,  163 

ToUl 

7,  347,  588         85,  .537 

14,.'i4l  94 

3,999  10 
.^,971  73 

1868. 
Tn  bulk,  pound* 

8,331,7%          6,508 
3.48!i,888         U.'ISe 

Total 

4.709,948  :      18,048 

9, 970  83 

1M9. 
Poands ...................... 

33, 180, 834  j      70, 845 

48,098  00 

poiuuli, 

1870. 
PoDIlilt 

0, 9.'i3,04a  i      34^017 

80,899  00 

pounds. 

JAMES  HAUKY. 

Q.  These  are  the  figures  for  the  four  years  when  such  duties  were  lev- 
ied t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  After  the  abrogation  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  and  before  the 
Washington  Treaty  came  into  force  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  aggregate? — A.  The  aggregate  value  is  $28,902,043, 
and  the  aggregate  duty,  $5,r)G5,720. 

Q.  What  are  the  aggregates  for  coal  and  salt  during  the  same  periods* 
— A.  The  aggregate  value  of  coal  exported  from  Canada  to  the  United 
States,  during  the  four  years  mentioned,  is  $2,495,063,  and  the  duty  col- 
lected thereon,  per  United  States  returns,  if  entered  for  consumption, 
$1,239,907.  The  aggregate  value  of  salt  exported  from  Canada  to  tlio 
United  States  for  these  four  years,  per  United  States  returns,  is  $147,847, 
and  the  duty  collected  thereon,  if  entered  for  consumption,  $94,10.'{. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  annual  aggregate  duty  on  these  three  articles? 
—A.  It  is  $1,724,933. 

Q.  Have  you  made  up  a  similar  statement  respecting  the  exports  of 
the  some  articles  from  the  United  States  into  Canada? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  liead  ofl'the  aggregates  for  each  year. — A.  They  are  contained  in 
the  same  tables,  and  the  diif'es  iiverage  $9,1G2  per  annum. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  ditterence? — A.  The  ditterenco  between  that 
and  the  amount  1  stated  is  $1,715,771. 

Q.  Multiply  that  by  twelve  years,  and  what  does  it  make?— A. 
$20,589,252. 

Q.  What  did  you  say  the  annual  duties  paid  on  lumber,  imported  into 
the  United  States  from  Canada,  amounted  to? — A.  $1,391,430. 

Q.  And  doubling  that,  how  much  will  it  make?— A.  $2,782,800. 

Q.  Taking  this  from  the  aggregate  twelve  years'  duties,  payable  on 
these  three  articles,  $20,589,252,  what  is  the  net  result?— A.  $17,800,;{02. 

Q.  rrom  what  statistical  returns  did  you  compile  these  statements  T— 
A.  I  took  them  both  from  Canadian  and  United  States  trade  and  nav- 
igation retorns. 

Q.  And  you  have  both  of  these  here? — A.  Yes. 

(>.  And  you  have  carefully  complied  this  statement? — A.  Yes. 

Mr.  Da  VIES.  These  returns  are  too  voluminous  to  be  read,  but  we 


AWARD    OP   THE    FISHERY    COMMISSION. 


1071 


f'nUed  Stalls  fioin 
1610,  invliiHitr. 


on  of  Cuunda. 


cents  per  100  poniul<j. 
cenU  per  100  pounds. 
'JAMES  HAURY. 

daties  were  lev- 

and  before  the 

is  $28,902,043, 

0  same  periods* 
to  the  United 
1(1  the  duty  col- 
cotisntnption, 
CaimdiV  to  tiio 
riis,  is  $147,847, 
Ml,  $94,10;5. 
three  articles? 

the  oxports  of 
A.  Yes. 
e  coutaiiied  in 
1. 
between  that 

it  make! — A. 


wish  it  to  be  understood  that  we  have  them  here  ready,  and  sve  desire 
tliem  to  come  in  as  evidence  before  the  Commission. 

Q.  I  understand  that  you  are  prepared  with  a  full  statement  showing 
the  quantity  of  fish  exported  from  tlio  Dominion  into  the  United  States, 
and  also  from  the  United  States  into  the  Dominion,  for  a  number  of 
years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  These  tables  show  the  imports  and  exports  of  fish  from  the  vari- 
ous provinces,  and  they  are  compiled  from  Canadian  as  well  as  from 
United  States  returns? — A.  Yes;  some  relate  to  the  period  extending 
from  1850  to  1870;  some  to  the  period  extending  from  1854  to  1870,  and 
some  to  the  period  between  1851  and  1870. 

Q.  They  cover  all  the  ground  and  give  all  the  information  which  is 
to  be  gained  from  the  returns  of  both  countries  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  any  summary  of  them  made  up? — A.  Y'es;  it  is  as 
follows : 

Summary  atalemeHt  Xo.  8,  showing  the  value  of  fish  and  products  of  fish  imported  from 
United  Stales  and  exported  to  United  Slates  and  all  other  countries  by  Dominion  of  Can- 
(ida  (exol»nre  of  British  Columbia  and  Manitoba),  during  each  year,  from  Itiol  to  1870, 
incliUite. 


Years. 


1851. 
lo.'ia. 

W>3. 
1>>.V,. 


li^.W. 
li'iSt. 
l!<60. 
l^fil. 

iH6a. 
1  «■.;«. 

\Kt>!t. 

\!>m. 

IrtiT. 
IrtiU. 

imo. 

1H71. 

lew. 

IH73. 
lH-4. 
1h7I\. 
lH7ti. 


a-j 


ToUl  forSO  vMra 7,032,010 


•27, 

3:«, 

71, 

M), 

269, 

410, 

:a«. 
loa, 

211. 
2M, 
294, 
321, 

2#iM, 
324, 
401, 
172, 
170, 

9it. 

!»!», 
123, 
12:1, 
279, 
72H, 
727, 
67!t. 


150 

:«i 

244 

460 
043 
2.W 
045 
829 
732 
298 
163 
834 
4S9 
475 
340 
228 
366 
156 
M:i 
4(HI 
331 
670 
049 
921 
,587 
657 


Exported. 


To  United 
States. 


•544,225 

823,  a35 

774,  418 

027,  197 

5a5,  l.')2 

,  468,  277 

,  198,  .'■.72 

,4:<6, 140 

832,803 

648,214 

843,  1.54 

816,  962 

7t;6  :ko 

,3,'!J>778 

979  426 

.,  809,  S.'iS 

,  lOM,  779 

,  103,  8.59 

,  208,  805 

, 129,  665 

087,341 

933,041 

393,  389 

,  612,  2<i5 

,  6;n,  712 

4.55.  U2it 


32,  580,  343 


To  other 
countries. 


ToUl. 


•I,  001.096 
1,  687,  029 

1,  848, 155 
2, 282,  589 
2, 189,  813 

2,  448,  390 
2,  061,  068 
2,509,256 
2,  708,  260 
e,  784,  495 
2,  .555,  043 
2,  591,  707 
2,  782,  182 
8,  203,  2(57 
2,  929,  286 
3,021,577 
2,  407,  724 

2,  488,  668 
2,221,157 
2,700,601 
3, 169,  755 

3,  .588,  315 
3.  482,  527 

2,  8<h.',  283 

3,  608,  074 
3,  973,  457 


•  1,54.5,321 
2.  510,  864 

2,  623,  573 
3,289.786 

3,  774,  965 
3,  916,  667 
3, 259,  640 
3, 945,  396 
4,541,063 
4, 432,  709 
3, 398, 197 
3, 408,  669 
3,  548,  502 

3,  5Mt,  045 

4,  itOS,  713 
4,  830,  932 
3,  516,  503 
3, 592,  527 

3,  439,  962 
3,830,266 

4,  857,  096 
4,  512,  3.56 
4,  875,  916 

4,  504,  578 

5,  245,  786 
5,  429,  086 


68,11.5,774  100,696,117 


1072 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  Can  you  give  me  the  totals  for  the  years  from  18G7  down  for  the 
two  countries? — A.  Yes;  here  it  is: 

statement  No,  \^,  nhowing  the  rahte  of  fith  and prothutn  of  figh  tJt ported  from  the  Dominion 
of  Canada  (wr/ii«re  of  liritiah  Columbia  and  Manitoba)  and  the  I'roiinre  of  Neiifonnd- 
land  to  the  United  States,  per  Canadian  uid  Xeirfonndland  ret  urn  h  ;  aim  the  voliu  of 
timilar  commtxlities  imported  into  the  I'niled  States  from  liritink  North  America,  per 
United  Statei  rcturnt,  during  ten  years,  from  18(57  to  IHTI),  incUmre, 


Years. 


1869 
1810 
1871 

iina 

1873 
UU 
1875 
1876 


Exported  to  Uiiiti'il  Ktiitcx.  per  Canxlian  rt'- 
turua. 


From  Domin- 
ion of  Can- 
ad  II. 


From  Provln<<> 
of  Ni'wl'ouml- 
luiid. 


Totnl. 


♦1,  3.'i5,  737 

i,.->;)0, 7-1(1 

l,-|:t9,  .MtS 
l,43ti,  Hit! 
1,  1  tilt,  87a 

i,ti:tfi.  ;)r>i! 
i.Hfi:),  :».'>! 

l,(ill,07rt 


3,  lOi, ; 


l."..772,  8fi!l 


ExccsK  of  Anx^rican  im{)ortH  (as  alM)ve)  over  Canadian  cxportH 


Imiiortod,  iH>r 
United  StutuK 
niturna. 


From  nriiisli 
No'tli  Aiiirr 
icn. 


•i,77;t.:w 
UMO,  vr, 

1,5«,'), 'JlKt 

1,4'iH,  .Ml,'. 

i,;»j<.'»,  nci'i 

1,  4(HI.  Kil 

I.  film,  i.ii 
a,  KM.  i:{4 
a,  ;iiH,ti4i 
i.H,-.a,  :!t7 


Ki,  •«ti7,  :m 

1.5,  77-2,  ^«li 
6U4,  (M 


JAMES  nARltY. 

Q.  Wliiit  period  of  years  does  that  cover? — A.  It  covers  tlie  years 
from  18(i7  to  187(5. 

Q.  Wliat  are  the  total  imports  from  Canada  into  the  United  States  ?— 
A.  J*er  Canadian  returns  they  amount  to  $12,070,515  for  the  Dominion 
of  Canada,  and  to  $3,102,354  for  the  Province  of  Newfoundhind,  giving 
a  total  of  $15,772,809. 

Q.  Now,  how  are  they  given  in  the  United  States  returns  ? — A.  I  find 
in  them  that  the  imports  from  British  North  America  amounted  to 
$10,407,502. 

Q.  A  slight  discrepancy  i.s  shown ;  and  the  United  States  returns 
show  a  greater  value  as  to  our  exports  to  th*>'n  than  do  our  own  re- 
turns?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  is  the  ditference  ? — A.  It  is  $694,033  for  these  ten  years. 

Q.  A  gentleman  stated  here  in  evidence  that  the  returns  of  exports 
from  '\'uce  Edward  Island  to  the  States  wore  incorrect;  these  returns 
were  made  up  by  you  from  United  States  stati'*tics,  showing  that  their 
imports  from  us  during  the  period  in  question  amounted  to  $10,407,502? 
—A.  Yes. 

Q.  The  difference  between  the  American  and  Canadian  returns  in 
this  respect  being  $094,033,  by  which  amount  the  former  exceed  the  lat- 
ter?— A.  Yes. 

Q.  That  makes  a  difference  of  about  $70,000  a  year  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  if  you  can  tell  me  whether  during  the  past  ten 
years  the  quantity  of  mackerel  imported  into  the  United  States  trom  the 
Dominion  of  Canada,  as  appears  by  the  statistical  returns,  has  sensibly 
decreased  or  remained  stationary  ? — A.  I  have  looked  into  the  United 
States  returns  for  this  information,  and  they  give  the  results  for  seven 
years,  but  during  three  of  these  ten  years,  it  seems  that  they  have 


•N. 

i67  down  for  tlio 


i  from  the  Dominion 

rorinre  of  Xeirfoiiiid- 

nn  :  alm>  the  vnlitf  of 

North  Jmericn,  fur 


iftti  n^* 

ImjiortfMl,    |inr 

I'liitod  SliituH 

nturiKi. 

Frmn     Britisli 

nl. 

Xfi'tli  Aim.  1 

ivA. 

:..'.,  7^7 

«i,77:t.:ii 

hit).  74ii 

■>(),  1-J7 

;»r.,  :«wj 

I.Wt,"!,  JlUt 

:W,  ftlts 

1,4*<,  .'.().■) 

Sfi,  HIti 

i,;Ki,!Hi.') 

ti'.t,  in 

1,  4(MI.  Kil 

m,  :»nii 

l.filM),  i:ii 

in.  M5 

a,  104.  i:i4 

h:i,  :».">i 

3,:iiH,(i4i 

ll,07« 

i.^.-.a,  T'.t- 

Ti,  86'J 


Hi.  4«7.  :>0'i 
I  ft,  'Ti.  ^fi!t 

»iy4,  i;,):( 


.TAMES  BARKY. 

covers  the  years 

ruiteil  States  ?— 
r  the  DoiQiiiion 
uiullaiul,  giving 

rns  f— A.  I  find 
ti  amounted  to 

States  returns 
lo  our  own  re- 

le  ten  years. 

irns  of  exports 

these  returns 

twing  that  their 

to|lG,467,502f 

ilian  returns  in 
exceed  the  lat- 


AWARD    OP   THE   FI8IIKKY    COMMISSION.  1073 

omitted  to  record  the  quantity  separately,  lumping  it  together  with 
otlior  fish. 

Q.  You  canm  t  give  the  quantity  from  the  Am(M'ican  returns  for  three 
years,  because  tliese  returns  an;  iinprrfoct  t — A.  Yes. 

i).  JJut  you  can  do  so  for  the  seven  years  ? — A.  Yes  ;  tliey  are  as  fol- 
lows : 

^Statement  (No.  10)  nhoicinff  the  tinantity  of  maclcerel  imported  into  the 
i'niteil  States  fnm  Jiritinh  North  America  during  each  year  from  1867 
to  187(),  respectively. 

ICoiiipiloil  frum  Coiumt'icu  ami  Navij[ntiun  lioturns  uf  United  Statcs.l 

Barrels. 
K.r 77,  .503 

i-(is 4l,«)r>5 

l-('>'.l  (not  jjivi'ii  in  UnittMl  .Stiitt's  rutiinis) 

l^Tl'tnot  j{iv»!ii  ill  Uiiitt'il  .Stiiti's  ri>tiiriiH) 

1-Tl  (lu)f  >j;ivcn  in  United  8tiite«  rctuiiiH) 

1-7^ 77,731 

i-T:t mA\m 

1-7 1 m,m3 

1-7.-. IV??^ 

1-7(1 7(J,  r)38 

.TAMES  IJARKY. 

if.  For  the  years  18(57,  1872,  187."),  ami  1870  the  (juantity  is  as  nearly 
;is  )u)ssil»le  77,(KK>  barrels  a  year  f — A.  Yes. 

(^  And  for  1873  and  1874,  8y,(KH>  barrels  a  year  ?— A.  Yes. 

(}.  You  are  a  member  of  tlie  civil  service  of  Canada? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  department  are  you  ? — A.  In  the  customs  departnient. 

(^>.  And  you  are  an  expert  at  figures  ? — A.  1  am  in  charge  of  the  sta- 
tist iiral  branch. 

Q.  And  that  is  your  business  ? — A.  Yes. 

(^).  Your  time  is  altogether  devoted  to  making  up  statistics  and  deal- 
ing with  them.' — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  have  these  trade  and  navigation  returns  here  ? — A.  Yes. 

i^}.  And  now  ready  for  inspection  ! — A.  Yes. 

ii.  And  you  are  ready  to  show  them  to  the  United  States  counsel,  If 
it  be  so  (k'sired  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  that  statement  is  taken  from  the  United  States  returns  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  examined  the  returns  with  the  object  of  gathering  and 
compiling  from  them  what  have  been  the  exports  of  cured  and  fresh  fish 
from  the  United  Statics  to  foreign  countries  during  any  number  of 
years  ? — A.  Y'es ;  I  have  made  u^)  a  table  respecting  this  matter.  It  is 
a.s  follows : 

68P 


-A.  Yes. 

g  the  past  ten 
States  from  tlio 
IS,  has  sensihly 
uto  the  United 
Bsults  for  seven 
hat  they  have 


1074 


AWARD   OP   THE    FISnP:RY   COMMISSION. 


'ihia;.i 


fg9S 


i(w||  |o  ii|.|(mI\>i  |ii)<),T,      * 


'2 


I 


•1    I-  1-  r> 

*. 

^ 

«■  1 

a  1 

m^ 

s 

„- 1 

--■^f 

- 

1^ 

H 

ti 

X 

e 

n 

<?» 

s 

•«  s 

s 

K    * 

«=;. 

a 

11 

a  ■= 

'A 

<-  »- 

«« 

fc^ 

3 

•«  ~ 

J"^ 

1 

I*  s 

s 

^ 

^1 

f 

•S'S" 

^ 

it 

1 

•e  a 

a 

*  a 

M^ 

X  J? 

1 

t  5 

-£ 

"S-*- 

ll 

S 

■2 

1 


•\\tt  III   ||.l AJ.W 

•M<I    nxii    fln!|iiii.i 
•ll|  lull  |i,i|.|<mIx.i  .1.1 
l|M||   ll.1|,Ull.l  .|ll    HllWA 

5*  79 

2| 

i 

* 

Will 

«r  -.  r- .-.  -• 

■M 

a. 

* 

1 .  •»  t  •  1  - 1  •  a 

n  i  =7  H  s  1; 

ill  Jr.4; 

S 

•IKmIxi 

'i% 

1   1-  li  3  i  .-.  — 

0)lti.tniii|i  |ii  M.iiipiv 
pio3      aiiiiuiXojiUlv 

|55^ 

1  t.  5.  ?.  r.  1:  r» 

1     !  V  ri  •» 

'x  1  i  S  5 

,Tl 

1 

*"          ( 

•C.IIMI 

u   U   i.   « 

'■)---   •-•: 

1  ]  n  !■-;  1-  —  r-  -.■  rj 

\\ 

'' 

•juoju<>n|u.v  »»ai!a.»A  y 

:m::.^;n 

... 

]  i  «-•  n  f  •  -i  •*  1  • 

M 

I,    1  T  ?.  :* 

[ 

•ooviiimi.i  ,j  tivsj  10 

!i??!??5§ 

•--1 

12    i 

aA|Hii|.i\  >   'w).i(i<i\,« 

JO     HUniUA    A.tllaJ.IIIJ 

iWA\ 

:'i 

i?,i'ii^  = 

I 

'*'*'""" 

W4 

•*■ 

■:»  "^  r.  ».  —    . 

■nil     1  -^  3  I-  I  —  -I 
■:i         .1-  i  1  r.  i  i-! 

5    i 

•i>.mi.>iin.H  nn^ 

IlllMj  Hlloilx."   I  itip'tl 

iigiiris^'  : 

^!  :^5^55^ 

=  !ip2 

*-'       1 

! 

il        i 

1  • 

§' 

•■  — 

— 

'm4.umI 

s?"^? 

I'l???^! 

^)mwm. 

1.   »-  r- 

f 

•p:A    A,)t|.u.iir.>   IKJ",!, 

!•    2 :;'  '.■) .:  V  5  ^' 

■=5  1 5  *-.  il  t;  >i  s  ^v' 

S  !iil 

1' 

, 

_1j:-".-_ 

[1 

-.,.,.« 

11 

I 

,                    •MJ.ll«\'(l   Sill 

•  :  if? 

^'?;n==i?f? 

..■:  II  •»  ■«.  a 

1    ' 

•linpilIJuU  111.(1  qtoJ.l 

t 

1 

:  I  :u'ff 

S  ,  S  i  r 
1 

^' 

i 
1 

l[ 

i;gi; 

|)| 

;5H^!lE 

i''??^ 

5 

i          -iisu  i>».in.i  J.iijio 

i 

'} 

i^Sii 

1 

a  :^';i 

£     1 

; 

s 

J 

i 

t 

Z%h 

S 
n 

1 

ti^i'i; 

"  ;i  ?  r  ;:•  -  S  t;  = 
s  ,  5^  jj  V  ~ .»  =  ri 

J-  ' 

1                 'HfB  P-ni'M 

*i  C"  «-  « 

?-  5  2  VT 

3 

5  9  ?i  i  =  .^ 
il 

,l!« 

S3;bll5ss 

1 

■'I«U 

Mnm 

B?H|H5 

P' 

i  ' 

.1- 

siil 

c 

1     f 

km^^ 

i 

i?-i 

1- 

:  .' 

:;:;:; 

>i      ;    ;    ; 

§      ' 

*     •     •     • 

::;::: 

;      1  :  1  :  1  1  : 

2     i  ;  : 

jt 

» 

">     111:1: 

t      '     *     •     •     1     t 

:  :  1  ! 
:  .  .  • 

^ 

''111' 

t     ;:::::: 

V.            Ill 

tf  ' 

.  .  ■  . 

.z 

■"     

s          .     ,     1 

«— 

•M                       •••»<»• 

a       •   •   • 

- 

','..'. 

$■ 

S     :  I  i  !  !  !  • 

.1     :  :  : 

>. 

'.'.'■'. 

- 

:''::: 

.5*     ;  ;  1  I  :  :  : 

«     ;  1  1 

i  i 

i 

;   ;    ;   : 

■fr 

^              

i  i  i : ;  M  ; 

«     •  i  1  :  I  ;  ; 

c      1:1 
"a      1  1  1 
^      111 

H     1 
Z 

f      •      '       • 

••;;;• 

=      1  ;  ;  !  1  1  1 

i<      1  .  . 

**^      111 
«      111 

■I'    i 

">       -.111! 

'>a^ 

!    ^    •    ! 

» 

:      .::::: 

S     ;::•;•: 

n    111 

'r^ 

I    I    •    I 

(J 



J. 

•    ■ 

5     M: 

^ 

•       .    .    . 

« 

■    •    *    • 

',',,'.'* 

^     *  ' 

•    •    •    1 

% 

4          

V           

i,  ! 

1    >    t    I 

'. 

L          

M      

U         •     '     • 

ti  1 

!    !    '    ! 

I- 

£      :  1  ;  1  1  ;  ; 

£      ;  :  : 

C  1 

'    '    I    ' 

'                 I'll* 

^         '    ;    •    ;    1    .    ■ 

*•            .      .      1 

41  1 

.... 

^ 

1*                      t.l 

>            .      .     • 

•"  1 

«  *-!  H  ."S 

*1 

'    .S.i'.5.3!5:S 

-<    iiSSpr^P 

<     ,tt:r- 

<  ] 

c  —  *»  ?^ 

^4    r^    *.^    fM 

<i  J,  4  j:  J.  .i 

S  ~  .•-  w  ..  '.^ 
7   t  T  t  T  I 

1—  —  fM 

1", 


AWARD    OF    TIIK    FIHHKRY    COMMISSION. 


1075 


3 

nn 

t 

t*  it  »•* 

- ' 

-■-of 

91 

»•  1   V-A:': 

n 

— 

ij 


i  1-  -r 
ft  1-  ^ 


-4 

•* 

•* 



.a 

^^ 

T. 

•« 

?4 

■4 

i:5 

:  s;es 

p.     E-'i 

*.     ■  "T  cr,  r^ 


i 


12  I  X'  Ti  p: 

;:  11  e  'T  •{ 


a  i>  X  TJ 

1-  I  —  *  I. 

—  I.  I*  Si 

-  I;  i  S  S 


v;  .ISif 


1.1 '  i  ?  t| 

i?   ,    r,  [-^  ,•-' 
■1    .-'."S 


•»•    ,1  o  -^  tt 


'?.  'iSSi 


sit? 


c 


i 

H 

B 


U      I 

e 

0) 


V  t*  —     <J 


i 


Q.  Tliiit  stutoinoiit  is  compiled  from  (Jnitod  States  trade  and  naviga- 
tiou  returns  ? — A.  Ves. 

\ly  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  The  last  tahh'  yon  have  put  in  shows  the  I'uitcd  States  exports  of 
lish  of  all  kin«ls,  cnnMl  and  fr«^sh,  to  fon^ij^n  countries  dnrin;,'  a  series ^of 
years  ? — A.   Ves,  with  the  excejitions  slated  tlnTein.  •"• 

i}.  What  do  you  mean  by  re-exports* — A.  Tliis  term  relates  to  [tisU 
lniport»'d  into  the  L'nitrd  States  and  exporteil  thence. 

i).  Where  are  tlirse  lish  exported  to  * — A.  To  forci;jn  countries. 

if.  Do  you  know  tt)  wiiat  countries  .' — A.  Yes  ;  the  returns  siiow  that. 

(}.  Have  you  nuMitioiu'd  tliis  in  the  stiitenuMit  ? — A.  No. 

i}.  Nave  you  put  anytliinj;  in  it  to  show  how  ntiicli  tisli  has  been  im- 
ported from  the  United  States  into  the  Dominion  i — A.  Yes;  1  havo^a 
statement  to  that  eHect.     (See  StatemtMit  S.) 

Q.  Have  you  charge  of  that  part  of  the  customs  statistics  which  will 
(jive  us  the  rt>ports  of  tlie  collector  of  customs  at  Port  ^Inlgrave  ? — A. 
There  is  no  such  port. 

(}.  lint  there  used  to  be  such  a  i)ort ' — A.  Yes. 

(}.  When  did  it  cease  to  exist  ? — A.  Thiee  or  four  years  since,  1  think. 

Q.  Was  that  before  or  sin<!e  1S71  i — A.  It  was  before  1871. 

Q.  We  have  had  put  in  here  some  returns  or  reports  of  the  collector 
of  customs  at  IVut  Mulyiave,  for  the  years  ISTi?  ami  1871,  showing;;  the 
nundicr  of  vessels  that  passei!  through  the  Strait  of  Canso;  do  you  know 
anything;  al)ont  this  matter? — A.  No;  Mul<;rave  is  a  subi)ort.  The  col- 
lector there  makes  h  .  reports  to  the  colleclur  at  (ruysborouyh,  through 
whom  we  receive  them. 

i).  You  yet  the  same  r»>turns  as  formerly,  thouuii  in  a  dilTerent  way  ? — 
A.  Y'es;  but  they  incbnie  otlier  information  besides  that  respecting  Port 
Midgrave. 

Tuesday,  September  18,  1877. 

Mr.  Thomson,  'ihe  case  for  the  Crown  is  closed  with  two  exceptions: 
One  of  our  pie<'es  of  testinniny  will  relate  to  the  expenses  involved  iu 
the  maintenance  of  light  houses,  buoys,  and  beacons,  »S:^c.,  which  are 
used  b>  the  Americans;  at  least,  they  get  the  benefit  and  advantage  of 
them  in  the  prosecution  of  these  fisheries,  and  we  contend  that  they 
should  pay  for  it.  The  witness  we  purpose  calling  in  this  relation  is 
not  here  at  present,  but  he  will  be  here,  1  expect,  in  a  few  days,  and  if 
no  objection  is  raised  to  it  on  the  other  side,  we  propose  then  to  call 
him.  The  same  course  is  intended  to  be  pursued  by  us  with  regard  to 
one  of  our  witnesses  from  Grand  Manan,  whose  family  is  now  very  ill, 
thus  preventing  his  j>resence. 

Mr.  Foster.  When  these  witnesses  arrive  you  can  introduce  them. 

Mr.  Thomson.  With  those  ex('ei)tions,  the  case  for  the  Crown  is 
close*). ;  and  1  suppose  that  any  other  witneijs  whom  wo  may  desire  to 
call  will  be  heard. 

Mr.  Foster.  We  will  grant  anything  for  which  there  is  reasonable 
excuse. 

Xo.  82. 

Friday,  September  28,  1877. 

William  H.  Smith,  residing  at  Cape  Sable  Island,  Nova  Scotia, 
master  ujariner  ami  fisherman,  cfilled  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of 
IJer  Jiritanuie  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 
Question.  How  many  years  have  you  resided  at  Cape  Sable  Island  f — 
Answer.  1  was  born  there,  and  it  always  was  my  home. 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-S) 


A 


k 


A 


f/. 


^ 


% 


1.0 


I.I 


I^I^B     |2.5 
|5o  "^     HMi^ 


IL25  IIIU 


<% 


VQ 


V^ 
K^^ 


«»..% 
^ 


V 


<% 


V 


/^ 


Hiotographic 

^Sciences 

Corporation 


\ 


iV 


^v 


•^ 


'%';v<' 


23  WIST  MAIN  STRUT 

WUSTH.N.Y.  MSSO 

(716)  873-4S03 


1076 


AWARD   OF  THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Plow  old  are  you  t — A.  Fifty-four  years. 

Q.  What  kind  of  llMh  are  caught  in  your  ueigkborhood  f — A.  Muck- 
erel,  berriog,  codfish,  haddock,  and  iMllock. 

Q.  With  regard  to  mackert. ,  are  they  fished  much  from  the  shore  by 
your  people  ? — A.  Altogether  from  the  shore. 

Q.  Uow  far  from  the  shore  f — A.  From  !M)  fathoms  or  180  yards  from 
the  shore  to  one  mile,  perhaps;  no  further  than  one  mile. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  an  idea  of  what  quantity  is  expo  ^od  from  there 
every  year.  You  live  at  Harrington  ? — A.  in  the  township  of  Barring- 
ton  t 

Q.  What  quantity  of  mackerel  is  exported  from  the  town  of  Barring- 
ton  f — A.  About  8,(HHt  barrels  last  year. 

Q.  How  many  boats  ars  employed  f — A.  About  200,  as  near  as  I  can 
recollect. 

Q.  You  catch  them  in  trn|)R  besides  T — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  fish  with  boats  or  traps  ? — A.  With  traps. 

Q.  How  far  are  >our  traps  from  the  shore  f— A.  90  fathoms  or  180 
yards. 

Q.  Your  fishing  this  year  is  pretty  good  f — A.  Middling. 

Q.  What  quantity  have  you  ctinght? — A.  9Wi  barrels. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  mackereliiKhing  in  vessels? — A.  Yes ;  I  have 
been  six  seasons,  summer  seasons. 

Q.  Were  you  in  American  or  British  vessels? — A.  The  first  season  I 
was  in  an  American  vessel,  the  other  five  I  was  in  British  vesst'ls. 

Q.  What  was  the  first  year! — A.  1845. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  f — A.  From  ott"  Delaware  River  down  to  Mount 
Desert. 

Q.  Did  you  fish  in  an  Amorlran  vessel  in  the  gulf  ?— -A.  No. 

Q.  In  British  v«»ssels  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  In  what  y v-ars ?— A.  In  18.5i,  1.S52,  1.S.">3,  and  l.S.'>4. 

Q.  Off  what  shores  did  you  oateh  your  fish? — A.  Mostly  off  the  north- 
vest  coast  of  Cape  Breton. 

Q.  Did  the  rest  of  the  fleet,  or  any  of  the  fleet,  fish  with  you  in  the 
8ame  waters  ? — A.  Altogether,  British  and  American. 

Q.  How  many  were  there  in  the  fleet  f — A.  About  2.'»0  sail,  Britisli 
»nd  American  vessels  altogether.  W^e  fished  at  the  northeast  side  of 
Prince  Edward  Island  also. 

Q.  At  what  distance  from  the  shore  did  you  fish  off  those  coasts  ? — 
A.  We  flsheil  from  half  a  mile  to  eight  or  nine  miles  out,  {Mirhaps. 

Q.  And  what  iroportion  of  the  catch  made  by  you  was  taken  within 
three  miles  of  the  shore  f — A.  Mostly  all  of  ours  was  taken  within  one 
mile  from  the  shore. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  catching  your  fish  from  one  mile  to  eight  miles 
off,  do  you  mean  your  vessel  or  the  fieet  generally  f — A.  The  tieet  gen- 
«rally.    We  all  fished  together. 

Q.  Give  the  names  of  the  four  vessels  you  were  in  f — A.  Pearl,  Dele* 
gate,  Isabella  Maria,  Glad  Tidings. 

Q.  When  were  you  last  in  Glad  Tidings?— A.  1873. 

Q.  Where  did  you  fish  ? — A.  In  North  Bay. 

Q*  That  is  marked  Aspee  Bay? — A.  Yes;  and  off  Prince  Edward 
Ifllaud  and  Cape  Bretou. 

Q.  Bow  far  did  you  fish  off  shore  there  t — A.  As  close  inshore  as  we 
could  get. 

Q.  Was  the  Glad  Tidings  a  British  or  American  vessel  f— A.  British. 

Q.  Was  she  a  hand  liner  or  a  purse-seiner  f — A.  We  used  both,  but 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1077 


:hom8  or  180 


we  did  not  catch  any  mackerel  with  the  seine,  because  thoy  were  too 
close  inshore. 

Q.  Did  you  take  all  yonr  catch  inshore  ! — A.  All  close  in. 

Q.  Within  what  distance! — A.  Within  a  quarter  of  a  mile,  princi- 
pally.    We  anchored  the  vessel  as  near  the  shore  as  we  could. 

Q.  Have  you  found  there  has  been  a  change  in  the  habits  of  mack- 
erel with  regard  to  the  distance  they  are  caught  from  the  shore  within 
the  past  twenty  years  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  !:•   vhat  respect! — A.  They  ar?  more  inshore. 

Q.  When  you  Mere  there,  in  1873,  in  the  Ghid  Tidings,  wore  other 
vessels  there  lM'si»les ! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Many !— A.  Quite  a  Heet.    50,  r»(),  or  70  sail. 

Q.  American  vessels  ! — A.  Americans  almost  altogether,  very  few 
liritish  vessels. 

1^.  Yon  say  yon  were  within  a  quarter  of  a  mile  from  shore? — A. 
They  caught  them  where  we  caught  ours.    Wo  all  lished  together. 

Q.  In  1873,  am  I  correct  in  stating  you  did  not  go  oil"  shore  beyond 
three  miles  ! — A.  We  tried,  but  we  »lid  not  catch  any  mackerel. 

Q.  As  far  as  your  knowledge  goes,  were  any  mackerel  caught  out- 
side in  1873! — A.  We  did  not  know  of  any;  not  by  the  tieet  we  were 
llshing  with. 

Q.  With  regard  to  halibut  Ashing,  is  there  any  halibut  fishing  carried 
on  near  Cape  Sable  Island  ! — A.  Not  by  British  people.  The  Americans 
fish  there. 

Q.  Every  year  ? — A.  Every  year  regularly. 

Q.  Wluit  is  the  number  of  the  fleet  which  comes  there  to  flsh  for  hal- 
ibut T — A.  I  have  seen  as  high  as  i)  sail  at  one  time.  I  should  suppose 
there  was  from  40  to  00  sail. 

Q.  Are  the  vessels  cml-tishers  at  other  times  of  the  year ! — A.  I  think 
they  are.  During  the  latter  part  of  May  and  June  they  flsh  for  halibut, 
then  they  flsh  for  cod  until  October,  jiid  then  for  halibut. 

Q.  In  the  spring  and  fall  they  flsh  ior  halibut,  and  in  the  summer  for 
co<l! — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ! — A.  On  Cape  Sable  Island 

Q.  Can  you  see  the  fleet  Ashing  for  halibut!— A.  Yes. 

ii.  Are  they  right  within  Right  from  your  door  f — A.  Yes ;  I  can  count 
the  men  on  deck  with  an  ordinary  glass.  I  counted  at  one  time  0  sail  at 
anchor  fishing  there. 

Q.  Do  they  take  the  halibut  they  catch  to  market  salted  or  fresh  !— 
A.  They  take  them  fresh.  Some  put  them  in  water,  others  in  ice. 
They  do  not  salt  any,  I  think. 

Q,  Uow  long  do  vesKols  or  the  fleet  remain  there ! — A.  About  two 
weeks  are  called  a  trip.    After  that  they  fro  home. 

Q.  Uow  far  from  the  slv.)re  are  those  halibut  caught ! — A.  From  one 
mile  to  two  and  a  half  or  three  miles  perhaps,  ott". 

Q.  They  are  caught  inshore  f— A.  Near  my  place  they  flsh  within 
one  mile  and  a  half  of  the  shore,  in  18  fathoms  of  water. 

Q.  Is  there  a  bay  called  Lobster  Hay  there  !— A.  Yes. 

Q.  When  you  s|)eak  of  having  si^n  them,  is  that  where  you  saw 
them  f— A.  A  little  to  the  southward  of  that— off  where  I  live. 

Q.  They  also  flsh  in  that  bay ! — A.  I  have  passed  there  in  vessels  and 
seen  them  Ashing  in  that  bay. 

Q.  Do  the  |>eople  in  your  vicinity  hire  on  board  of  American  vessels 
and  flsh  in  them  t — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  would  have  an  opportunity  of  hearing  from  themf — A. 
Yea. 


1078 


AWABb   OF  THE  FISHEBT  COMMISSION. 


Q.  You  have  heard  that  from  them  f — A.  Yes.  They  often  go  as  mas- 
ters of  vessels. 

Q.  You  have  heard  it  from  nei(;hbors  of  yours  f — A.  Yea. 

Q.  How  do  they  fish,  with  haud-lines  or  trawls  f — A.  With  trawls  for 
halibut  altogether. 

Q.  Where  do  they  get  bait  ? — A.  In  the  harbors  there,  from  our  peo- 
ple. 

Q.  What  wouhl  you  place  the  fleet  at  that  frequents  that  vicinity! — 
A.  For  halibut  fishing,  I  think  from  40  to  GO  sail  would  be  a  fair  aver- 
age. 

Q.  They  come  and  go;  yon  say  you  have  seen  nine  at  one  time.  Do 
you  meau  to  say  that  a  different  fleet  comes  along  f — A.  I  think  so,  be- 
cause there  are  some  there  all  the  time. 

Q.  Are  you  perfectly  positive  about  it? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  You  speak  from  the  evidence  of  your  own  eyes? — A.  I  speak  from 
my  own  knowledge,  not  from  hearsay  at  all. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  Those  vessels  you  have  observed  with  a  glass  from  your  house,  so 
that  you  could  count  the  men  on  deck,  did  you  know  them  to  be  Amer- 
icans always,  all  of  them? — A.  I  know  some  of  them  to  ba  Americans 
by  the  fact  that  I  have  been  on  board  of  them  and  supplied  them  with 
bait. 

Q.  When  you  go  on  board  to  supply  them  with  bait  you  can  tell  their 
national  character? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  But  when  you  are  looking  at  them  through  a  glass,  can  you  tell 
tiieir  national  character  ? — A.  I  can  form  a  pretty  good  opiuioii.  They 
fly  the  American  flag. 

Q.  While  they  are  fishing? — A.  Frequently.  When  they  come  in  for 
bait,  they  always  fly  it. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  signal  that  they  want  bait  ? — A.  Not  exactly ;  they  don't 
signal  for  bait. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  an  American  vessel  floats  its  colors  while 
it  is  lyingto  fishing  ? — A.  They  do  very  often. 

Q.  If  there  is  any  need  in  showing  their  colors,  no  doubt  they  will  do 
it  ? — A.  We  have  been  in  the  habit  of  doing  it  when  we  get  a  good  catch 
of  fish. 

Q.  You  run  up  the  national  flag  when  you  have  a  good  catch  ? — A. 
We  run  up  some  flag. 
AQ.  Do  you  run  up  the  national  flag  ? — A.  The  one  we  generally  use. 

Q.  When  you  have  not  the  national  flag,  what  do  you  substitute  f — 
A.  We  substitute  the  next  best. 

Q.  And  if  j'ou  don't  have  a  good  ciitch  •  -A.  We  don't  use  any  flag. 

Q.  Is  it  the  same  with  those  vessels  oft"  there  of  which  you  have 
spoken  ? — A.  They  mostly  always  hoist  their  flag  when  they  come  into 
port. 

Q.  If  an  American  vessel  is  lying  off  fishing,  does  she  fly  the  na- 
tional colors  ? — A.  Sometimes  they  do ;  not  always. 

Q.  Not  by  any  nciins  always  t — A.  Not  always. 

Q.  I  don't  mean  when  coming  into  port,  or  when  they  have  had  extraor- 
dinary luck,  but  is  it  anything  like  the  custom  to  fly  the  national  flag 
when  the  fleet  is  lyiug-to  fishing  7 — A.  I  don't  think  it  is. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  the  national  character  of  those  vessels,  except 
when  3'ou  have  been  on  board  and  except  when  they  have  come  into  |)ort 
and  you  have  watched  them  out? — A.  I  see  them  in  the  harbor  with 
thefar  flags  up. 


AWARD    OF   THE   FISUEKY   COMMISSION. 


1079 


n  go  as  mas- 


in  tell  their 


jiitch  f — A. 


Q.  But  if  tbey  do  not  come  into  harbor,  how  do  you  know  the  na- 
tional character  of  the  vessels  ? — A.  I  coald  only  tell  from  appearances. 

Q.  Are  there  no  British  vessels  fishing  for  halibut  off  your  coast?— 
A.  r  don't  know  of  any  British  vessels  fitting  out  to  fish  for  halibut. 

Q.  From  where! — A.  From  anywhere. 

Q.  Inshore  or  out  f — A.  Not  to  fish  for  halibut. 

Q.  Don't  they  fish  for  nnlibut  f — A.  Not  that  I  know  of. 

Q.  You  never  knew  of  a  British  vessel  fitting  out  to  fish  for  halibut  ?— 
A.  No. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  never  know  a  British  vessel 
to  go  out  to  fish  for  halibut  ? — A.  I  never  knew  of  one. 

Q.  There  are  not  many  British  Canadian  or  provincial  vessels  which 
now  go  out  to  fish  at  all  ? — A.  Yes ;  there  is  a  large  fleet. 

Q.  What  was  the  number  of  Nova  Scotia  vessels,  decked  fore  and 
aft — not  boats — which  were  fishing  for  mackerel  when  you  began  to  know 
about  them  ! — A.  I  cannot  say ;  but  the  number  was  very  small. 

Q.  And  then  they  increased  in  nuiuber  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  U[>  to  w  hat  time  f — A.  I  do  not  know  but  that  they  are  increasing 
yet. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  the  number  of  vessels  which  has  been 
fishing  for  mackerel  anywhere  in  Dominion  waters  has  very  much 
decreased,  and  that  the  fishermen  have  taken  to  boat-fishing  instead? — 
A.  I  could  not  say;  the  eastern  people  in  Prince  Edward  Island  and 
Cape  Breton  have  taken  to  boats. 

Q.  They  have  very  largely  left  off  vessel-fishing  and  taken  to  boats  ? — 
A.  I  think  that  they  have  left  off  going  iu  American  vessels,  and  have 
gone  fishing  in  their  own  boats. 

Q.  They  have  left  off  building  and  buying  vessels,  and  sending  the 
larger  class  of  vessels  fishing? — A.  I  could  not  say  that. 

Q.  In  what  depth  of  water  did  these  vessels  you  speak  of,  and  which 
you  watched  more  or  less,  fish  ? — A.  In  this  one  particulr.r  place,  near 
where  I  live,  they  fish  in  about  eighteen  (iithoms  of  water. 

Q.  For  halibut  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  far  from  thn  shore? — A.  Not  over  one  and  a  half  miles  from 
an  island  called  Green  Island ;  about  one  and  a  half  miles  from  it. 

Q.  In  what  direction  ? — A.  About  southwest  by  west,  I  think. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that,  as  a  general  thing,  a  depth  of  eighteen  fathoms 
of  water  is  to  be  found  within  one  mile  or  one  and  a  half  miles  of  your 
shore  t — A.  There  is  a  place  with  a  depth  of  eighteen  fathoms  about  one 
and  a  half  miles  from  the  shore,  but  the  soundings  are  generally  broken. 
The  water  is  deep  and  shoal,  the  bottom  being  ridgy,  and  this  is  the  deep 
spot  where  they  catch  halibut,  which  like  deep  water;  this  is  near  and 
southwest  by  west  of  Green  Island.  Perhaps  you  may  not  have  the 
soundings,  but  that  is  the  de[)th  of  the  water. 

Q.  Having  examined  the  soundings  marked  on  the  chart,  do  you  dis- 
pute the  correctness  of  the  chart  ? — A.  1  do  if  eighteen  fathoms  is  not 
marked  there.    I  can  find  that  depth  within  one  and  a  half  miles  of- 
Qreen  Island,  and  I  can  find  fourteen  fathoms  inside  of  this  island. 

Q.  What  figure  is  this  which  I  now  show  you? — A.  20;  but  that  is 
wrong.    There  is  no  twenty  fathoms  there. 

Q.  Look  at  the  chart  and  see  if  you  can  find  one  place  within  three 
miles  of  the  coast  where  is  to  be  found  the  depth  you  mentioned ;  you 
give  it  up? — A.  No ;  I  will  not. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  you  cannot  find  eighteen  fathoms,  unless  it  be 
in  a  hole,  within  three  miles  of  your  island  ? — A.  No ;  I  can  find  eighteen 
ffithoms  iu  plenty  of  places  within  that  distance. 


1080 


AWABD   OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


Q.  How  do  you  account  for  this  not  being  montionod  on  tlie  ubart?— 
A.  I  do  not  know  why  it  is,  I  am  aure. 

Q.  There  are  small  holes  with  such  depth  in  that  neighborhood  f— A. 
No ;  but  quite  large  phices,  where  you  can  sot  a  good  long  trawl. 

Q.  But  there  are  none  of  eighteen  fathoms ;  the  distance  put  down  on 
the  chart  within  the  three-uiile  limit  there  all  vary  from  Hve  to  tifteeti 
fathoms  f — A.  They  are  not  correct ;  1  would  not  trust  to  these  sound- 
ings.   I  would  go  by  my  own  soundings  and  not  use  the  chart. 

Q.  You  mean  that  vessels  go  to  particular  spots  where  there  is  a  dei)tli 
of  eighteen  fathoms;  you  admit  the  general  correctness  of  these  sound- 
ings T — A.  On  some  lines  they  are  correct,  and  on  some  they  are  not  to 
be  depended  on.  Fishermen  do  not  run  by  the  chart  when  near  tlui 
shore.  In  some  places  there  is  a  depth  of  twenty-tive  fathoms;  I  have 
sonndeil  them  at  ditt'erent  times. 

Q.  Do  the  vessels  which  you  call  American  lie  at  one  place  or  move 
about  ? — A.  Tlioy  shift  about. 

Q.  You  think  that  they  drift  from  one  deep  spot  to  another?;— A. 
They  do  generally  look  for  deep  water,  and  where  they  tish  they  come 
to  anchor,  when  taking  halibut. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  the  name  of  any  of  these  vessels  that  you  say 
have  fished  within  that  distance  of  the  shore  in  eighteen  fathoms  of 
water? — A.  1  can  give  the  name  of  one,  the  Sarah  E.  Pile,  Captain 
Swctt,  of  Gloucester.    I  supplied  him  this  summer  with  2,8<)0  mackerel. 

By  Mr.  Foster : 

Q.  Is  he  a  halibut  Usher? — A.  I  think  he  fishes  for  halibut. 

By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  What  year  was  that  ? — A.  This  present  year.  Swett  is  a  neighbor 
of  mine. 

Q.  This  vesst-1  then  is  under  the  command  of  a  Nova  Scotia  master  i 
— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Is  he  a  British  subject  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Uow  do(>s  he  come  to  lie  in  command  of  an  American  vessel  ? — A. 
One-half  of  the  Cape  Ann  fieet  is  commanded  by  men  who  come  from 
my  neighborhood,  and  who  have  lived  at  Cape  Ann  for  some  time. 

Q.  Just  enough  to  get  their  papers,  I  8up]>ose  ? — A.  I  don't  know  how 
they  manage  that.  1  sold  the  2,800  mackerel  on  the  5th  of  last  June, 
for  bait. 

Q.  You  have  with  you  a  memorandum  concerning  this  vessel  to  which 
you  sold  these  mackerel  t — A.  Ves. 

Q.  What  did  th'W  do  with  mackerel  T — A.  They  put  the  fish  in  ice  on 
board.    I  don't  know  what  became  of  the  latter  afterwards. 

Q.  What  did  the  vessel  do  then  f — A.  She  went  out  to  fish. 

Q.  Did  you  see  her  do  so  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  she  continue  fishing  with  L',HOO  fresh  mackerel  on  board  ? — A. 
The  captain  took  them  for  i)art  of  hid  bait.  We  did  not  supply  hem 
altogether  with  bait. 

Q.  Did  you  go  on  board  of  her  after  she  left  the  harbor  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  she  caught  ? — A.  No. 

Q,  Whether  cod  or  mackerel  f — A.  No. 

Q.  It  might  have  been  cod  f— A.  Yes. 

Q  Why  did  yon  eay  it  was  halibut? — A.  I  say  that  we  supplied  him 
with  bait,  but  I  do  not  know  that  she  caught  halibut. 

Q.  As  to  those  vessels,  can  you  tell  with  your  glass  at  that  distance 
whether  what  they  haul  on  board  is  halibut  or  cod  ? — A.  I  do  not  know 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY  COMMISSION. 


1081 


;he  chftrt?— 


ace  or  move 


what  they  catch,  but  they  aay  that  they  come  there  to  flsh  for  halibnt* 
I  frequently  converse  with  them. 

Q.  Yon  cannot  tell  of  a  certainty  what  is  the  national  character  of 
resHels  Hshing  off  there  with  no  colors  Hying,  which  do  not  come  into 
the  harbor;  and  then  you  cannot  tell  whether  they  catch  co<l  or  halibut 
unless  you  communicate  with  them  ? — A.  1  frequently  converse  with  the 
men,  but  1  do  not  know  the  names  of  the  vessels. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  name  of  any  other  vessel  besides  the  one  you 
mentioned? — A.  No;  but  1  remember  the  name  of  one  other  master. 
It  is  Ireland,  I  think.    He  is  in  command  of  a  New  London  vessel. 

Q.  Is  he  a  British  subject  f — A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  He  was  in  a  New  London  vessel  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Was  he  in  the  harbor? — A.  Y'es;  frequently,  to  get  bait  and  ice. 

Q.  Can  you  remember  the  name  of  a  \AiW.e  from  which  any  other 
vessel  came? — A.  All  I  know  about  it  I  have  told  you.  I  cannot  re- 
member any  other  name. 

Q.  Can  you  remember  from  what  port  she  sailed  ? — A.  I  only  know 
what  I  have  been  tohl  about  the  vessel  from  New  London. 

Q.  Where  were  the  other  vessels  from,  as  tar  as  you  know  ? — A.  I 
have  been  ou  board  of  iiloucester  vessels. 

Q.  Where  were  they  lying  f — A.  In  what  we  call  Shag  Harbor,  where 
tb-y  get  ice. 

i^.  Are  you  in  the  habit  of  boarding  them  when  they  are  oft"  fish- 
ing ? — A.  No;  but  in  the  harbor. 

Q.  And  then  you  talk  with  the  men  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  us  the  place  from  which  any  vessel  came,  excepting 
the  two  you  huve  mentioned  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  the  names  of  any 
others. 

Q.  But  some  came  from  (tloucester  ? — A.  Several  did  so,  I  know. 

Q.  And  you  learned  whether  they  are  fishing  for  cod  or  halibut  from 
the  vessels  that  come  hito  the  harbor  ? — A.  I  learn  it  from  the  men 
themselves  on  board  of  the  vessels.  You  will  understand  that  when 
they  come  over  there  they  first  come  in  the  harl>or  to  get  ice  and  bait, 
and  then  we  learn  where  they  are  from  and  what  thei**  business  is;  that 
is  how  I  procure  this  information. 

Q.  Do  all  of  them  come  into  your  harbor? — A.  Asa  general  thing 
thej  do.  They  come  there  for  ice  and  bait,  because  they  can  get  ice 
cheaper  there  than  at  home. 

Q.  Do  they  not  bring  their  bait  with  them  ? — A.  No. 

<i.  They  bring  none  with  them  ? — A.  I  have  hsirdlyever  known  them 
to  do  so.  In  fact,  they  cannot  get  bait  a^  home ;  it  is  not  to  be  had, 
unless  they  take  salt  bait,  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  How  long  does  it  take  tluMn  to  come  there  from  Eastport,  Glouces* 
tor,  and  Portland  ? — A.  From  Gloucester,  30  hours  is  a  fair  run. 

Q.  Can  they  not  get  bait  to  live  that  length  of  time  ? — A.  I  do  not 
know  where  they  are  to  get  it  at  home. 

Q.  Is  any  ice  to  be  found  in  New  England  f — A.  Yes,  plenty  of  it ; 
but  they  prefer  ours,  some  way  or  other. 

Q.  Is  there  no  bait  to  be  found  in  New  England,  which  will  last  a 
fortnight? — A.  They  do  not  get  it  there,  or  else  they  would  not  come 
to  us  for  it.  We  have  an  ice-house  which  puts  up  1,300  or  1,400  rous  of 
ice,  aud  over  one-twelfth  of  it  is  taken  by  the  American  fishermen. 

Q.  \Vhat  l)ecome8  of  the  rest  of  it  ? — A.  The  British  take  some  of  it^ 
and  the  balance  runs  away. 

Q.  What  kind  of  British  ?— A.  Nova  Scotian. 

Q.  What  do  they  fish  for  f— A.  Cod. 


1082 


AWABD  OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Where  f—A.  OffHbore. 

ij.  They  fish  for  co<l  and  the  AiucricaiiH  for  halibut  f — A.  Y«h. 

Q.  You  kuow  that  this  in  the  case  f — A.  The  Aiuoricaii8  say  that  they 
fish  for  halibut 

Q.  Do  not  the  British  vessels  tiab  for  halibut  f — A.  We  have  never 
had  a  British  vessel  fit  out  to  catch  halibut  to  my  kuowledge.  The 
Americans  fish  inshore  and  our  vessels  ofi'  shore. 

Q.  IIow  far  ofl'f— A.  We  go  off  20  and  1*5  miles  to  fish. 

Q.  Then  the  cod-fishery  is  an  otV  shore  fishery  ? — A.  It  is  an  inshore 
and  off  shore  fishery ;  inshore  the  oi)en  boats  fls^h  and  offshore  the  vessels. 

Q.  Why  do  not  the  vessels  fish  inshore  if  plenty  of  cod  are  to  be  found 
there  ? — A.  They  leave  that  fishery  to  the  old  men  and  to  those  who  are 
not  capable  of  going  outside  to  fish. 

Q.  Do  you  really  think  that  this  is  the  reason  for  it  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  if  they  found  plenty  of  cod  inshore  thoy 
would  fish  there  f — A.  No.    The  young  men  like  to  go  out  to  fish. 

Q.  I  am  perfectly  willing  to  let  you  have  as  high  an  opinion  of  your 
own  |)eople  an  you  like,  but  if  they  found  more  cod  inshore  than  offshore 
would  they  not  come  in  to  catch  them  *. — A.  They  do  not  consider  it  an 
honorable  thing  for  a  large  schooner  to  come  inshore  and  fish  among  the 
o|)en  boats.  We  consider  that  it  is  the  privilege  of  the  open  boats  to 
fish  inshore.  The  vessels  do  not  think  that  it  is  right  to  take  advan- 
tage of  this  privilege,  and  so  the  decked  vessels  fish  ott'  shore. 

i).  Then  the  American  schooners  do  not  come  inside  to  catch  fish 
among  the  boats  T — A.  No ;  not  generally. 

Q.  Do  they  not  res|>ect  the  privilege  you  mention  ? — A.  I  think  it  is 
very  likely  that  thoy  do,  because  we  have  our  iH)ople  in  them. 

Q.  That  is  because  they  are  commanded  by  British  subjects  7 — A. 
Over  one-half  of  them  are  so.  I  think. 

Q.  From  1851  to  18.~>-1  you  were  fishing  off  Cape  Breton  and  other 
places  T— A.  Yes,  and  Prince  Edward  Island. 

Q.  In  British  vessels  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  there  a  great  niany  British  vessels  fishing  there  then? — A. 
I  think  not ;  there  was  something  like  seventy  sail  of  British  vessels  at 
these  places  at  the  time. 

Q.  Has  there  been  anything  like  that  number  there  since  f — A.  I  do 
not  know  what  the  number  has  been  since. 

Q.  You  have  heard,  have  you  not? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Y'ou  have  heartl  that  the  number  of  British  vesst^ls  lias  since  then 
very  largely  diminished  ? — A.  1  do  not  know  whether  this  is  the  case  or 
not. 

Q.  But  you  have  heard  so  ? — A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  have.  I  know 
that  our  vessels  from  Lunenburg,  after  the  cod-fishing  season  is  over, 
generally  go  to  North  Bay  for  mackerel. 

Q.  In  1873,  you  fished  off  Cai)e  Bretou  and  Prince  Edward  Island? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  you  anchored  that  year  within  one  quarter  of  a  mile  of  the 
Prince  Edward  Island  shore  ? — A.  No ;  this  was  off  the  (Jape  Breton 
shore. 

Q.  Yon  never  "tuchored  within  one-quarter  of  a  mile  of  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island  t — A.  No ;  the  water  there  is  very  shallow,  and  it  is  not  a 
pleasant  coast  to  anchor  on  ;  I  now  refer  to  the  northeast  side. 

Q.  It  would  not  do  to  anchor  there  except  in  mid-summer,  I  sup- 
pose f — A.  No ;  you  want  to  keep  a  good  lookout  there. 

Q.  What  was  the  tonnage  of  yonr  vessel  t— A.  In  1873,  the  vessel  I 
was  in  was  of  53  tons. 


AWARD  OF   THE   F18HERY   COMMISSION. 


1083 


I  aud  other 


Island  1 — 


Q.  Do  you  know  what  it  wan  by  the  Ameiicaii  syHtem  ? — A.  It  was  53. 

(j.  Then  the  present  American  system  is  the  same  with  yours  ! — A. 
I  think  so. 

Q.  When  you  wonhl  anchor  within  a  quarter  of  a  mile  of  the  coast  it 
would  be  on  a  Imld  shore? — A.  It  was  in  12  feet  of  water;  the  viSiel 
only  drew  8  feet  in  ballast. 

Q.  Then,  with  a  small  vessel  of  50  tons,  you  would  not  wish  to  anchor 
within  a  quarter  ot  a  mile  of  the  shore  ? — A.  I  would  go  as  near  it  as  I 
dated  if  I  could  catch  mackerel  there. 

i}.  And  you  would  dare  to  do  ho  on  such  a  shore  as  that  of  Gaite  Bre- 
ton f — A.  We  were  ilsliin);  oil  Sydney  a  jfootl  deal  of  the  time. 

Q.  But  off  parts  of  the  Cai)e  Breton  shore  you  would  not  liko  to  do 
sot — A.  There  parts  o(  it  are  very  ragK^Hl,  but  a  quarter  of  a  mile  oft" 
from  it  affords  safe  anchorage  anywhere  around  it  for  a  vessel  of  that 
size. 

Q.  I  think  you  said  that  after  your  vessels  have  done  cod-fishing  they 
go  into  the  gulf  for  mackerel  i — A.  The  vessels  on  the  western  shore, 
from  liunenburg  and  (Queen's  County,  do  so. 

Q.  Are  you  well  acquainted  with  those  places  and  their  fishermen  ? — 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  Lunenburg  niackerel-fisshiug  vessels  now  go  into  the 
bay  for  mackerel ! — A.  I  could  nut  say  how  many  have  done  so  this 
year. 

Q.  But  in  previous  years  ? — A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Can  you  give  the  number  for  any  time  within  the  last  five  years! — 
A.  I  ««ouUi  not  pretend  to  state  the  number,  but  suppose  that  quite  a 
litrge  tleet  goes  from  Lunenbin-g. 

Q.  Can  you  risk  any  number  which  you  are  willing  to  stand  by! — A. 
I  would  not  like  to  do  so,  because  I  could  only  give  a  rough  calcula- 
tion. 

Q.  I  wouhl  like  to  have  it  ? — A.  I  could  not  come  perhaps  within  one- 
half  of  the  real  number.  I  do  not  know  wiiiat  number  of  vessels  from 
Lunenburg  is  engaged  in  the  fishing  business. 

Q.  How  many  come  to  the  Bay  of  Saint  Lawrence  after  they  are  done 
rod  fishing? — A.  I  think  that  the  large  portion  of  these  vessels  do  so. 
They  fish  northeast  of  J'rince  Edward  Island,  at  the  Magdalen  Islands, 
and  around  there  in  the  autumn  ;  also  about  the  northwest  coast  of 
Cape  Breton. 

Q.  The  Magdalen  Islands  are  a  good  deal  frequented  by  them  in  the 
autumn,  when  the  mackerel  are  coming  down  on  their  way  out  of  the 
bay  f — A.  Considerably  ;  yes. 

Q.  Have  you  this  year  seen  any  vessels  which  you  knew  to  be 
Gloucester  vessels  and  which  you  boarded  iu  the  harbors  f— A.  I  have 
passed  them. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  word  "  Gloucester  "  on  their  sterna  f — A.  Yes. 

Q.  How  many  Gloucester  vessels  have  you  been  on  board  of  this 
year ! — A.  I  could  not  say  that  I  have  been  on  board  of  more  than  one. 

Q.  Which  one  ? — A.  The  one  I  gave  you  the  name  of,  under  command 
of  Captain  Swett. 

Q.  Were  you  on  board  of  any  other  Gloucester  vessel  this  year  ? — A. 
No,  not  that  I  recollect  of;  but  1  passed  them  at  anchor  this  year  iu 
the  harbor. 

Q.  How  many  Gloucester  vessels  have  you  passed  besides  the  one  you 
have  named  ? — A.  I  cannot  tell  exactly  how  many,  but  I  think  there 
were  12  or  15. 

Q.  Lying  iu  your  harbor  ? — A.  Yes. 


1084 


AWARD  OF  THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Did  you  speak  to  tliein  f — A.  Not  pnrticniarly  that  I  kuow  of.  I 
did  not  go  on  b«)nrd  of  them. 

Q.  Then  you  «lo  not  know  i)o»itivoly  where  they  are  from  f — A.  No, 
aave  from  hearsay. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  what  they  caught  when  tliey  went  off  to  sea  f— 
A.  No. 

Q.  Do  you  know  why  it  ia,  if  there  is  good  halibut  fliiliing  so  near  your 
shore,  that  your  |>cople  do  not  go  into  it  f — A.  I  think  the  rea.so:i  is 
because  we  aave  no  market  for  fresh  halibut. 

Q.  Where  is  such  a  market  f — A.  In  the  United  States — at  Boston, 
Ca|)e  Ann,  «S:c. 

Q.  How  could  they  be  taken  there  ft-esh  f — A.  In  ice  or  in  water  in 
smacks  in  the  wells.  The  New  London  vesHiUs  are  mostly  nil  sniackH 
with  wells  of  salt  water,  iiloucester  vessels  preserve  them,  I  think,  in 
ice. 

Q.  Why  cannot  .vour  people  do  the  same  thing  f — A.  I  suppose  we 
could  do  so  if  we  had  vessels  suitable  for  the  business. 

Q.  Are  your  vessels  not  suitable  to  carry  them  in  ice  ! — A.  O  yes. 

Q.  Why  don't  you  do  it  ? — A.  There  is  not  enterprise  enough.  I  do 
not  know  what  other  reason  there  is  for  it. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  Are  the  fish  kept  alive  in  the  wells  f — A.  Y«8. 
By  Mr.  Dana : 

Q.  And  you  have  none  of  these  smacks  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  You  have  never  tried  them  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  Have  not  those  smacks  l>een  rarely  seen  during  the  last  Ave  years  t 
— A.  No.  I  think  that  a  considerable  number  of  New  London  smacks 
are  cruising  yet.  I  do  not  know  of  any  belonging  to  Gloucester  or  Cape 
Cod.  1  contine  them  altogether  to  New  Jjouilon.  I  have  no  recollection 
of  ever  having  seeu  any  (rioucester  smacks,  or  any  from  any  place  ex- 
cept New  London.  Still  there  may  be  smacks  which  come  from  other 
places  of  which  I  have  no  knowledge. 

•     Q.  Are  these  halibut  catchers  which  you  have  seen  off  your  coast  gen- 
erally small  vessels? — A.  They  are  from  50  to  70  tons  burden. 

Q.  You  do  not  have  vessels  of  00,  LOO,  and  120  tons  fishing  there  T— 
A.  I  do  not  think  it. 

Q.  Are  most  of  the  vessels  which  fish  oft*  there  smacks  T — A.  No. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  them  are  smacks  f — A.  A  small  proiwrtion,  I 
think,  New  Londoners.  The  largest  {xirtion  of  the  fleet  is  composed  ot 
Cape  Ann  vessels,  varying  from  50  to  70  tons. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  any  vessels  there  from  New  London  which 
were  not  smacks  f — A.  I  do  not  recollect  of  any,  but  there  may  have 
been  some.  I  think  it  is  likely  that  there  have  been  vessels  besides 
smacks  there  from  New  London. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  believe  a  majority  of  the  fleet  fishes  there  for 
halibut  or  cod,  and  that  most  of  them  are  from  Gloucester  f — A.  Yes; 
the  majority  of  the  halibut  fleet  is  from  Gloucester,  I  think. 

Q.  And  the  rest  are  from  New  London  f — A.  I  think  so,  principally. 
There  may  be,  however,  a  few  from  the  State  of  Maine. 

Q.  Do  they  send  any  smacks  from  Maine  f — A.  I  do  not  thipk  that 
they  do ;  I  do  not  know  of  any  coming  from  there. 

Q.  Yoa  attribute  the  failure  of  your  people — assuming  that  you  are 
right — to  catch  halibut  and  take  them  fresh  to  the  States,  to  lack  of 
enterprise  t — A.  I  would  not  say  that'  this  was  the  case. 

Q.  It  was  the  only  cause  yon  assigned;  is  the  halibut  fishery  a  pro- 


AWARD   OF  THE   FI8HEBY   COMMISSION. 


1085 


suppose  \v»> 


fltable  flttliery  at  all  f — A.  I  do  not  know.  I  ooiild  uot  say.  I  supiicse, 
however,  that  it  iH,  or  they  would  not  follow  it. 

Q.  Is  the  codHshery  profitable  f — A.  I  suppose  so — 8ome  years  it  is 
not  so  ^uod  aM  it  is  other  years.  I  think  that  the  lishermeu  make  a 
living  out  of  it. 

Q.  And  of  these  two  flslieries,  the  cod-flsliery  is  the  most  profitable  and 
certaiu  f — A.  I  would  risk  ^oiiig  cod-fishing  myself  before  I  would  go 
halibut-fishing. 

Q.  t)o  you  know  anything  about  the  salting  of  halibut?  Is  that 
done  ? — A.  We  use«l  to  do  it;  but  it  has  not  been  done  latterly.  We  do 
uot  now  get  any  to  salt. 

Q.  Where  did  you  send  them  when  you  salted  them  ? — A.  We  iiseil 
to  bring  most  of  them  to  Halifax,  and  to  St.  John,  N.  B. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  You  used  to  catch  halibut  in  wiers? — A.  Yes;  in  our  traps. 

1^.  Close  by  the  shoi-e  ? — A.  Yes. 

(}.  And  now  you  do  not  catch  them  in  these  traps? — A.  Yes. 

i}.  And  that  is  the  only  way  in  which  you  prosecuted  the  halibut 
fisiiery  7 — A.  We  caught  them  with  hand-lines  in  boats,  close  in  shore. 

Q.  Iliilibut  are  not  found  where  they  used  to  be? — A.  We  do  uot 
now  catch  any  with  our  hand-lines,  or  in  our  traps. 

Q.  What  is  the  cause  of  this,  as  far  as  you  know? — A.  I  think  trawl- 
ing.   The  trawls  now  catch  them  all. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  these  American  vessels,  which  you 
speak  of  as  engaged  in  the  halibut  flshery,  are  also  engaged  in  the  cod- 
fishery  during  the  summer  months  ? — A.  Yes;  after  the  halibut  fishing 
is  over. 

Q.  And  then  again  in  the  fall  they  resume  halibut  fishing? — A.  Yes; 
when  the  bait  comes  inshore. 

Q.  Can  you  give  me  a  statement  of  the  fish  exports  of  the  town  of 
Baningtonf — A.  Barriugton  pro|)er  contains  about  7,(M)0  inhabitants  ; 
and  we  exported,  I  think,  last  year,  35,()U<)  quintals  of  cod,  vahied  at 
$58,04N»;  12,(NH)  quintals  of  haddock  and  pollock,  valued  at  $30,000; 
8,(NH)  barrels  of  mackerel,  valued  at  $56,000;  2,000  barrels  of  herring, 
valued  at  $7,000;  and  1,200  barrels  of  oil,  valued  at  $15,000;  making  a 
total  of  $I72,(NM>. 

Q.  Wliere  do  you  seud  your  codfish  ? — A.  Most  of  our  small  and 
large  codfish  come  to  Ualifax ;  aud  a  few,  also,  are  sent  to  Look^jort 
and  Yarmouth. 

Q.  With  reference  to  the  soundings  which  have  been  mentioned — 
you  speak  pretty  confidently  respec.ting  the  soundiugs  about  Greea 
island ;  have  you  made  them  personally  ? — A.  Yes ;  I  speak  concerning 
them  from  my  own  actual  knowledge. 

Q.  You  have  been  all  over  that  ground? — A.  Yes;  repeatedly. 

Q.  You  have  uot  the  faintest  shadow  of  a  doubt  about  your  sound- 
ings?— A.  Ko. 

Q.  You  have  been  at  this  work  ever  since  yoa  were  a  boy? — A.  Yes; 
and  I  would  not  give  in  to  anybody's  soundings. 

By  Mr.  Dana: 
Q.  Tou  have  spoken  of  certain  American  vessels  which,  according  to 
your  judgment,  were  halibut  fishing.  During  what  portion  of  the  sea- 
son are  they  there  catching  halibut? — A.  From  about  the  20tb  of  Haj 
to  the  20th  of  June,  and  afterwards  ttom  the  first  to  the  last  of  October-— 
about  two  mouths  in  all. 


I 


w— ■■■■ 


1086 


AWARD   OF  THE  FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


Q.  Do  yon  know  whether  the  same  vessels  are  there  in  the  spring  and 
ikUf—A.  No. 

Q.  What  are  they  doin^;  the  rest  of  the  season  t — A.  I  cannot  sny. 

Q.  Do  you  then  see  them  f — A.  No ;  not  tliat  I  know  of. 

Q.  Then  you  count  all  the  time  they  are  in  sight,  with  or  without  » 
glass,  as  the  halibut  seaHon  ? — A.  The  only  way  I  kr.ow  of  their  ])ivs 
ence  is  when  I  see  them  laying  at  anchor;  that  is  the  only  time  which 
I  undertake  to  count. 

Q.  And  you  do  not  undertake  to  say  what  they  are  or  what  thry  do 
daring  the  rest  of  the  season  f — A.  No. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  Hiiy  that  the  same  vessels  during  the  spring 
and  fall  are  within  that  distance  all  the  time  you  have  mentioned  ? — A. 
1  would  not  say  that  they  are  the  stmio  vessels;  there  may  be  others. 

Q.  During  this  [leriod  these  vessels  may  be  otf  and  then  in  again  7 — 
A.  Just  so. 

By  Mr.  Davies : 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  vessels  that  fish  there  iu  May  and  June  li.sh 
for  cod  in  July  and  August  ? — A.  Yes. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait : 
Q.  But  you  do  not  know  that  this  is  the  case  ? — A.  No. 

By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  Are  these  vessels  anywhere  near  your  shore  save  in  May,  June, 
and  October  ? — A.  1  do  not  then  fen  them. 

Q.  They  di8a|>i>ear  during  the  rest  of  the  season  ? — A.  The  time  I 
mentioned  is  the  only  season  during  which  they  tish  inshore,  to  my 
knowledge. 

Q.  During  what  part  of  these  eight  weeks  do  you  mean  to  say  that 
they  are  within  three  miles  of  the  shore  ! — A.  We  see  them  laying  there 
during  these  two  months. 

Q.  Within  three  miles  of  the  shore  f — A.  Yes. 

By  Sir  Alexander  Gait: 
Q.  Do  the  smacks  which  are  provided  with  wells  ever  fish  for  cod  ? — 
A.  I  think  not,  but  I  do  not  know. 

No.  83. 

Daniel  M.  Browne,  of  Ualifax,  N.  S.,  was  called  on  behalf  of  the 
Government  of  Iler  Britannic  Majesty,  sworn  and  examined.    . 

By  Mr.  Thomson : 

Question.  What  position  do  you  hold  t — Answer.  I  ara  a  retired  naval 
ofiBicer,  and  I  now  am  serving  as  a  clerk  iu  the  mariue  and  fisheries  de- 
partment of  the  Dominion  of  Canada. 

Q.  Have  you,  in  your  official  {position,  any  knowledge  as  to  the  num- 
ber of  light-houses  which  are  situated  on  the  coasts  of  the  British  prov- 
inces T — A.  Yes ;  I  have  been  a  good  deal  around  these  ooasts.  During 
the  time  when  the  fisheries  were  protected,  I  was  in  the  protection  serv- 
ice in  command  of  a  crniser  for  a  couple  of  seasons.  I  have  also  been 
a  good  deal  around  the  coast  conveying  supplies  to  light-houses. 

Q.  This  is  part  of  your  business  f— A.  Yes. 

Q.  Will  you  state  what  the  number  of  light-honses  on  the  coast  is? — 
A.  On  the  Nova  Scotian  coast  there  are  108  lights,  and  of  these  82  are 
available  for  use  by  American  fishermen ;  on  the  Quebec  coast  there 
are  46  lights,  of  which  29  I  consider  available  for  use  by  American 


AWABD   OF   THE   FISHERY   COMMISSION. 


1087 


hat  tliov  do 


ul  June  tish 


I  for  cod  ? — 


fishermen ;  on  the  New  Brnnswick  const  there  are  60  lights,  of  which  32 
are  available  as  mentioned;  and  on  Prince  Kdward  Island  tliere  are  20 
lights,  all  of  which,  I  presume,  are  so  available;  besides  these,  there 
are,  of  course,  fog-whistlos. 

Q.  Is  there  a  fog-whiKtle  at  every  light-house  ? — A.  No. 

Q.  How  many  fng-whirttlcs  are  there  which  are  available  to  American 
fishermen ! — A.  There  are  ten  un  the  Nuvsi  Scotian  coast ;  and  I  sup- 
nose  there  is  about  an  equal  number  on  the  coasts  of  the  other  prov- 
luces  altogether. 

Q.  Are  they  all  available  to  American  flMlicrmen? — A.  Yes;  all,  more 
or  lesH. 

Q.  You  are  speaking  ftou)  experience  obtained  on  these  coasts? — A. 
Yes. 

Q.  Which  are  available  for  the  American  flshermen,  and  which  are 
not  so? — A.  I  should  say  that  all  the  fog-whistles  could  be  so  available. 
I  know  all  are  so,  except  one,  perhaps,  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy. 

Q.  Where! — A.  At  C'ape  D'Or.  1  su^ipose  that  this  one  is  not  of 
much  use  to  American  fishermen. 

Q.  I  «lo  not  know  why  not. — A.  I  have  not  been  out  there  a  great 
deal ;  but  I  should  presume  that  this  fog  whistle  would  not  be  of  a  great 
deal  of  use  to  them. 

Q.  With  that  single  exception,  all  the  others  would  bo  useful  to 
them  ? — A.  Ves. 

Q.  There  are  buoys  and  beacons  on  our  coasts  besides? — A.  Y^s. 

Q.  llow  many  of  them  are  there,  and  how  many  of  them  are  available 
to  the  Americans  7 — A.  I  have  not  got  their  numl^er.  I  have  simply 
put  down  their  cost.  The  cost  of  the  maintenance  of  buoys  and  bea> 
cons  on  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia  amounts  to  $6,41)3  in  the  year. 

Q.  What  is  such  cost  in  connection  with  the  light-houses  T — A.  Sev- 
enty-seven lights  on  the  Nova  Scotia  coast,  on  the  average  cost  $3,000 
each. 

Q.  How  did  you  make  up  this  paiM?r  f — A.  From  the  books.  The 
statement  is  as  follows : 

Mnintenutwc  of  lights  in  the  Dominion,  iisnl  by  (hi  Jishirmcn  of  the  United  States. 

Nova  Scotia  agency : 

82  lighto  ami  J>  fog-whimloH §82,039 

Huniune  e«tabliHhmeiit  at  Snblo  Ixlaud  and  8r.  PaulH* 14, 182 

BuuyH  an«l  boacoua fi,  493 

Doniiniuu  stcaiuofH,  ^%'„,  $:i9,U00 29,609 

;gl32, 323 

Quebec  agency : 

46  liglitii  beluw  Qaebec,  inclnding  fog-whistloH;  of  these  29  arc  used 
by  American  flahcrnien.  Cost  of  inainteuunce  of  4(>  ih  $94,997,  tbure- 
furv  tv'n  of  this  amount 59,889 

Co«t  of  HteauierH  carrying  Hupplies 25, 000 

84,8s9 

New  Brunswick  agency : 

60  lights  and  fog-whistles;  of  these  32  are  used  by  American  fisher- 
men. C(»8t  of  maintenance  of  00,  including  supitly-vessels,  $52,270 ; 
therefore  1^  of  this  amount 27,880 

Buoy  service 10,275 

38,155 

Prince  Edward  Island : 
Total  ligbta,  20.    Cost  ntaintenanoe 13,730 

868,197 


1088 


AWABD   OF   THE   FI81U:UY   COMMISSION. 


Con$trtwtioH  of  fog-whiatlei  and  liqht-Kotuet  uatd  by  the  United  Staitt  fuhermen, 

Sanibrcl»1«nd  fog-whistle $«»,4n;; 

Cape  Sable  foR-whbtle 10,  ^H) 

Seal  lalaiul  fuju;-whi8t.Ie 4,552 

Yarmouth  foK-whistle 4,  OOU 

UrierlHland  foK-whistle 7,5<K) 

Diffby  foK-whlstle r>,Ha8 

Cranberry  Island  fog-\rbiHtlo (5, 740 

Sable  Island  foK-wbiHtle «'»,  OHl 

St.  Panl's  fog-wbistlo 10,275 

$7H,  018 

Sable  Island  light-honses 51 ,  457 

HiirrinKtun  lii(iit-veHHel 5,000 

St.  Paul's  liguts,  humane  tMitabU.Mhinent,  &c 50, 000 

77  li;;htH,  at  an  average  *'i>8t  of  $:i,000  each  {'iO  li^ht^i  recently  built 
cost  ii2,y;«  each) 231.000 

:W7. 457 

Totul  «>Htiinato<l  cost  of  construciimi  of  li>rht.s,  fog-whistles,  &«•.,  in  Nova  Scotia, 

nseil  l»y  American  tishuruien 41(5, 0«)'.> 

One-half  of  the  'ightM  uaeil  by  Aiiifri<-ans  tishiiiK  otV  the  coasts  of  the  T>oiniu- 

ion  are  in  Nova  Scotiau  agency;  therefore  for  the  other  provinces  mid 4U>,  OTi'^ 

Total  estimated  cost  of  construction  of  all  the  provinces K{2, 1:)<S 

Total  estimatetl  cost  of  constrnotion  of  Km  ]i;;htfl,  fog-whistles,  and  humane 
establishments,  used  bj'  United  States  ti.sliernien,  on  the  coasts  of  the  Do- 
minion   $832, 13."- 

Cost  of  maintenance  of  above  for  one  year 20H,  1U7 

J  Iht    of  the  Canadian  lif/htii.  Hay  of  Fiindji,  Coanf  of  Xora  Scotia,  and  the  Gulf  of  St- 
Lawrtiwe,  until  by  the finhtrmen  of  the  i'niled  States. 

Mai-hiiis,  Seal  Islnud   OrosH  Inland,  I'icton,  Shippe^ran, 
('J),  Ilobson's  Nosi',  Amet  Island,  Ut>ose  Lake, 
Qanneti  Chester,  North   Toint    (I*.  E.  Cara(|uut, 
Swallo.v  Tail,  I*''Kg.v's  Point,                  Island),  Uathurst, 
South  Wolf,  Hetty's  Island,  West  Point,  Carleton  Point, 
Hea<l  Harlior,  Sauibro,  Sumuiersitle,  Paspebiao, 
Ulue's  Island,  Chebucto,  Sea  Cove  Head,  Maquereau  Point, 
Drew's  Head,  George's  Island,  Crapaud,  Cape  Despair, 
Lepreau,  Maiigher's  Heach,  Charli>ttetown,  Peri-6, 
Partriil^e  Island,  Devil's  Island,  Point  Prim,  GaHi>e, 
Cape  Spencer,  E^K  It^laud,  Wood  Island,  Uasp<^  Bay  Light-ship, 
Digby,  Heaver,  Murray  llarb«ir,  Ca{>e  (juspd, 
Hoar's  Ileail,  Lisconib,  Panuiure  Mead,  Cu{)e  Rosier, 
Hriar  Island,  Isaac's  Harbor,  tieorgetown    (P.    E.  Cape  Magdalen, 
St.  Peter's  Island,  Conntry  Harbor,             Island),  Martin  River, 
Sissiban,  Torbay,  East  Point,  Ca|>e  Chatte, 
Church  Point,  Whitehead,  St.  Peters,  Matan, 
Meteghan,  Cape  Causo,  Traoadie,  I'oint  de  Mouts, 
(^ape  St.  Mary,  Canso  Harltor,  North  Rustlco,  Egg  Island, 
CaiHt  Forchu,  GuyslDorongh,  South  Rustioo,  Seven  iNlauds, 
Banker's  Island,  Maud  Point,  New  London,  West    Point    (Anti- 
Seal  Island,  Point  Tupper,  Fish  Island,  oo«ti), 
Pubnico,  Creightou's  Head,  Little  Channel,  S.  W.  Point, 
Ban  Portage,  Jersey  man's  Island,    Cancumpeo,  Bagats  Bluff, 
Cape  Sable,  Petetdegras,  Tourimom,  N.  B.,  Heath  Point, 
BarringtOQ  Light-    Green  Island,  Sbediac,  Belie  Isle, 

ship,  Guion  Island,  Sbediao  Island,  Auiour  Point, 

Baccaro,  Louiaburg,  Caaaia's  Point,  Cape  Noriuan, 

Negro  Island,  Mamadiau,  Ricbibaoto,  Point  Rich, 

Cape  RoMway,  Scatterie,  Preatou  Boaoh,  Cai>e  Ray, 

Sand  Point,  Low  Point,  Grant's  Beat  h,  St.  Paul's  N.  E., 

Gall  Bock,  Sydney  Bar,  Esoaminao,  St.  Paul's  8.  W., 

Carter's  Island,  Point  Aooni,  MiramiobiLightHihip,  (Magdalen  laUnda,) 

Port  L'Ebert,  Cibouz.  Fox  Jaland,  Eaat.  Biid^Rooka, 

Little  Hope,  Ingoniab,  Fox  Island.  N.  W.,     Entry  bland, 

Port  Monton,  Cape  North,  Portage  laland,  Amhent  Island, 

Fort  Point,  Cheticamp,  Meqnao,  Etan  da  Nord, 


AWARD   OF  THE   FISHERT  COMMISSION. 


1089 


ie  Gulf  of  St- 


Coffin's  lHlan«1, 
Purt  ModwM.v, 
MaiMin  Islaiid, 
Le  H»vn, 
West  Irnnboiind, 
Battery  Puiut, 


Marf^nrep, 
Port  Hooil, 
North  Cunao, 
Poinqiiet  iHland, 
Cape  St.  George, 
Piotoa  Island, 


Tabuflintao, 
South  Tracadie, 
North  Tracadie, 
Pokemouohe, 
Mitiouu, 


(<4»ble  (Island,) 
East  LiKlit, 
West  Light, 
Fiint  Island, 
Point  Tupiwr. 


By  Mr.  Foster: 

Q.  Have  yon  the  dates  of  the  erection  of  these  light-houses  T — A.  No ; 
but  I  have  seen  them  in  the  books. 

Q.  Could  you  furnish  them  f — A.  O,  yes. 

Q.  Will  you  do  so? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Were  not  liphtdues  exacted  for  a  good  many  years  ? — A.  This  has 
not  been  done  within  my  recollection  ;  it  has  not  been  done  since  1870. 

Q.  How  far  back  does  your  expeiience  extend  ? — A.  1  can  only  speak 
from  1871. 

Q.  Have  you  not  the  means  of  showing  when  the  light-dues  were 
taken  off? 

Hon.  Mr.  Smith.  This  was  done  in  1808  everywhere  except  on  Prince 
Edward  Island,  and  on  Prince  Edward  Island  they  were  taken  off  in 
1873. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  the  light-dues  were  when  they  were  exacted? — 
A.  No. 

Q.  Have  you  the  means  of  showing  this? — A.  I  might  be  able  to 
ascertxin  it. 

Q.  Have  you  the  means  of  showing  how  much  money  was  collected 
from  American  vessels  for  light-«lues? — A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Would  there  be  no  way  of  showing  that  ? — A.  It  might  be  obtained 
from  old  returns. 

Q.  It  would  be  hard  to  get  at  it  ? — A.  I  would  not  know  how  to  obtain 
it  at  all. 

Q.  You  say  von  will  give  me  the  dates  of  the  erection  of  these  light- 
houses?— A.  That  can  be  ascertained,  I  think. 

Q.  How  far  back  is  it  since  the  earliest  light-house  was  erected  on 
these  coasts  f — A.  The  Sambro  light-house  was  erected  in  1758. 

Q.  Do  the  fishermen  use  these  lighthouses  in  any  particular  way  ? — 
A.  They  use  them  generally  as  they  go  along  the  coast ;  and  they  point 
out  the  fishing- grounds. 

Q.  Tell  me  about  that. — A.  If  a  man  wants  to  ascertain  the  location 
of  the  spot  where  he  is,  inshore,  he  takes  the  bearing  of  the  light  and 
fixes  his  ship's  position  ;  he  thus  knows  exactly  in  what  course  to  steer 
to  reach  the  fisliing-grounds. 

Q.  What  fishing-grounds  are  pointed  out  by  particular  light-houses  ? — 
A.  1  do  not  mean  that,  but  it  stands  to  reason  that  if  a  man  wants  to 
run  to  a  certain  point  in  the  ocean  anywhere,  he  makes  use  of  these 
lights  when  this  is  possible. 

Q.  That  relates  to  fisliing  or  anything  else  ? — A.  Yes,  to  any  purpose. 

Q.  I  thought  .you  meant  rhat  there  were  particular  lights  to  show  the 
location  of  fishing-grounds  ? — A.  O,  no ;  certainly  not. 

Q.  Then  all  the  people  who  sail  on  the  sea,  similarly  get  the  benefit  of 
these  light-houses? — A.  Exactly. 

Q.  As  long  as  the  Government  of  the  Provinces  thought  it  wise  to 
charge  fees  in  this  regard,  they  did  so;  and  when  they  thought  it 
wise  to  cease  charging  such  fees,  they  gave  it  up  ? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  they  gave  this  up  in  1808,  everywhera  except  on  Prinre 
Edward  Island,  where  the  practice  was  abandoned  in  1873  ? — A.  Yes. 

Mr.  Thomson.  This  was  abandoned  in  Quebec  long  before  1808. 

60  F 


1090 


▲WABD  OF  THI  FI8HBBT  COMIIISSION. 


By  Mr.  Thomaon : 

Q.  I  loppoae  the  Ashing  basineM  oonld  not  be  prosecnted  alonfc  the 
ooast  by  the  Amerioani,  or  probably  by  anybody  else,  without  these 
lights  f— A.  It  would  be  hasardoas  to  attempt  it  I  would  not  say  it 
oonld  not  be  done^  but  it  would  oertaidly  be  a  hazardous  undertaking. 


ed  aIoD|(the 
ithoat  these 
lid  not  say  it 
Ddertakiug. 


